Do some French people see what's going on? Yellow Vest Protests

In the light of the movement of the yellow vests, it may be interesting to review the work done by this couple.
Monique Pinçon-Charlot is a sociologist, research director at the CNRS until 2007, when she retired to join the Research Institute on Contemporary Societies or IRESCO.
Monique Pinçon-Charlot is a sociologist, research director at the CNRS until 2007, when she retired to join the Research Institute on Contemporary Societies or IRESCO.

Her husband Michel Pinçon-Charlot has the same background, which is why most of her works were written with the collaboration of her wife. Otherwise, his studies are devoted to the study of the upper middle class and social elites.

And this couple hits hard and speaks clearly around their book "La violence des riches - Chronique d'une immense casse sociale" (Editions Zones - La Découverte 2013).
Excerpt:
"The notion of law is not erased," writes psychoanalyst Marie-France Hirigoyen about the perverse narcissists, "on the contrary, they take pleasure in circumventing it, misleading it to ultimately present themselves as bearers of the true law. "If we think of tax havens where hundreds of billions of euros find a cozy haven, far from the state coffers and their redistributive tendencies, we can see that "the heart of the system is outlawed, but[that it] imposes its laws on the population". The law of the market is never more than the euphemised and transposed form of the new law, that of research of maximum profit, transcended by this force of free and perfect competition that would be superior to human will.
The ruling class, when it becomes an oligarchic system, presents an increased violence in social relations that allows lucid and greedy to assert their particular interests by further adjusting the legality to their convenience. The oligarchs who lead France, Europe and perhaps- to be the entire planet to its downfall have never acknowledged their responsibility in the 2008 financial crisis. They accuse the people of costing too much, to be too greedy, to spend too much on their health and education. They thus seek to discard themselves without ever questioning their greed financial.
The deregulation of economic life has thus allowed the emergence of individual and collective cynicism. The tax exile assumes its will in the open to escape the law and not pay the taxes he or she owes. He proclaims it loud and clear. Depardieu revolts, but also makes people laugh, fascinates and gets some support, including popular support. It is by openly displaying his denial of the rule that the dominant takes precedence over the dominated, themselves tempted to withdraw into an individualism of last resort by abandoning utopias and collective struggles. This renunciation is a kind of particular fatalism that associates acceptance and non-consent in a contradictory way

Monique Pinçon-Charlot: "Tax fraud is a weapon to enslave the people"
"Tax evasion is a weapon to enslave the people"
The more we discover that tax fraud is widespread within the ruling class, within those who monopolize all the wealth, all the powers, politicians, businessmen....
It is one of them (speaking of the case of Cahuzac, which served as a tree to hide the rest of the forest).
It's so systematic... shows that these are gears that are quite cynical, that are machiavillian, and that are never the result of Bercy's hunt...
The richest people's tax fraud represents 80 billion euros less each year in the state's tax revenues (this represents the French public deficit).

This tax fraud is a financial weapon to enslave the people, we are told that there is a deficit, and that it is the people who must repay it, and this deficit is built by those who hold all the reins of power up to the top of the Elysée.

These mechanisms must be revealed and solidarity must be shown for a profound change.
This climate deregulation is the capitalist system, those who are thirsty, hungry, greedy for money are destroying the planet and humanity.

Macron is a representative of the single thought, we are in a dictatorship, the freedom of thought is not that great, every day there is propaganda which is distributed by a number of media outlets.
We are in the single thought, there is no more Right or Left party, critical thought has no right to exist, critical thought is censored.

10 billion euros per year would be enough to solve the problem of extreme poverty.
(The report of the Public Institute: a loss of purchasing power for the 20 % of the most modest, the 1 % richer income doped by 6 %.)
The poorest classes will pay a high price, in terms of finance, ideology and linguistics.

We are not in the denunciation, but in the unveiling of the functioning of a highly predatory oligarchy and today this oligarchy has an appointment with us at a time when the planet is truly in danger, and when the processes of dehumanization of the poorest are set in motion and this appointment is serious, everyone must be up to the task to this appointment to preserve the future of the next generations on this earth.
The French who work, who make the world of the real economy work, it would only take a general strike to cause panic at the very top of society.
Violence is at the top of society, not at the bottom.

And the movement of yellow vests as seen by Monique Pinçon-Charlot:


 
I think she is a very smart lady. I only regret that she sometimes buys the idea of "global warming" (or anthropogenic changes) while her arguments would be even stronger if she didn't, but then again, so many people do!

Her explanation of the fiscal fraud is spot on, IMO. Simple math, and you see that the problem is not the lack of money in France, but rather, its wrong distribution and fraud in the hands of the protected rich elites. That's after all part of what the YV are rightly complaining about.
 
Last edited:
These last events in Strasbourg sure look like a false flag, but I wonder then why it didn't happen during a "gilets jaunes" demonstration ? That would have been so efficient to stop the movement !
So that it isn't the goal actually ? Just to add some more chaos may be...

Just speculating here, but the other day I thought that maybe they need to be more careful with these operations because of all the smartphones and stuff around? If there are too many videos from too many angles, perhaps even tracking the suspect, that could destroy their narrative? That would explain why the shooter went for a rather calm area, which from a "terrorism" perspective doesn't make any sense (not very symbolic, less chaos than doing it in front of a hot spot...) Just a thought.
 
Macron accused of treason by French generals for signing UN Migration Pact

They shut down the face, to face choice of property tax payment. You know, at a window, Any amounts over 300. ** Euro, are NOW an online process.

Thus and perhaps, a hint that economic future, may getting leaner. And more than likely, the system is cutting personal and trimming the fat, so speak.

Though, the Saturday market does well here. Local produce, and lot's of hawker's of fine meat's and cheese's. Best place for fresh cilantro, and basil. A buck a bunch!..... :cool2: Good price's draw's the flock, with a good bargain or two. With an undeground economy!

Private sector output contracts for the first time in two-and-a-half years
Markit Economics - Press releases

Facebook and Twitter face growing scrutiny for their role in sparking France’s ‘Gilets Jaunes’ protests
The French government announced it is investigating the possibility that Russia manipulated social networking services such as Facebook and Twitter to foment discord that has inspired growing protests across the country.

The Gilets Jaunes or “yellow vests,” appeared at first to be largely a spontaneous social movement of protestors angry about an impending tax on diesel that is aimed at fighting climate change. The original complaint that this fell disproportionately on the backs of poor and rural residents has evolved into widespread anger over economic injustice. This movement has now engulfed President Emmanuel Macron’s government in its greatest crisis since he was elected 18 months ago.

t was clear from the start that Facebook played a critical role in propelling the movement forward as Facebook groups sprang up across the country, allowing local residents to organize and plan demonstrations. But there had been growing suspicion in recent weeks, particularly as the protests turned more violent, that outside groups may be using social media to manipulate residents — as happened with the Brexit vote and the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign.

On Sunday, during an interview with RTL radio in France, Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said an investigation has been launched into possible manipulation by Russia or others.

“An investigation is now underway,” said Le Drian, according to Bloomberg. “I will not make comments before the investigation has brought conclusions.”

The Bloomberg story notes that the Alliance for Securing Democracy, a unit of the German Marshall Fund of the U.S. that monitors pro-Kremlin activity, has been tracking about 600 Twitter accounts that promote Kremlin views and that have recently been targeting France by promoting the #giletsjaunes hashtag. The Alliance says #giletsjaunes conversations on these Twitter channels has surged past those about Brexit and U.S. politics.

In many cases, these accounts, led in part by such Russian-controlled media outlets as Sputnik news and RT, have been reporting blatantly false stories, such as that French police are sympathizing with protestors and turning their back on the government. One such video that involved police removing their helmets went viral because it supposedly showed police standing in unity with protestors, something witnesses on hand say was not true.

French newspaper Le Monde reports that French security forces are examining “accounts opened two weeks ago that send a hundred messages a day.”

Meanwhile, French cybersecurity researcher Baptiste Robert has been capturing more than 250,000 tweets over the past week as he tracked the explosion of English-language messages with the #giletsjaunes hashtag.

The tweets with the most reach and influence are coming from the Twitter accounts of a Polish nationalist, a Turkish breaking news account, and a pro-Trump follower who is part of the QAnon conspiracy theorists, Robert found. “A lot of influential groups are trying to support the catastrophic nature of the demonstrations, the ‘civil war’, the police violence,” Robert told the Liberation newspaper.

The London Times reported on an analysis conducted by New Knowledge, a U.S.-based cybersecurity firm specializing in misinformation and founded in 2015 by former National Security Agency employees. Under the headline “Russian accounts seek to stir up racial tensions in France,” the story says New Knowledge has tracked 2,000 accounts that have shown “behavior patterns that reveal Russian control.”

While Macron’s popularity has plunged in recent months, many observers in France point to a video posted to Facebook by Jacline Mouraud, a 51-year-old resident of Brittany, as the catalyst in launching the Gilets Jaunes movement. Posted on October 18, the video went viral after calling out Macron for ignoring the tax’s impact on the poor:


Likewise, a Change.org petition protesting the gas tax posted by Priscillia Ludosky of La Seine-et-Marnaise exploded and has since received more than 1.1 million signatures. No one disputes that these were from real people motivated by genuine economic frustration.

Countless Facebook groups have sprung up since word of the first protests began to spread a month ago. Whatever part third parties play, the role of social media has led to a growing debate in France about whether services such as Facebook and Twitter are fundamentally undermining the ability of democratic governments to function.

On Medium, French writer and researcher Frederic Filloux looked at “How Facebook Is Fueling The French Populist Rage.” Part of the concern is that the very structure of social networks makes protestors angrier and more emotional.

“Facebook is the most threatening weapon to democracies ever invented,” he wrote. “Over the last two years, the hijacking of the social network by populist groups or parties has tainted a dozen election processes across the world and brought to power a string of populists leaders that will have a profound effect on their countries.”

This week, across French social media an essay published by Olivier Costa, director of research at CNRS (Centre national de la recherche scientifique) at Sciences Po Bordeaux sparked further debate about the role of social networking and protest. “Can we still govern during the time of social networks?” he asked.

“State authorities and elected officials … face a mistrust of unprecedented magnitude, to which it is difficult to find an answer,” he wrote. “How to explain how we got there so fast? The first observation is that the revolt of the yellow vests is only one symptom of more than one deeper evil, the one that led to Brexit, the election of Viktor Orban, Donald Trump, Matteo Salvini, and Jair Bolsonaro and guarantees the irremovability of Vladimir Putin and Recep Tayyip Erdogan.”

In response to questions, last week a Facebook spokesperson declined to say whether the company was specifically looking at possible infiltration of third parties related to Gilets Jaunes Facebook groups. However, in a statement the spokesperson said: “False news has no place on Facebook, and we have doubled down on our efforts to prevent the spread of false information on our platform and to educate people on how to identify and signal this type of content. We also have robust partnerships with French fact-checking organizations to tackle misinformation by verifying information shared on our platform.”


Robin Lacassin on Twitter
The following is our translation of an intriguing text by Samuel Hayat, a French political scientist, published on Dec. 5th 2018. It offers a thought-provoking analysis of the moral economy of the Yellow Vests movement which should also provoke conversations about other social/radical movements and their attachment to normative moral claims about the economy or the present world we are forced to live in.
It’s difficult not to be swept up by the movement in progress. The whole thing is disconcerting, including for those who make a profession of researching and teaching political science: its actors, its modes of action, its demands. Some of our best established beliefs have been called into question, notably those related to the conditions and bliss of social movements. Hence the necessity, or at the very least the desire, to put out it in the open some reflections stemming from the open comparison between what we see in this movement and the knowledge base relating to other subjects. Besides the research of the movement in progress, let us hope that the indirect light born of the comparison with other fields offers up something different on what has taken place.

The situation

The images reported by the media like personal wanderings during the events of December 1st have shown a Paris never-before seen, neither in 1995, 2006, or 2016: three moments where the usual space-time of Parisian mobilizations were deeply deformed. Some have been able to talk about riots or an insurrectionary situation. This may be so and nonetheless it did not resemble at all the insurrections which took place in 1830, 1832, 1848 or 1871. All those insurrections took place in a neighborhood, putting into play local sensibilities, a relational tissue allowing popular solidarity to be deployed.1 But on Dec. 1st the fire took place in bourgeois Paris, in the Parisian north-west which had never before really been a theater for such operations. Far from being led by local forces, raising barricades to demarcate a space of autonomy, these actions were the deeds of small mobile groups, often living elsewhere.

It’s evident that local sensibilities play a role in the formation of these groups. You only need to look beyond Paris to see the collective re-appropriation of a given territory, the formation of durable links… But on Dec. 1st these solidarities were displaced to a demonstration space which is itself rather customary: the sites of national power. Here we find ourselves in a totally modern register, no offense to those who speak of Jacqueries2: it’s really a national and autonomous movement, to return to the key categories which Charles Tilly qualifies the repertoire of action typical to modernity. But the rules of the demonstration, long already fixed (we generally situate their formalization in 19093) were ignored: there was no march, no legal representatives, no negotiated route, no service d’ordre4, no fliers, no banners, no stickers but rather a myriad of personal slogans written on the backs of yellow vests.

The whole practice of maintaining order was upended and we have seen how, despite their numbers and armament, the professionals of order were incapable of assuring their own safety, without mentioning the safety of goods and persons. We could imagine that the forces of order will not put up with allowing themselves to be manhandled and that police violence, already very common, runs the risk of further amplifying, with the calls for the extension of the use of force, or even declaring a state of emergency. The failure to maintain physical order goes hand in hand with an even more complete failure to maintain symbolic order: a president in transit to an international summit, an inaudible government (the ransom to be paid for personal power surrounded by mediocre courtiers5 so that no shadow weakens their glow), the pseudo-party in power occupied the same day with electing a new general delegate as though nothing were going on.

Order was wavering, the city was left to the demonstrators, everything was allowed and in this space embodying privilege, liberties were taken with the customary norms of the use of public space. We will not cry for the “families of [broken] windows”, to cite the usual expression; however, we must take into account the measure of the threat that this destruction poses for power: on the first Saturday of December neighborhoods where luxury hotels and businesses line the streets became the object of so many outbreaks, forcing the closure of department stores on the Boulevard Haussman, constituting a great economic risk. If we turn our gaze away from capital we would see that the mobilization was massive across the country, making the maintenance of order so much more costly, even impossible. The temptation the authorities had before Dec. 1st to leave the situation to rot until Christmas now seems impossible.

Mobilization work

The sociology of social movements has for a while now opened the eyes of those who believed in the spontaneity of the masses. Behind any seemingly spontaneous movement, there are mobilization enterprises, people able to put militant capital at the service of the cause, material and symbolic resources as well as skills acquired in previous struggles… There would be no Tunisian revolution without the Gafsa, no 15-M movement without the Stop Expulsions and the Juventud Sin Futuro, no Nuit Debout without a mobilization against the Loi travail. Shall we update these genealogies with that of the gilets jaunes? Perhaps, but they would only offer a weak explanatory power:

the mobilization took off too quickly and passed too quickly to the national level to then be interpreted as the result of the patient work of mobilizations by social movement organizations, or even informal organizations.

If there is movement representation work which helps bring into existence this movement (“the Yellow Vests”), this work has been remarkably decentralized, passing through multiple local groups organizing via social networks, by the media aggregation of various words and the work of interpretation done by journalists, politicians and sociologists.6 The desire to give the movement agile spokespersons able to negotiate with the authorities has failed (for the moment). Many commentators have glossed over the supposed inconsistency of motives and actors; on the contrary, given the fragmentation of its representation, the unity within the movement is surprising. There’s a unity in action, solidarity and an apparent consensus on the list of demands, even a unity of rhythm. The choice of the yellow vest, this clothing item made obligatory for all motorists, and whose primary purpose is to render one visible, is particularly happy and has certainly been a material condition for the rapid spread of this unique symbol. But the choice to take action and to do it with the rigor and coherence shown can not simply be the result of a catchy emblem, the good use of social networks, nor of a shared discontent, regardless of its size and shared nature. The words of discontent, anger and of grumblings are screens that prevent us from grasping the reasons for the mobilization in the double sense: they give up their own causes and justifications. The challenge is then to find an explanation for this movement which covers both its form (decentralization, radicality) and its substance (demands).

The demands are worth taking a pause over. We know little as to how they were made, but a list of 42 demands have been widely disseminated both by groups and by the media.7 These demands have some remarkable traits that have already been noted: they mainly concern living conditions, far beyond the sole question of the price of gasoline; they contain positions against the free movement of migrants; they propose institutional changes that strengthen citizen control over elected officials, whose remuneration would be reduced to the median wage. This list has been described as a “patchwork of demands.”8 It seems to me that on the contrary this list is deeply coherent and that what gives it its coherence is also what allowed the mobilization of the yellow vests to take on and to last: it is anchored in what one can call the moral economy of the working-class [classes populaires].

The moral economy of the Gilets Jaunes

The concept of moral economy is well-known by researchers in the social sciences.9 It was developed by the historian E.P. Thompson as a way to designate a fundamental phenomena within 18th c. popular movements: it refers to the conceptions largely shared as to what should be the proper functioning of the economy, in the moral sense.10 Everything happened as though it were self-evident that certain rules had to be respected: the price of goods should not be excessive in relation to their cost of production; standards of reciprocity, rather than the game of the market, should regulate exchange, etc. And as soon as these unwritten norms were found to be trampled upon, or threatened by the rules of the market, the people would feel it was this their right to revolt, often initiated by women. Their motive was very economic, but not in the usual sense: they were not driven by material interests in the strict sense, but by moral claims about the functioning of the economy. There were similar revolts in France at the same time, and even later: the miners of the Compagnie d’Anzin, for example, the largest French company during most of the 19th c., regularly went on strike to remind the bosses the norms which, according to them, should organize work and its remuneration, often in reference to an older order of things, in short, to custom.11

The resonance with the yellow vests movement is striking. Their list of social demands is a formulation of essentially moral economic principles: it is imperative that the most vulnerable (the houseless, the disabled) be protected, that workers be rightly remunerated, that solidarity function correctly,12 that public services are ensured, that tax cheats are punished and that everyone contributes [to taxes] in accordance with their means, which is perfectly summed up with the formula “have the big ones pay big and the small ones pay small.” This call which could seem to be good common sense is not self-evident: it is a matter of saying that against the utilitarian glorification of the policy of supply and the theory of trickle-down economics dear to the elites (to give more those who have more, the first on the repel line, so as to attract more capital), the real economy must be based on moral principles. This is surely what gives this movement its strength and its massive support among the [French] population: it articulates, under the form of social demands, moral economic principles which the reigning power has explicitly attacked without end, which it even has has boasted about. From then on, the coherence of the movement is better understood, likewise with the fact that it was able to do without centralized organizations: as James Scott has shown, recourse to moral economy gives rise to a collective capacity to act, an agency, including social actors deprived of capital usually required for mobilization.13

In effect, moral economy is not just an assemblage of norms passively shared by the working-class. It is also the result of an implicit pact between those who dominate and thus always inserts itself within power relations. Already in the 18th c., the working-class studied by E.P. Thompson had a moral economy with deeply paternalistic traits: the wielders of power were expected to guarantee this pact, in exchange for the generally accepted social order which they enjoyed. But if the powerful were to break this pact, then the masses could then, by riot, bring them back to order. This is what we saw in the riot of four sous, at Anzin, in 1833: the miners protested against a decline in wages, but to this end they placed themselves under the protection of their former bosses, ousted by the capitalists who now controlled the company, singing “Down with the Parisians, Long live the Mathieus of Anzin!” It’s not much of a declaration to say that the current authorities have broken this implicit pact, as much by their anti-social measures as by their repeated disdain displayed to the working-class. The riot did not come out of nowhere, from a simple discontent, or an indeterminate popular agency that was spontaneously set into motion: it is the result of an aggression of power, all the more symbolically violent since that power does not recognize its actions as aggression. And the president of the [French] Republic, who is supposed to represent the French people, has become the incarnation of this betrayal, with his little utterances about “people who are nothing,” his advice on how to get a nice shirt or how by simply crossing the street you can find a job14. Instead of being a protector of the moral economy, Emmanuel Macron has constantly manhandled it, with a disarming naturalness, to end up becoming the representative par excellence of the forces that oppose this moral economy. As he said during [his electoral] campaign on the ISF15, “it’s not unfair just because it’s more efficient”16: it’s hard to think of a better example to illustrate his lack of knowledge or contempt for any other norms than that of finance. It is he who broke the pact, the national charivari now playing is addressed to him and thus we can only imagine that the charivari will end with either bloody repression or his resignation.

Moral economy and emancipation

If we can only hope that this was the second term of the alternative, we must still not underestimate the consequences which such an event has wrought. Revolts founded on moral economy do not necessarily transform into revolutionary movements, since all that is necessary is the restoration of the [implicit] pact so that the riots may end. For as much as moral economy reveals the collective capacity of the people and the existence of a real but marginal autonomy vis-à-vis those who govern, moral economy is still conservative. By way of its activation, it temporarily upends the normal functioning of institutions, but its aim is, above all, a return to order and not a revolutionary transformation. There’s something here a bit difficult to understand and formulate: just because a movement is authentically popular, and anchored with the most communally-shared beliefs of the vast majority, does not make it emancipatory. Returning to the categories of Claude Grigon and Jean-Claude Passeron, to believe that the people cannot act on their own, that the people are always submissive to symbolic power, is to demonstrate one’s own légitimisme17 and misérabilisme18. The Yellow Vests movement’s strength, spontaneity, coherence and inventiveness offers a blatant and welcome rebuff to the approaches made by this order. However, one should not fall into the opposite extreme, that these authors describe as populism, imagining that because a movement is popular it means that it is in the true, is authentic and in the right. This movement is not so much a sign of revolution but rather of a start, faced with the real decay of representative government institutions.

For what also reveals the Yellow Vests’ use of moral economy is the extent of political desert that has installed itself the past few decades. The fact that it was necessary to wait until the fundamental implicit pact that binds rulers and the ruled to be broken for there to be such a movement, whereas for decades the government has been bludgeoning us with security and anti-social policies, shows that the power of unions and political forces to mobilize has been reduced to nothing, or that the forms their mobilizations have borrowed have placed them in a state of utter powerlessness. To say this clearly, there is no joy to be had that we have had to come to this point, up to this point of rupture, so that something can finally happen, and that something which borrows pre-modern forms of collective action, under forms certainly renewed. Here is the limit point and also an important lesson on the relevance of the comparison between the Yellow Vests and past riots demonstrating a moral economy: this comparison should not be possible, given the supposedly immense distance which separates the political conditions between these situations, and yet the comparison strongly imposes itself. Moral economy belongs to periods and spaces in which the national and ideologized forms of politicization of democratic modernity, based on the confrontation between political projects and even opposing visions of the world, have not yet come to play a role. And with this the Yellow Vests movement maybe is from another time – but it says a lot about our current moment.

This has a cost we should measure: movements based on moral economy are part of a callback to custom, submission to order, but also exists within the context of a community. Moral economy is not only conservative because it harkens back to timeless norms, but also because it binds together defined by a common belonging. This is how its potential for exclusion are not mere slags which one can easily get rid of: they are the heart of the movement. To take a flagrant example, the demands against the free movement of migrants, for the expulsion of foreigners and the forced integration of non-nationals (“To live in France implies becoming French (French-language courses, French history courses and [French] civil education with a certification upon completion): all of this is inseperable from the movement because it is the logical consequence of the implementation of the moral economy of the initial community, even if this moral economy can be manipulated by the movement in different directions. Moral economy is the proclamation of the norms of a community which does not extend to the logic of equality for foreigners, nor does it recognize internal conflicts, particularly ideological ones. This last point clarifies the refusal of representative power for the popular re-appropriation of politics. But it is also the rejection of the partisanship of democracy, the opposition between political projects, in favor of a unity which we know well can easily turn into a “hate gathering built around the passion of the One which excludes.”19

The detour through this historical parallel with the past may not seem very convincing in grasping the situation in its exceptionality. Perhaps this is just a mind game. But perhaps, on the contrary, it reveals some of the fundamental characteristics of the current movement: its improbable unity, its popular support, its riot-like character, but also its very real conservative, anti-pluralist and exclusionary aspects. Perhaps it also indicates that we are only at the beginning of a new chapter in history, that the conditions for re-politicization are there, outside the framework of old parties and the old instituted forms of politics. At Anzin, the miners did not retain strikes based on moral economy. Upon contact with the first socialist and trade union forces in the region, they adopted their ideas and forms, so that they would become one of the foci from which anarcho-syndicalism emerged. Some local committees of Yellow Vests, far from sticking to a protest in the name of moral economy, call for the formation of popular committees and direct democracy, that is to say towards a radical political emancipation.20 Nothing is guaranteed, everything is open.

1Laurent Clavier, Louis Hincker et Jacques Rougerie, « Juin 1848. L’insurrection », in 1848 : actes du colloque international du cent cinquantenaire, tenu à l’Assemblée nationale à Paris, les 23-25 février 1998, Jean-Luc Mayaud (dir), Paris, Creaphis, 2002, p. 123‑140 ; Maurizio Gribaudi, Paris ville ouvrière: une histoire occultée (1789-1848), Paris, La Découverte, 2014 ; Michèle Riot-Sarcey, Le procès de la liberté: une histoire souterraine du XIXe siècle en France, Paris, La Découverte, 2016. Merci à Célia Keren pour sa relecture.

2Gérard Noiriel montre bien les enjeux d’une telle qualification Les gilets jaunes et les « leçons de l’histoire »

3Samuel Hayat, « La République, la rue et l’urne », Pouvoirs, vol. 116, 2006, p. 31‑44

4Translator’s note: Security forces employed by official unions in France.

5Ecoutons Agnès Buzyn assurer le 1er décembre que « Tous les jours nous agissons pour faire disparaître la colère et la peur » ou Benjamin Griveaux le lendemain que « nous ne changerons pas de cap car le cap est le bon ».

6Là aussi voir Les gilets jaunes et les « leçons de l’histoire »

7Par exemple DOCUMENT - Les gilets jaunes publient une liste de revendications

8Les «gilets jaunes», un magma de revendications hétéroclite

9Le thème a déjà été mentionné par plusieurs commentateurs du mouvement, notamment l’étudiant Léo Labarre (Le 17 novembre, au-delà des gilets jaunes) et l’historien Xavier Vigna (Gilets jaunes : «Ils inventent leurs propres codes», estime un historien) .

10Edward Palmer Thompson, « The Moral Economy of the English Crowd in the Eighteenth Century », Past & Present, n°50, 1971, p. 76‑136

11Samuel Hayat, « Une politique en mode mineur. Ordre patronal et ordre communautaire dans les mines du Nord au XIXe siècle », Politix, n°120, 2017

12tr. A specific French reference where public social aid are known as solidarités.

13James C. Scott, The Moral Economy of the Peasant Rebellion & Subsistence in Southeast Asia, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1977

14Translator’s note: Macron had fallen into controversy in 2016 when he said to an anti-Loi travail worker that “You’re not gonna scare me with your t-shirt. The best way to be able to enjoy a suit is to work for it.” In September of 2018 he also fell into controversy when a young man told him he has been having trouble finding a job, which Macron replied with “But there are so many jobs! You gotta go look. Right now…hotels, cafés, restaurants…if I cross the street I can find you one!”

15TN: ISF = Impôt de solidarité sur la fortune. tr. Solidarity tax on wealth.

16TN: This is a reference to Macron abolishing the ISF and seeing it as merely being “more efficient” to tax the rich less.

17TN: A term used to describe a French political movement which favors the re-establishment of the monarchy by the eldest of the Capétiens, leader of the house of Bourbon. (source: Wikipedia).

18TN: A term used in opposition to populism; developed by Jean-Claude Passeron. It describes an attitude which consits in “only seeing within the culture of the poor an impoverished culture.” (source: Wikipedia)

19Jacques Rancière, Aux bords du politique, Paris, Folio, 2004

20L'appel des gilets jaunes de CommercyL'appel des gilets jaunes de Commercy
 
Last edited:
This letter from the French generals openly accusing the President of the Republic of treason for signing the pact on migration is a major and serious event.

First, because it is an authentic insubordination of the general staff that could have practical consequences since the army has an exceptional jurisdiction enshrined in the constitution that could allow Macron to be dismissed (for treason) without going through parliamentary procedures.

Of course, this would be considered a military coup, but since the protection of the country is the primary mission of the army, it could very well do so, i.e. dismiss the President, and consequently his government and dissolve the assemblies.

Provisionally govern the country for the time it takes to hold new elections, or even to convene a constituent assembly to write a new constitution.

The very fact that they have officially declared themselves despite their duty of reserve, is, in my opinion, a sign that they are ready to do so.

This is the difference with May 1968, when DeGaule had finally obtained the support of the army, which guaranteed his exercise and government.

I think it whistles the end of recess for Macron and his little friends.
 
First, the army should convince the police forces not to intervene and let the army take the Elysée, the ministries and the assemblies. Arrest all these people while waiting for them to be tried by military courts.

Close borders and establish strict exchange controls, i.e. remove the country from the Schengen area and freeze treaties limiting the full sovereignty of the state (which is equivalent to putting the country's participation in the EU in brackets), remove it from NATO command otherwise it would have to wait for US authorisation to act... and mint in case the ECB no longer honours the French Euros.

Possibly, dismantle the fake news media...and restore the public service media.

Establish the conditions for dialogue with the population in order to restore order and institutions.

In short, to do everything the American army was willing to do in the United States in case Trump was not elected.

The problem is that there are no civilians in our country who can do that.
 


Translated from French by Microsoft
Act V of the yellow vests: 45 #stations of #métro and #RER closed in Paris Acte V des Gilets jaunes : 45 stations de métro et de RER fermées dans Paris - Fdesouche

Translated from French by Microsoft
Libé, who has been advocating all moral and security subversions for 30 years, encourages them #giletsjaunes to return to their homes on the eve of a key moment in the greatest social movement in contemporary history. I hurt my left.

 
#RT #news LIVE: Yellow Vests march under ‘Macron resign’ motto, huge numbers of police deployed
Paris is bracing for yet another round of Yellow Vest protests, with demonstrators planning to take to the streets on Saturday. More than 10,000 people have already RSVP'd on Facebook to the ‘Acte 5: Macron Démission’ march. READ MORE: https://on.rt.com/9kiw

 
In the margins of the demonstrations:
Last night, I watched the TalkShow show on RMCStory channel 23. You can see the replay here (in French:-[):
or the:Talk Show
I wanted to share with you something that really makes me uncomfortable when during this program a LAREM deputies speaks (about 40 minutes away): it is always the same rhetoric.
Over the last four weeks, I have observed the interventions of the LAREM deputies in the television media and especially during the debates: it is incredible how they have the same stereotypical speech, no empathy and expressing themselves in a voluble way so that they are not cut off, it is very aggressive. I assure you, when it puts the ball in my stomach, I instinctively know that these people are badly determined. It always revolves around what they have achieved, what Monarc has done, other gvt before us have done nothing but never, never talk about the people ! But they assure, swear by all the devils they hear, that they listen YV on the roundabouts.
They look like members of a cult defending their guru (but what does MIVILUDE do :-D)
I must be said that the opposing political figures who are opposed to them do not have many arguments, they who have sold the country and the world off in the state in which it is!
But to come back to this TalkShow, the two interlocutors in front of this deputy were Edwy Plenel (mediapart) and Thierry-Paul Valette (yellow vest). Their analysis was factual and relevant IMHO and I retained two solutions that are becoming viral in the "small people of the terriaries": RIC (referendum of citizens' initiative) and "Citizens' Assembly" which can represent a hope... Unfortunately, I have to express some reservations because wherever there have been such initiatives, these movements have always been suppressed. See recent examples in Assemblée citoyenne — Wikipédia
The next few days may be exciting...
 
Hi
I wanted to share this video posted on december 3rd (only available in french) : Christophe Cros Houplon predicted the attempt that took place in Strasbourg and his analyse of the situation seems to be quite realistic (in my point of view).
his analysis caught my attention and I wanted to submit this view of things :

 
Below, a video (without subtitles) of the press conference held in Paris today by the 'France en colère' collective (which advocates a more 'radical' line, compared to the more moderate 'Gilets jaunes libres' collective) :

VIDÉO - "Gilets jaunes" : l'allocution de Priscilla Ludosky et Maxime Nicolle

What are the 4 new demands of "La France en colère"?

Unlike the "Gilets jaunes libres", "La France en colère", the group of yellow vests led by Priscilla Ludosky, Maxime Nicolle and Eric Drouet, maintain the call for a demonstration, Saturday in Paris and the regions. The objective: to make this "act V" a success in order to give weight to the 4 new demands of the movement.

Emmanuel Macron wanted to defuse the yellow vest movement with four proposals announced on Monday. Emergency socio-economic measures that were not enough to convince a large part of the movement.

The members of "La France en colère", one of the main collectives of YVs, met this Thursday in Versailles in the salle du Jeu de Paume [a quite symbolic place], to call on the demonstrators to gather again in Paris and the regions on Saturday. The course is set: "act V" of mobilization. But to get what, exactly?

Rather than storing their yellow vests next to the red triangle somewhere in the back of the trunk of their cars, the demonstrators once again opted for consultation and collective organization. Especially since after the attack on Tuesday evening in the centre of Strasbourg, the question of suspending the movement arose more than ever. Some figures of the movement may have called for a stop to the blockages, but it seems that the yellow tide is not quite ready to flow back.

Less taxes, more participation

Among the four demands of these yellow jackets, we find the imperative of economic and social justice at the heart of the movement's demands since the first day of mobilization. Go further in lowering taxes, by living off the "product of our work, without feeling the terrible grip of the administration and taxes", as Priscilla Ludosky, one of the figures of La France en colère, puts it.

In this sense, La France en colère demands a reduction in the percentage of all taxes relating to basic goods and services: i.e. water, gas, electricity, food and, of course, fuel.

The collective is also calling for a referendum on popular initiative in France, another very popular demand among the Yellow Vests. This mechanism allows citizens to call upon the National Assembly by referendum for decisions pertaining to the enactment of a law. The Yellow Vests of La France en colère think that this mechanism could also be abrogative or consultative, i.e. it could repeal a text in force, or it could simply be used to consult voters on a bill, without normative value.

Demands directly targeting institutions and elected officials

The last two requests listed on their website concern elected officials and representative bodies. The collective proposes the creation of a "more democratic system" by creating a "citizen assembly".
For what purpose? While the project is still vague, it would be, as published on the dedicated page of the website, an assembly of citizens randomly selected, with no criminal record, renewable very regularly and which would "propose topics to be submitted to a referendum". This assembly could also "exist in another way, provided that it defends the interests of citizens and acts as a bridge between the people and the government".

And since their press conference took place in the salle du Jeu de Paume, the last proposal is all the more delicious: the "significant reduction in the salaries of government members". Following this request, the following are listed: the "abolition of privileges (salaries after terms of office, fictional work...)" and the "control of elected officials' expense accounts".

All these proposals are open to vote on the website of La France en colère and for the moment, each of them has received almost unanimous support.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator
 
These last events in Strasbourg sure look like a false flag, but I wonder then why it didn't happen during a "gilets jaunes" demonstration ? That would have been so efficient to stop the movement !
So that it isn't the goal actually ? Just to add some more chaos may be...

Just speculating here, but the other day I thought that maybe they need to be more careful with these operations because of all the smartphones and stuff around? If there are too many videos from too many angles, perhaps even tracking the suspect, that could destroy their narrative? That would explain why the shooter went for a rather calm area, which from a "terrorism" perspective doesn't make any sense (not very symbolic, less chaos than doing it in front of a hot spot...) Just a thought.

I would suggest one of the reasons for choosing Straßburg instead of a direct yellow west protest location in France, was maybe to also send a message to the german population in earnest and thereby trying to kill two birds with one stone: Scare both populations into obedience at the same time, both of which are the leading countries in europe. Thereby also sending a message to all other European countries and their populations.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom