The effectiveness of the 'Naughty' strategy: provoking chaos and conflict - how to respond?

Act: Journalist, SEO copywriter

Jean-Luc Melanchon has for years relied on a strategy of conflict that was theorized by philosopher Chantal Mouffe and Sophia Shikirou.

What is this strategy and how does it manifest itself on social networks and in front of the media?

Bruno Cotré:

This is a political strategy with two aspects. On the one hand, it shows that one should never give up and that the long-term political struggle is more important than short-term events: any concession would mean admitting weakness and betraying the main political message to be preserved - the message of insubordination and refusal to submit. This applies not only to insubordination''Contraversionist positions, "noise and fury" are present throughout Jean-Luc Melanchon's work, as well as important historical references, including from the French Revolution.

Christophe Boutin:

First let me say that I find it rather difficult to mix Chantal Mouffe, with all the remarks that can be made about the philosophical approach of this philosopher from Belgium, and Sophia Shikirou, a communication counselor who has not yet proven the quality of her advice, a "poor spin doctor" whose trips apparently do not educate young people. Chantal Mouffe, together with her husband Ernesto Laclau, with whom she wrote Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: towards a radical democracy, criticizes some elements of Marxism and then (The Paradox of Democracy) some principles''our liberal and deliberative democracies, in particular by bringing the notion of conflict back to the center of politics (agonistic thinking: political thinking about the world).

This notion of conflict may have evolved in the course of her analyses, and if she tries to avoid that its radicalization leads to the destruction of political structures and, at the same time, of the city, it is still a key element in the specificity of political debate, which cannot be based, as some liberal authors write - we think of Tocqueville, Constant or Stuart Mill, of course - only on rational contradictions and organized debate.

With regard to the share of populism that exists in Mouffe and Laclau, and that is also present in Jean-Luc Melanchon, it''comes from the fact that this left-wing populism seeks to create a new people rather than, like 'right-wing' populism, to affirm the characteristics of the previous people - we turn to the Dictionary of Populism published with Olivier Dard and Frédéric Rouvois.

What Sophia Shikirou adds is the usual obviousness that modern politics must take into account social media, but with this reinterpretation according to which they must be used to bypass the classical media and disseminate a thought forbidden by the latter - an analysis that is a common feature of any "Influencer" and of many madmen on the Internet.

In this sense, she managed the campaign of candidate Jean-Luc Melanchon, managing his website and making sure that social networks''were filled with comments from France's leader of the unruly. Like any campaign aimed at creating 'noise', this mechanically implies a radicalization of statements in the long term to compensate for the fatigue of 'follower'.

But can we say that Jean-Luc Melanchon's current behavior depends solely on the philosophical influence of Chantal Mouffe and the strategic choices of his close advisor? Not only, because for years now, the extreme left, which has become his main commodity, has moved from defense of Palestinian rights to anti-Zionism, sometimes difficult to distinguish from anti-Semitism. One might consider this 'rupture' to be indicative of that, at least as much as the result of organized speech as well as disruptive strategic''a choice aimed at making the leader of France recalcitrant and members of his party followers of awakeners of conscience on TikTok.

Can the strategy of rupture advocated by Jean-Luc Melanchon be selectively effective? Can he continue to gather supporters around him?

Bruno Cotré:

The first reaction would be to answer no. Can someone who makes such a sharp division embody unity and unification, especially of the left? The significant tensions that now exist between the constituents of the NUPES and within the FI seem to confirm this thesis. But it is more complicated than it seems: a strong polarization of political speech could also lead to a strengthening of commitment to this way of thinking among those who most''disintegration.

Could it nevertheless have electoral effectiveness? Attract new FI voters?

This assumes that there is a significant segment of the population in France for whom national elections are based on criteria of international politics, people who care more about solidarity with foreign peoples than with their own countrymen. Obviously, this can only apply to a small minority,''uniting supporters of extreme left-wing politics and supporters of radical Islamism, and this does not create an electoral base that allows them to seize power. On the contrary, these statements will alienate an electoral body that is not satisfied with such radicalism - which, by the way, is already happening, the French believe in polls that the offensiveness of FI deputies excludes this formation from the country's leadership.

Could Jean-Luc Melanchon's strategy lead to anything other than violent revolution if it is carried through to fruition? Who today still believes in the possibility of such an uprising? "

Christophe Boutin: Jean-Luc Mélenchon makes no secret of his desire for revolution, but here he is in line with the deep desire of the French to "turn the'table' of politics. In 2017, after seeing that the shifts of the 'government right' and 'government left' were not leading to real change, that none of their major issues and concerns, be it purchasing power, immigration, security, preserving social benefits, were actually being addressed, they opted for the 'revolution' that Emmanuel Macron was proposing in the title of his program book. Then they realized that the rupture he promised was simply an acceleration of the withdrawal begun by his predecessors, and there is always a significant demand for change. Another decision by the French,