💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › crimethinc-yellow-vests-for-may-day.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 08:57:31. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Yellow Vests for May Day Author: CrimethInc. Date: April 29, 2019 Language: en Topics: may day, Yellow Vests, France, fascism, ecology, Paris, direct action, reactionary activism, democracy Source: Retrieved on 17th June 2021 from https://crimethinc.com/2019/04/29/yellow-vests-for-may-day-can-macron-pacify-france-before-may-day-2019-probably-not
Last week, concluding a national initiative aimed at drawing the general
population into “dialogue” with the authorities, French President
Emmanuel Macron announced a handful of minor reforms intended to placate
participants in the yellow vest movement. It’s far from certain that
this strategy will succeed.
The situation in France is the culmination of years of strife between
protest movements and the state. At the height of the so-called “refugee
crisis” in 2015, the French government used the opportunity provided by
the November 13 terror attacks to declare a state of emergency intended
to suppress all protest activity. Instead, a massive student revolt
against the Loi Travail erupted in 2016, defying the state of emergency,
and simmering unrest continued through the 2017 elections and the 2018
eviction of the ZAD. The clashes of May Day 2018 showed that the
movement had reached an impasse: thousands of people were prepared to
fight the police and engage in property destruction, but the authorities
were still able to keep the contagion of rebellion quarantined inside a
particular space.
Starting in November 2018, the Yellow Vest movement upended this
precarious balance, drawing a much wider swathe of the population into
the streets. In response, Macron organized a “National Debate” in a
classic attempt at appeasement and pacification. The outcome of the
National Debate and the May Day demonstrations will tell us a lot about
the prospects of social movements elsewhere around the world: what forms
of pressure mass movements can bring to bear on the authorities, what
kind of demands neoliberal governments are (and are not) able to grant
today, and what sort of longterm gains movements for revolutionary
liberation can hope to make in the course of such waves of unrest.
Accordingly, in the following update, we explore the concessions Macron
offered and conclude with the prospects for May Day 2019 in France.
Having postponed his announcement due to the fire that destroyed part of
Notre-Dame cathedral on the evening of April 15, President Emmanuel
Macron finally presented the results of the National Debate on Thursday,
April 25, in a press conference broadcast live on French television.
The government launched this “democratic” political tool three months
earlier, on January 15, 2019, to answer the thirst for a more “direct
democracy” verbalized by a large part of yellow vest movement—especially
through calls for a Citizens’ Initiative Referendum (RIC). Macron’s
goal, of course, was to reestablish political stability in France while
making as few changes as possible.
In the days preceding the press conference, several elements of his plan
were leaked to the press, which diminished the surprise effect that the
government aimed to create with this event. But unlike members of the
current government, Macron’s supporters, and some corporate journalists,
none of us were waiting impatiently for the president’s intervention,
nor expecting that anything positive or surprising would come out of
this political spectacle.
For more than five months now, yellow vesters have learned the hard way
that dialogue with the government is meaningless—the state is prepared
to take ever more authoritarian measures in order to maintain its
hegemony and preserve the status quo. In the outcome of the “National
Debate,” we see again why democracy has not served as a bulwark against
fascism, but rather as a means to legitimize state power. Those who
control the state are always careful to make sure that while elections,
referendums, and discussions can serve to create the impression that the
government has a mandate to represent the general population, they never
actually threaten the institutions of state power.
Those interested who wish to see two and half hours of political
doublespeak can watch Macron’s press conference in full. Our goal here
is simply to analyze some of the major decisions taken by the French
government.
In the opening statement, Macron explained that he had learned a lot
from the National Debate and emerged “transformed.” According to him,
this three-month political experience highlighted that there is a deeply
rooted feeling of fiscal, territorial, and social injustice among the
population, alongside a perceived lack of consideration on the part of
the elite. Therefore, the government has decided to present “a more
human and fair” political project.
However, after these conventional words intended to create the illusion
of empathy from the government towards yellow vesters and everyone else
struggling on a daily basis as a consequence of the policies implemented
by successive governments, Macron lifted the veil, adding:
“Does this mean that everything that has been done in the past two years
should be stopped? I believe quite the opposite. We must continue the
transformations. The orientations taken have been good and fair. The
fundamentals of the first two years must be preserved, pursued, and
intensified. The economic growth is greater than that of our neighboring
countries.”
If some people still hesitated to believe that the National Debate was
just a political farce, here is the ultimate proof. For months, people
expressed their frustrations in the streets and traffic circles. Facing
this unprecedented and uncontrollable situation, the authorities
answered by saying that in a democracy, dialogue must not be established
through “violence,” therefore offering the National Debate as an
alternative in order to pacify the situation—while increasing police
repression against demonstrators in the meantime.
After three months of National Debate—which fortunately failed to stop
the movement—those who trusted the good intentions of the government saw
their efforts and demands dismissed. In effect, Macron was telling
everyone, “Thanks a lot for taking part of this debate, we heard you,
but in the end, we decided to pursue our political agenda and continue
the liberalization of the capitalist economy.”
So the long-awaited conclusion of the National Debate was simply a mix
of old promises, a few adjustments to show the goodwill of the
government, and new reforms to accelerate the transformation and
liberalization of society.
First, Macron rejected some of the biggest demands of the yellow vest
movement. The government will not officially recognize “blank votes” as
a form of opposition during elections (so far, those votes are counted
but they are not taken into account in the final results and in the
total number of vote cast). Then, he refused to reverse the decision to
reduce taxes on the income of the super-rich—one of the issues that had
provoked the emergence of the yellow vest movement in the first place.
Furthermore, the government also opposed the idea of creating the
Citizens’ Initiative Referendum (RIC). Instead, they want to develop an
already existing alternative¬—the Referendum of Shared Initiative—by
simplifying its rules. From now on, instead of requiring 4.7 million
signatures to be discussed at the Assemblée Nationale, a petition will
only need one million signatures and the approval of at least a fifth of
the total number of deputies. If the National Assembly refuses to
discuss the issue, a referendum can be held. Macron also mentioned his
desire to reinforce the right to petition at a local scale.
Even with the proposal to simplify this participatory political
platform, it is easy to see that the government is taking very few risks
with this alternative. The idea is to give people the impression that
they have more leverage within the democratic system, as they can
address petitions to their representatives. But in the end, who will
have the final word on these issues? Politicians motivated by
self-interest, power, and careerism. There is very little probability
that the deputies will validate any petition that could threaten the
status quo. As in any other political system, this democratic game is
obviously rigged: even if you play by the rules, you always lose!
Then, Macron repeated and clarified some reforms that were already
present in his electoral program of 2017: limiting the number of terms
for politicians (though he did not specify how many would be allowed);
reducing the number of parliamentarians by 25% or 30%; increasing the
degree of proportional representation in legislative elections (which
will likely give more power to the National Front in French political
institutions).[1]
After presenting what the government is planning to do to include more
elements of participatory democracy in the French political system,
Macron expressed his desire to undertake a “profound reform of the
French administration” and of its public service. To do so, the
government intends to put an end to the National School of
Administration (ENA)—symbol of republican elitism and opportunism—in
order to create a new institution that “works better.” Moreover, in May,
Prime Minister Edouard Philippe has been mandated to officially present
a government plan to put more civil servants in the field so they can
help the authorities find solutions to people’s problems at a local
scale. Therefore, the government has abandoned its previous objective of
abolishing 120,000 posts of civil servants—but this doesn’t mean that
the government has abandoned the idea of cutting jobs.
To fight against the steady reduction of public services in the
countryside and in some provinces—such as post offices and deliveries,
health insurance, and unemployment agencies—the government aims to
establish buildings that would concentrate all these rudimentary public
services in one location. Such initiative already exists, in fact, but
is suffering from critical underfunding.
Then, Macron stated that no further hospital or school will close until
2022—the end of his presidential term—without the agreement of the Mayor
of the Commune they are located in. For years, successive governments
have underfunded hospitals and schools, increasing the precarious aspect
of working conditions. The main question is—what will happen after 2022?
Regarding the education issue, Macron agreed to limit the number of
students per class to 24 from kindergarten to second grade and to
duplicate classes if necessary, as is already stipulated in some
priority education areas—read poor districts. This is an interesting
focus for Macron when in the meantime, government policies are worsening
the educational system as a whole, especially via reforms targeting high
schools and universities.
Concerning economic policies, Macron explained that he wants to
“significantly reduce” the amount of income tax demanded from the middle
class. However, to do so while balancing the loss of tax revenue, Macron
is asking everyone to “work more.” The meaning behind this statement
remains quite obscure, as Macron offered no further explanation. So far,
we know that the government doesn’t want to change the legal age of
retirement nor to cancel holidays. However, Macron is not opposed to the
idea of increasing the number of working hours per week. The government
also aims to reach its objective of “full employment” by 2025, without
explaining how this might take place. In order to compensate for the tax
cuts for the middle class, the government also aims to suppress some
specific fiscal niches used by large companies, but Macron said nothing
about the various strategies of tax evasion utilized by the super-rich.
Macron also explained his wish to increase the minimum amount of
retirement pensions from today’s approximately €650 per month up to
€1000. Moreover, Macron also reconsidered his previous policy regarding
retirement and confirmed that pensions under €2000 would be re-indexed
to account for inflation starting January 2020. Finally, the government
wants to create some sort of mechanism to guarantee the payment of child
support to families in need.
Starting in June, Macron wants to create a “citizen’s convention
composed of one hundred and fifty people with the mission to work on
significant measures for the planet.” In addition, he wants to establish
a Council of Ecological Defense to address climate change. This council
would involve the Prime Minister as well as the main Ministers in charge
of this transition in order to take “strategic choices and to put this
climate change at the very core of our policies.” This is not a measure
to address the ecological crisis so much as yet another step in the
development of the same French bureaucracy that sparked the yellow vest
movement in the first place. Our governments and the systems that put
them in power in the first place continue to lead us towards darker
futures.
Finally, and most ominously, Macron presented his plan to “rebuild the
immigration policy” of France. “Europe needs to rethink its cooperation
with Africa in order to limit the endured immigration and has to
reinforce its borders, even if this means having a Schengen area with
less countries,” he proclaimed. “I deeply believe in asylum, but we must
strengthen the fight against those who abuse it.” This will likely be
the premise of a new step in the development of fortress Europe. And, of
course, whatever authoritarian measures are developed to target migrants
will also be used to target poor people and rebellious elements within
France itself. In this regard, we can see that it has been
self-destructive as well as racist and xenophobic that some yellow
vesters have demanded more immigration controls.
Following this press conference, the government hoped that its official
announcements would finally take the life out of the yellow vest
movement, defusing the social tension that has built up. However, in the
hours following Macron’s speech, several well-known yellow vest figures
expressed their dissatisfaction with his proposals, calling for further
demonstrations. In the end, even if some yellow vesters were sidetracked
by Macron’s announcement, it was difficult to predict whether people
would massively take the streets for the 24^(th) act of the yellow vest
movement.
On Saturday, April 27, about 23,600 yellow vesters demonstrated in
France. For this new day of action, the epicenter of the movement was
the city of Strasbourg. As the European elections will occur in a month,
an “international call” was made to gather and march towards the
European Parliament. Some Belgians, Germans, Italians, Swiss, and
Luxembourgers participated as well. About 3000 demonstrators walked
through the streets of Strasbourg, confronting police and engaging in
property destruction. In the end, 42 people were arrested and at least 7
injured—three police officers, three demonstrators, and one passerby.
At the same time, two demonstrations took place in Paris. The first,
organized by trade unions, drew about 5500 demonstrators, among them
2000 in yellow vests, while the other, mostly composed of several
hundreds of yellow vesters, did a tour of all the major corporate media
headquarters to ask for “impartial media coverage.” Other gatherings
also took place in Lyons, Toulouse, Cambrai, and elsewhere in France.
(All of the figures provided here are from the French authorities.)
If we compare the total number of participants in this 24^(th) act to
the other national days of action, it is undeniable that it attracted
fewer participants. Does that mean that the government has finally
gained the upper hand over the movement? It’s unclear. It is possible
that some yellow vesters stayed home from the 24^(th) act in order to
prepare for May Day.
Last year, the intensity of property destruction and confrontations with
police during the May Day mobilization of anarchists and other
autonomous rebels compelled the government to cancel the entire
traditional trade union march. In view of the tense social and political
situation in France today, who knows what May Day 2019 could bring?
If the government attempts to cancel or repress demonstrations in Paris
this May Day, the situation could become explosive. Not only because the
police have adopted aggressive new law enforcement strategies over the
past few weeks, but also because several calls have been made for yellow
vesters to join autonomous rebels at the front of the traditional
Parisian afternoon procession for the “ultimate act.” The objective is
set: Paris is to become the capital city of rioting.
Here is an English adaptation of one of the calls, entitled Pour un 1er
mai jaune et noir:
For a yellow and black May Day!
“When the government violates the rights of the people, insurrection is
for the people and for each portion of the people the most sacred of
rights and the most indispensable of duties.”
-Article 35 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen (1793)
Macron’s government has decided to crush the current social protest by
force, reaching a level of repression never seen before: prohibitions of
demonstrations, deployment of soldiers, the use of armored vehicles, the
use of chemical markers and weapons of war against protesters, jail
sentences in spades, hands torn off, blinded protesters…
During the demonstration of May Day 2018, the Prefecture of Police
counted 14,500 demonstrators “on the sidelines of the trade union
procession” (almost as much as in the traditional procession) including
1200 “radical individuals.” On March 16, at the time of act 18, it was
1500 “ultra violent” ones who were present among the 7000 demonstrators,
according to the figures of this same police.
Today, what frightens the state is not the rioters themselves, but the
adhesion and understanding they arouse among the rest of the population.
And this despite the calls, week after week, for everyone to dissociate
themselves from the “breakers.”
If there is one group that currently strikes France with all its
violence, it is not the “Black Bloc,” nor the yellow vests; it is rather
the government itself.
We are calling on all revolutionaries in France and elsewhere, all those
who want this to change, to come and form a determined and combative
march. Because if repression falls on everyone, our response must be
common and united. Against Macron and his world, let’s take the street
together to revive the convergence of anger and hope. Let’s get ready,
let’s equip ourselves, lets organize ourselves to overthrow him and drag
him through a day in hell.
War has been declared!
[1] “Proportional representation” would mean that if, for example, 30%
of voters vote for the Green Party, then members of that party would
receive 30% of the total number of seats. So far, legislative elections
offer no proportional representation—even if a party receives a large
percentage of votes, it might not gain many seats at the assembly.
People have been complaining about this “unfair process,” so now the
government is willing to increase proportional representation in
elections. Unfortunately, for several years now, the National Front has
usually received around 20–25% of votes but only currently holds 6 seats
out of the 577 in the Assemblée Nationale. Increasing proportional
representation will give them more power in the
decision-making—although, of course, it’s not clear to what extent
Macron will actually follow through on his promises.
Of course, there is no option for people who have grown disillusioned
with government itself: that perspective will never be “proportionately
represented.” This is why the government refused outright to recognized
blank votes.