Is there a need today in France to defend our freedoms? This is what several associations intend to do all day this Saturday, April 15 in Paris, during the Popular Assizes for our freedoms. Meeting organized in particular by the League of Human Rights, ATTAC or the Syndicate of the Judiciary.
The sociologist Jean Viard deciphers today this question of society and topicality: is there a need today, in France, to defend our freedoms? The Popular Assizes for our freedoms will debate it all day this Saturday, April 15 in Paris. An event organized in particular by the League of Human Rights, ATTAC or the Syndicate of the Judiciary.
franceinfo: On the poster for this event, we see in particular Marianne, the symbol of the Republic, being charged by several CRS. For you, does this question arise today: the defense of our freedoms in France?
John Viard: We are mainly talking about maintaining order, but we are also talking about the law. We are in a country of law, and I think that we remain in a country of law. Personally, I don’t really like people saying that the law no longer holds its place. I think that what protects a society is the law, it is the application of the law, both to the weak and to the powerful, and I think that we are in a society of law. That’s why there are parallels that sometimes make me jump a little. We are not in a totalitarian regime. We can’t let that be said. I know that people say it, but I think you still have to know what a totalitarian regime is. I who frequented the communist countries of central Europe, I have memories that are not those that I see in France.
Afterwards, there is another question, which is that the police have a report of violence, which is strong, and that basically, the scenes of violence that we see in France, we see in far fewer countries from Europe. And there, there is another question, which is that society has indeed changed. Before, there were big demonstrations by huge organizations, which we have also seen with the unions for two months, but where there were organizations, negotiations, security services. And then, there was in fact permanent negotiation between the security service, for example of the CGT which was undoubtedly the best, and the police forces, including because the police forces, often moreover , they were people from the left, who were in the police force. I remember all the same that a good part of the police forces come from the left of the liberation.
So there was this permanent negotiation. And then the demonstrations changed in nature. There are groups of thugs in the middle today, and so it’s not the same population anymore. It is no longer the same rule. The problem is that in France, the police have not changed their strategy. When you look at the specialists, like Sébastian Roché, who are better than me, that’s actually one of the issues, it’s not to agglomerate the onlookers and the Black Bloc, it’s precisely to separate them, to deal with friendship the onlooker, the protester, and with the necessary violence, those who hit you, who throw pétanque balls. There, we sometimes have the impression that we are all put in the same category. And there, these are questions of work. It is also the question of who decides, that is to say that there are countries where the judge has much more importance, whereas we, I would say the police, are a compact block, who at the same time makes the rules, applies them, and afterwards, we measure the errors, we will say individual, because most of the time, these are individual errors.
So, suddenly, we have the feeling that we are not protected, that there is a group called the authority and that we are opposite, whether we are Vlaams Blok, walkers or demonstrators . The problem too is that violence pays. If you are in a society where violence pays, somewhere, those who are not violent, they look at the violent, saying: listen, go ahead guys, because we are going to win thanks to you. And that is very destabilizing and very dangerous for the authority of the State.
You said it, Jean Viard, abroad, we are sometimes looked at with wide eyes on the images of our demonstrations. On March 20, a United Nations special rapporteur said that he was following the ongoing demonstrations in France very closely. He recalled that these peaceful demonstrations are a fundamental right, that law enforcement officers must facilitate them and avoid any excessive use of force. And at the same time, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe was concerned about the conditions in which the freedoms of expression and assembly are exercised in the context of the mobilization against the pension reform.
Doesn’t it all the same look a little bad when a foreigner looks at France, the country of human rights, of freedom of expression with those eyes?
But yes, it looks bad. As well as the Arc de Triomphe ransacked by the Yellow Vests, it looked bad. A Republic where there are these signs of violence, of hatred too, because there is hatred in these relations between individuals, between the Black Bloc and the police, and perhaps in both directions. Moreover, that’s why when I insist on the fact that we have to take up the issue of violence again, put sociologists into it, put researchers into it and find blue helmets for civil peace, that seems to me an important issue. And I believe that we have allowed a situation of strength to develop, of war costumes, of rituals which are dangerous for our republican values. Because republican values, you know what Camus said: “There’s always a grain of truth in your opponent’s eye“. For me, this sentence serves as my mantra, and at the moment, it seems that this mantra is no longer respected.