Benjamin Morel is a lecturer in public law at the University of Paris II Panthéon-Assas
FIGAROVOX.
- Aurélien Taché's recent remarks on polygamy caused a reaction, to such an extent that the latter felt obliged to "clarify" them this morning in the Obs.
Do you think his line is in the minority among walkers?
Benjamin MOREL.
-
Aurélien Taché's line on these questions appears very radical and excessively in the minority within LREM.
It is closer to a very strong Anglo-Saxon differentialism carried by part of EELV.
Even among those who followed Aurélien Taché in the split with LREM and the creation last summer of the Ecology-Democracy-Solidarity group, such a posture seems quite iconoclastic.
To read also:
"The entryism of Islamo-leftism at the university is a reality"
There is therefore no
differentialist “
Taché line
” which would oppose a
republican “
Bergé line
” within LREM.
In reality, there are mainly fifty nuances of En Marche on these subjects.
The LREM group (not to speak of the party which does not really exist as a place of militant socialization) is in reality absolutely not structured on this theme.
This is explained by the very low importance given by Emmanuel Macron to these subjects during his campaign.
Identity or security issues are not part of the common fund that attracted deputies to En Marche.
From then on, everyone arrived with their ideas and their vision of the world.
Moreover, these elected officials do not have a common history built in a long struggle which would have allowed the development of a common culture of these subjects.
The failure to structure the parliamentary group by its successive presidents did not allow a common analysis to emerge either.
Even if they do not adhere to the Taché line, the LREM deputies are rather close to the center left
More than a majority polarized between contradictory lines like the previous socialist majority, the LREM majority is therefore an unstructured majority.
However, it is all the more so because, even if they do not adhere to the Taché line, the deputies are rather close to the center left.
However, the right-handed accents of the Minister of the Interior on these subjects are creating a stir.
We had already seen it on the Asylum and Immigration law.
As soon as deputies find themselves at odds with the main force which ensures coherence between them - the government - individual desiderata can only take over.
"At least have the courage, if not the decency, to resign from this mandate acquired by the investiture of LaREM and to represent yourself under your own" colors "and ideas" Aurore Bergé replied dryly on Twitter.
Can the party afford to display its divisions in this way?
It's not that new.
The LREM group has not stopped losing feathers since the start of the five-year term.
Here again, this stems from the absence of a partisan culture among its members.
The party cannot afford these bickering, but it has no choice but to tolerate them.
What else could he do?
Exclude?
Read also:
How to better arm our rights: the example of radicalized mosques
The deputies would form yet another new group and LREM would be even more dependent on the Modem.
Threatening not to grant a nomination?
Many MPs are not as seasoned political professionals as the LR or PS MPs of yesteryear.
They don't project all career hopes into re-election.
Law on Islamist separatism / dissolution of the CCIF on the one hand, and homage to the FLN / defense of polygamy on the other ... Can the "At the same time" really be readable for the French on this subject?
The “At the same time” has its limits when you are in power and it is undoubtedly one of the mistakes of Emmanuel Macron not to have understood it.
You can develop a left-wing ecological policy and a right-wing security policy to triangulate.
It can work electorally and be rather clever.
But you cannot say everything and its opposite on the same subject.
On separatism, for example, the government defines it as the fact that the law is the same for everyone and is in the process of passing a law of differentiation which will allow it to be adapted according to the goodwill of local elected officials.
The idea is to please Richard Ferrand for his campaign in Brittany where he would like to copy the Corsican model.
Between the vision of France as an agglomeration of communities (...) and that of a Universal Republic addressing individual citizens, Emmanuel Macron did not choose
However, we can imagine the symbol for those who demand such adaptations to the specificities of their subjective communities, and potentially the use made of such a principle in certain municipalities threatened by the rise of Islamism.
We therefore advocate the unity of the Republic while building tools available to its enemies.
Between the vision of a France as an agglomeration of ethnic, religious and regional communities developing their own laws and organizations and that of a Universal Republic addressing individual citizens, Emmanuel Macron did not choose.
Are there other division topics at LREM?
LREM represents a kind of conjunction of the left and right centers.
Economic liberalism and the belief in the overtaking of France by Europe are the main bindings between these political families.
These were also the two strong themes of Emmanuel Macron's campaign in 2017. But these two themes are problematic today.
European software is increasingly contested and, in any case, not very mobilizing.
Economic liberalism is weakened by the crisis and the emerging demand for the State.
The government must therefore activate other themes that divide its original electorate.
The security issue is therefore quite delicate.
The electorate of the left who continues to follow Emmanuel Macron is quite "
vallsist
".
He is attached to secularism and to the authority of the State.
The same goes for the Modem electorate.
Read also:
Benjamin Morel: "The crisis that LREM is experiencing represents a real risk for Macron"
But at the same time, these two political families are very attached to public freedoms.
We must therefore give the impression that we are reassuring the authority of the State, without compromising its freedoms.
In a period of confinement, it is a challenge.
By presenting a fairly amateurish proposal for a comprehensive security law, which would have deserved much better legal work and less erratic communication, it becomes very complicated.