Understanding. At least decrypt, get out of the café of commerce and reflect twice. Pierre Larrouy, who was in his youth one of the collaborators and friends of Jacques Pilhan – pioneer of political analysis through psychosociological surveys, describes the situation in which France finds itself, and then offers an interpretation.
A free society… but disoriented
“We live in an extremely paradoxical society which, on one hand claims to control everything, but on the other hand does not see what it does, nor where it may lead,” he says from the start. The increase in exchanges, instead of promoting common ground, enabling the emergence of an intense collective life, reinforces individualism and the feeling of accumulated loneliness. In the past, an isolated person was deemed as someone without parents or friends, widowed or single and elderly. Pierre Larrouy notes that loneliness now affects everyone. “Whether young or old, whether CEO, executive, employee, this feeling dominates us,” he observes. Everyone seeks someone who will understand them. By being too free, we no longer understand each other.”
The triumph of the imaginary and the loss of the symbolic
Of course, the explanation of our concerns by hyper-individualism is not new. Many sociologists have already denounced such a drift. But for our interlocutor, it is not just about that. According to him, we have eliminated the symbolic part, the one that precisely helps us to live. “In general, any limit is rejected (including that of the body, biology, physiology) because it is seen as a hindrance to our freedom, to our fulfillment,” he laments. However, it is this limit that authorizes us, because it gives us a sense of Law. Our society is full of energy, but, because it believes that this energy helps to produce the symbolic, it goes in circles. Psychoanalyst Charles Melman writes: “Energy does not allow us to move from the imaginary to the symbolic, it only reinforces the imaginary.”
This refusal of the symbolic, we find it in the political field in the classical form of a feeling of omnipotence. Donald Trump is obviously the most spectacular representative of this. But in France as well, how can we not be tempted to find it, following different modalities? When Jean-Luc Mélenchon says: “I am the Republic!” or when Jordan Bardella claims to lead France even though he has never held a job before being designated by Marine Le Pen as one of the leaders of the National Rally, we detect some characteristic ingredients.
But the lack of limit does not only result in a feeling of omnipotence. It prevents the accomplishment of individuals. “When you ask young people what they do, they answer: ‘I have a project,'” notes Pierre Larrouy. This project does not always materialize, but that is not essential; for them, having a project is to exist. It is the dominance of the imaginary fueled by energy. This generation of eternal students who often want to first be creators – and why not artists? – is truly fragile, since, as we just said, each one withdraws into themselves, refuses the common, asserts their desire as an imperative.” The worsening mental health issues are a concerning sign.
The “resentful middle classes” in search of meaning
In this desolate landscape, our analyst distinguishes a social category whose distress is not fully appreciated, one that he designates under the term “resentful middle classes.” These are cultured people, who have made the effort to pursue good studies, and who feel that the elites do not listen to them. “They are cultural yellow vests,” says Pierre Larrouy. Teachers, civil service executives, they see themselves as the lifebuoys of a society in turmoil, the guarantors of a fraternal society; what characterizes them is not material criteria – although they struggle to live in the city centers where they work – but a loss of meaning, the impression of not being listened to.”
To overcome this collective crisis, many demand the restoration of a vertical authority. More than the desire for a return to the old order, it is the aspiration to give meaning to communal life that undoubtedly explains the success of formations that are said to be populist.
It would be appropriate, but it is not our subject here, to emphasize how much this word reflects contempt for the people. Certainly, it is reasonable to avoid generalities, especially to be wary of the singular when speaking of individuals. Does “the people” exist in the homogeneous sense of the term? This would warrant further development. But when de Gaulle or Mitterrand spoke of the people, they did not seem to distance themselves, to be wary; on the contrary, they approached to listen better.
Everyone can see how reestablishing an undisputed vertical authority can be illusory. “The answer to limitless horizontality cannot be verticality,” emphasizes Pierre Larrouy. It is assent that makes authority. It is acceptance of the common fate, of the will for sharing and of the limit that strengthens it, which I call “horizontalism.” In sports as in politics, the great leaders are those who generate assent. The next president of the Republic will be the candidate who knows how to recreate assent.” May such a personality present themselves.
Read: Pierre Larrouy: “The Resentful Frances”
