“Delafosse revealed”, “Islamophobic”, “clothing policeman”… The mayor of Montpellier, Michaël Delafosse, has been the target of serious accusations for several months. Which today means he is placed under police protection, as revealed in an article in L’Opinionpublished on October 2. The investigation reveals the mode of action (accusing leaflets, online petition, etc.) put in place by a citizen collective which claims to defend “the dignity of the Muslims of Montpellier and its metropolis”. The elected socialist’s opponents criticize him for certain positions and actions whose aim is to enforce the principle of secularism in his city, such as his opposition to wearing the abaya at school or the burkini in municipal swimming pools. or the establishment of a “public, secular and free” educational support offer.
On a WhatsApp loop titled “Oumma Montpellier”, the orders banning pro-Gaza gatherings aroused the ire of the community. Always according to Opinionthe group’s administrator applauds the determined policy of Alenka Doulain, opposition municipal representative (LFI), and describes Michaël Delafosse as “the most Zionist mayor in history”. While Nathalie Oziol, LFI deputy for Hérault, allegedly accused the town’s chief magistrate of having “misused secularism to cast suspicion on Muslims”. Iannis Roder, professor of history and geography and director of the Education Observatory of the Jean-Jaurès Foundation, denounces a dangerous alliance between rebellious activists and supporters of radical Islam.
L’Express: How do you react to the threats made against Michaël Delafosse?
Iannis Roder : I find it extremely shocking that an elected official would be threatened in this way, a priori by a political movement – La France insoumise – which is not bothered about the truth. Because what is being said is obviously completely false. These accusations of anti-Muslim racism against Michaël Delafosse are not based on any tangible act or statement. We are dealing with a manipulation company which aims to prepare for the municipal elections of 2026 (Manon Aubry, the LFI candidate, came first in the European elections) by discrediting the mayor of Montpellier in the eyes of part of the population of the city. These actions which consist of distributing leaflets, of lying about the substance, make me think of the methods of the extreme right which, as History has shown us, has had the habit of building fantasies around great political figures like that of Léon Blum in particular.
An internal source in the intelligence services affirms that there would be a “syncretism between the Insoumis and movements close to the Muslim Brotherhood”. What mechanism is this?
The attacks directed against the socialist mayor Michaël Delafosse are the perfect illustration of the strategy put in place today by Jean-Luc Mélenchon and LFI which is to only address segments of the population. This political movement, in the speeches it makes, no longer targets the general interest but a sum of particular interests, in particular those of Muslims which it refers to their religious identity. A completely opposite approach to that of Michaël Delafosse who is an elected universalist republican very attached to the general interest. At the time of the European elections and currently, in the context of events in the Middle East, LFI continues to send signals to the Muslim population by emphasizing the victim aspect but also the alleged responsibilities of Jews in the chaos of the world, in Israel as in France – as shown by Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s tweet which targeted Minister Benjamin Haddad.
This is where these political activists join the discourses held by Islamists of all stripes, both by encouraging the anti-Semitic reading of the march of the world and by insisting on the idea that Muslims would be discriminated against, always under the influence of a colonialist and racist France which would not want them. They thus ensure that they prevent their integration and assimilation. This is the objective pursued by the Islamists and in which La France insoumise collaborates.
A strategy which primarily targets schools and which Michaël Delafosse knows well since he is himself a history and geography teacher…
Of course. And why do Islamists fight against secularism in schools? Because they consider that secularism is precisely a tool of emancipation and they do not want this youth, those whom they see only as Muslim, to emancipate themselves from what they consider to be their immutable identity. There is, once again, a convergence of interests between the Islamists and LFI which seeks to essentialize Muslims for purely electoral and clientelist purposes. The various positions taken by Michaël Delafosse, on the ban on wearing the abaya at school for example to promote individual emancipation and protect young girls from pressure wherever they come, obviously go to the against their joint actions.
By establishing an offer of public, secular and free educational support, particularly in working-class neighborhoods, the socialist mayor ensured that all children were offered the opportunity not only to be helped in their education but also to do so in a Republican executive. Is this the action of an allegedly racist mayor? This accusation, astounding, is no less worrying. Michaël Delafosse’s idea is to fight against the risk of exploitation by fundamentalist religious associations which represent a real danger for young people and our democracy. Michaël Delafosse, through all these actions, never deviates from his line and remains faithful to the DNA of the left. A universalist, republican and social left.
Even if it means risking losing part of its electorate… Isn’t the strategy implemented by LFI paying off in certain districts of Montpellier?
Yes, just look at the results of the last European elections: in the La Paillade district, for example, LFI received 75% of the votes. Which actually means that his strategy is working. The most worrying thing is that, by favoring the interests of those they perceive as Muslims, these activists contribute to fracturing the French political community, which is increasingly divided into different entities. As a result, these segments of the population, such as French Jews and French Muslims, are sent face to face with incendiary and violent comments and speeches.
By accusing Michaël Delafosse of “Islamophobia”, are his political opponents not putting him in real danger? We can’t help but think about what happened to Samuel Paty, a victim like him of false accusations on social networks…
This is a very sad way for LFI to commemorate the four years since the assassination of Samuel Paty. Today, we do not use this type of vocabulary in an innocuous way. Publicly accusing an elected official of “Islamophobia”, a term constantly used by Islamists to prevent any criticism of religion and its practices, and which LFI has adopted, very clearly amounts to putting a target on his back. We know very well that this can give some people the idea of taking physical action. Not only is it extremely dangerous but it is also terribly cowardly since, once again, these lies and these fantasies uttered against the mayor of Montpellier only aim to manipulate part of public opinion.
Michaël Delafosse, when he says “I prefer to be beaten than to sacrifice my ideals” takes an opposite approach to that of LFI. The Insoumis, to be elected, have clearly chosen to sacrifice the historical values of the left, but remain faithful to the old far-left antiphon which is that “the end justifies the means”. They think they can win the municipality in 2026 and are obviously ready for anything. This is all the difference between a responsible left-wing elected official, attached to democratic principles, and a movement whose objective is chaos by any means provided that it serves its sole interests, even if it means sitting on the values and principles that have guided the left since the Dreyfus Affair.
.