David Desgouilles is a columnist at
Marianne
.
He published
Dérapage
(ed. du Rocher, 2017) and
Their lost wars
(ed. du Rocher, 2019).
To discover
PODCAST - Listen to the club Le Club Le Figaro Idées with Eugénie Bastié
LE FIGARO. - The President of the Republic gave an interview to the newspaper
L'Humanité
, answering various questions around the pantheonization of the Manouchian communist resistance fighters, the conception of the nation, poverty in France, immigration or the rise of the far right.
After
Valeurs Actuelles
in 2019,
L’Huma
… Does this choice illustrate the “at the same time” of macronism?
David DESGOUILLES. -
There is nothing shocking about the President of the Republic granting interviews to various newspapers in the country, quite the contrary, and it is even his duty not to boycott them.
The problem is elsewhere.
The famous “at the same time” will nestle elsewhere.
It is to have a speech that adapts excessively to the media to which it responds.
In this case, the two interviews that you cite constitute an example of the multiple speeches of the President of the Republic.
The RN “would be inspired not to be present” according to Macron. How do you view this choice?
This invitation not to come to a ceremony at the Pantheon while the State, of which he is the head, has sent invitations to RN parliamentarians borders on political schizophrenia.
President Macron invites but Emmanuel disinvites?
This is indeed an original reading of the theory of the “two bodies of the King”.
The latter, let us remember, invites the Head of State not to forget that what “Emmanuel” says does not concern us.
Moreover, Marine Le Pen does not obey the injunction.
She had decided alone not to participate in the tribute ceremony to Robert Badinter at the Invalides, complying with the wishes of the family of the former Minister of Justice.
A “pantheonization” ceremony for resistance fighters does not at all follow the same logic as paying homage to a personality who has just passed away, where the opinion of the bereaved family is obviously essential.
I would also point out that La France insoumise obviously had nothing to do with this family mourning and that Emmanuel Macron could have clarified this, even if it meant shocking the journalists who questioned him.
Oddly, he abstained.
In this interview, Emmanuel Macron affirms that the RN and Reconquête! do not fit into the “republican arc”. How can we understand the definition of this republican arc? Is it legitimate to assert that 41.5% of those who voted for Marine Le Pen in the second round of the presidential election in 2022 – or more than 13 million French people – are excluded from the French Republic?
Once again, Emmanuel Macron has said everything, done everything, and its opposite, on this subject.
He criticized Élisabeth Borne in the Council of Ministers for making the same speech, and he obviously wanted this to be known.
But after all, perhaps he was reproaching him for not having reserved this declaration for
L'Humanité
or
Libération
.
Then he ostensibly welcomed Jordan Bardella, letting his advisors filter all the esteem he has for him.
But perhaps it was a way of destabilizing the president of the RN and his presidential candidate.
We are not one maneuver away from convenience store Machiavellianism.
Emmanuel Macron uses the word sovereignty constantly now, and sometimes very inappropriately, confusing this absolute concept with independence, a concept always relative.
David Desgouilles
This notion of a republican arc is a trap.
If the parties accept the democratic game and the institutions of the Republic, as such, they are authorized to compete in the elections.
This applies to the National Rally as well as to La France insoumise.
The notion of a republican arc is therefore not political but moral.
The object of the presidential reproach to Élisabeth Borne was precisely that we had to guard against moral postures.
When to believe it?
Questioned about the Immigration law and the situation in Mayotte, Emmanuel Macron defended the abolition of land law, arguing that it was necessary to
“break the migratory phenomenon”
.
Isn't this ironic to the extent that, in mainland France, migrant camps are multiplying and the OQTFs are not applied...?
The President of the Republic responded to this in
L'Humanité
, specifying that our unitary State was already accompanied by exceptions in the overseas territories.
He did not specify, but perhaps he did not voluntarily want to enter into figures which accused the action of his presidency for seven years, that from now on, 50% of the population of Mayotte was foreign.
We are obviously not there in mainland France.
But if there is a difference in degree, you are not wrong to give examples which demonstrate that there is no difference in nature, namely uncontrolled immigration.
“Deindustrialization and the feeling of downgrading have fueled the far right. We began to respond to this with the fall in unemployment and the start of reindustrialization. It’s a long process.” Is the President of the Republic beginning a change of sovereignty?
For the drop in unemployment, which owes more to demographic issues than to government action since 2017, it is actually validated by the statistics.
For the start of reindustrialization, allow me to be more circumspect.
Furthermore, Emmanuel Macron uses the word sovereignty constantly now, and sometimes very inappropriately, confusing this absolute concept with independence, a concept always relative.
But these are just communication tricks.
It is enough to see him attaching sovereignty to the adjective “European”.
Article 3 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen proclaims that the principle of all sovereignty resides in the Nation.
This precious text appears on the Élysée website and has constitutional value.
It would not be abnormal for the President of the Republic to be informed of this.