A on the eve of the return to parliament, the left has no shortage of subjects for mobilization: the pension reform which it opposes, the taxation of superprofits for which it is campaigning, the ecological transition which it dreams of spearheading . However, for a week, La France insoumise (LFI) and Europe Ecologie-Les Verts (EELV), two of the components of the New Popular Ecological and Social Union (Nupes), have been inaudible on these subjects. They are entangled, to varying degrees, in cases of violence against women which discredit them and, in turn, weaken the whole edifice.
At LFI, Adrien Quatennens, the coordinator of the movement, had to step back after The chained Duck revealed the existence of a handbook for violence, filed by his wife in the process of divorce. It is still happening that the deputy from the North granted himself five days of reflection before putting his role within LFI on hold. It is understood that the decision is personally difficult to assume. Nothing, on the other hand, justifies the complacency of Jean-Luc Mélenchon who has accumulated the odds about a cause which has become one of the main fights of his training. The leader of the “rebellious” began by denouncing the “police malice, media voyeurism, social networks” who “were invited” in this “adversarial divorce”before greeting the ” dignity ” and the « courage » d’« Adrien », without a word for the victim. Since then, he has corrected the situation a little without managing to dissipate the internal malaise.
At EELV, Julien Bayou, the co-president of the group, also had to step back on Tuesday, September 20, after being publicly challenged by MP Sandrine Rousseau, spokesperson for ecofeminism within the same party. The leader of the Greens is accused of having behaved inappropriately towards his ex-companion, who seized during the summer the internal body which manages the reporting of gender-based and sexual violence.
A battle emblematic of the left
The two cases have little to do with each other: in the first, the accused admitted acts of violence. In the second, the facts are not proven. At EELV, the pre-congress context also lends itself to settling scores. Nevertheless, the result is the same: the left is caught out on one of its most emblematic fights because it seems unable to match its words and its actions.
We can certainly admit that any societal revolution requires a period of adaptation. On the left as on the right, the liberation of women’s speech, after centuries of silence, is attacking all the parties that have been and often still remain dominated by men. Each revelation embarrasses their leaders, accustomed to the tightness between public life and private life. None has the authority or the will, including the government, to enact indisputable internal rules.
But if there is one who could not afford the slightest failure, it is Jean-Luc Mélenchon. The boss of the “rebellious” knew how to attract feminists to him, carry their cause and encourage their radicalism. By reacting like a pack leader only concerned with defending his proteges, he takes them completely from the back.
The shaking of the authority of the “insubordinate” is however only at its beginnings. From the Socialist Party to the Communist Party via EELV or the “rebellious”, many are sighing loudly, but no one is in a position to challenge him for leadership. The fault of Mélenchon has thus become in this return the ball and chain of all Nupes.