CHRONIC. Emmanuel Macron and the “preferably French”

Clément Viktorovitch returns every week to the debates and political issues. Sunday February 25: the expression “French preferred”, a formula from Louis Aragon taken up by Emmanuel Macron to salute the memory of Missak Manouchian and her 23 comrades of the Resistance, executed by the Nazis on February 21, 1944.

“No one seemed to see you. Preferably French. People went around without paying attention to you all day long. But at curfew time, wandering fingers had written under your photos : died for France.” These are in fact the verses with which Louis Aragon paid tribute to Missak Manouchian and her comrades of the FTP-MOI, the communist resistance fighters, foreign and stateless, who had decided to fight for France.

That the President of the Republic chooses to use this expression has immense symbolic significance: it is the recognition by the French State of the role played by the communist and immigrant Resistance during the Second World War, and of the tribute that ‘she paid.

Beyond the symbolic dimension, we must of course also see a political intention. An entry into the Pantheon always fits into a context. It responds to issues that question our political society. And, in this case, the message seems clear: at a time when the National Rally is recording its best polls, when the speeches of rejection of the other, even of hatred of the other, are so significant, the leader of the State wanted to remind us that the French Republic has never ceased to be irrigated by all those who, initially foreigners, chose to join it. In this sense, the use of the words “French preferred” seems particularly appropriate to me.

It is a direct response to a totem of the far-right: the expression “French paper”. We find it in the mouths of deputies Jean-Philippe Tanguy or Emmanuelle Ménard, for example, but also, before them, in Jean-Marie Le Pen and, even before him, in the pen of the ultranationalist and anti-Semite Edouard Drumont, at beginning of the 20th century. The idea behind these words is that, unlike so-called “native French people”, French people who have acquired nationality or who have an immigrant background would be false citizens. They would take advantage of the generosity of the State, even conspire against it. The expression “French preferred” reminds us that on the contrary, many immigrants choose to invest in the French Republic, recognize themselves in its values, or even are ready to die for them, even before having been naturalized.

A weapon in the political and cultural debate

This expression makes it possible to oppose one metaphor to another, one imaginary to another, and thus to fight against the temptation of xenophobic withdrawal. Especially since the choice of the word “preference” is particularly clever. It also responds, in the same movement, to the historic proposal of the National Rally: the idea of ​​a “national preference”. In rhetoric, this is what we call a strategy of reversal: seizing the words brandished by the adversary, to use them against him.

From an argumentative point of view, this is therefore a great find. From the point of view of political responsibility, on the other hand, it seems to me that we can question ourselves. Because, all the same, remember: at the time of the immigration law, what Emmanuel Macron had accepted was that provisions directly inspired by national preference be included in the text. They have, of course, since been censored by the Constitutional Council. And, certainly, the President of the Republic affirmed that such measures could not be described as “national preference”. But this has been contested by numerous researchers: the historian Emmanuel Blanchard, the jurist Francis Kessler, the economist Antoine Math, the political scientist Olivier Esteves, and so on! By letting national preference be voted on in the Assembly, Emmanuel Macron has given credence to the theories he claims to combat.

He certainly explained that he did not want these measures, that he was forced to do so as part of the negotiations with the LR deputies, but he could also have chosen to withdraw the text before it was voted on, if he really wanted to fight against the values ​​of the National Rally! Especially since this is not the only example. This week, Emmanuel Macron supported the proposal to abolish land rights in Mayotte. Here again, a historic position of the National Rally, which is thus legitimized! Personalities as different as François Héran, professor at the Collège de France, or Manuel Valls, former Prime Minister, spoke out to explain that on the one hand, this was probably not going to change anything in the problems of the Mahorais, since in any case, since 2018, children born to parents in an irregular situation can no longer obtain French nationality. But what’s more, it is a dangerous precedent which contradicts a principle as old as the Republic: the one which wants one not only to become French by blood, but also by adhesion and by will. Without land rights, children born to foreign parents will remain foreigners forever.

It is the exact opposite of the ideal held by Aragon, and apparently displayed by Emmanuel Macron: that of “preferably French”.