Lhe ninth day of demonstrations against the pension reform, Thursday, March 23, was marred by numerous disorders and violence, in Paris, but also in a certain number of other cities in France. Several explanations will be offered to understand this visible radicalization.
The first is political and responds to the verticality of power practiced and assumed by the Presidency of the Republic; verticality accentuated by distancing intermediate bodies – including those most open to the logic of compromise (the CFDT) – which seems to sign Macron governance. If the violence occurs so suddenly, it is because the legislative tool to pass this controversial text attests in the eyes of many demonstrators to this “Jupiterian” practice of power. The use of article 49 paragraph 3, certainly perfectly constitutional – let us recall that it has been used a hundred times since 1958, with only one motion of censure adopted –, may appear to many as a mode of adoption that is not very consensual of the text (accrediting the idea of a “forced passage”).
Even more, the practice reveals a presidential contradiction. If the head of state, in a very republican vein, can indeed oppose strong institutional legitimacy to the weak legitimacy of the street, then how can we understand that he is at the same time denying the legitimacy of the most powerful – the chamber embodying the sovereignty of the nation – by denying it the right to vote. There is no doubt that this apparent contradiction could have greatly contributed to fueling the fire. It also offered protesters a means of legitimizing violence, presented as essential when it is political. The violence of the demonstrators is no longer presented as aggressive but as reactive, responding to an institutional violence (the “forced passage”) which would precede it.
emotional logic
The second is more sociological and reminds us that political violence responds to four logics. First an instrumental logic. The idea, constantly repeated since the movement of “yellow vests”, is that violence pays. It makes it possible both to make the power react, which fears a disorder calling into question its primary function (ensuring the social contract and civil peace) and to obtain visibility in the public space since the fire and the cries attract the cameras. television, like honey with bees. The idea gradually takes hold that a smooth traditional event would ultimately be of very little use.
You have 56.06% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.