The essayist and journalist David Goodhart, famous for his distinction between “Somewhere” (“those from somewhere”) and “Anywhere” (“those from everywhere”), is one of the best analysts of the fractures of our contemporary societies. Currently in France, the English intellectual observes with incredulous curiosity our national heartbreak around the pension reform. For L’Express, he analyzes this crisis which reminds him of the Brexit precedent. Interview.
L’Express: As a Briton, do the protests sparked in France by the pension reform surprise you?
David Goodhart: No. This challenge is more political than usual, and is itself a reaction to a particularly aggressive political act on the part of Emmanuel Macron: the use of 49-3. These two opposing sources of legitimacy – the Presidency of the Republic and the National Assembly – remind me of Brexit: the results of the referendum were opposed to the wishes of Parliament.
To these two sources of legitimacy, some French people add a third, the street, by reactivating the myth of the popular insurrection…
Every time, people use this very radical language of insurrection. Many people are very upset, but France is a parliamentary and presidential democracy, Emmanuel Macron announced this reform, and the people elected him. He has his reasons: the country is heavily in debt. That doesn’t mean he can do whatever he wants. He should have known people would react that way. The other side has its reasons, such as the aggressive way in which the president wanted to impose his views.
It is difficult to know if things will get worse, if there will be oil shortages, deaths… Emmanuel Macron is perhaps betting that the violence in the streets will allow him to turn the situation to his advantage.
Why is the pension issue less inflammable in the UK?
Here, people work until they are 66, and soon 67 [NDLR : en 2027]. The population accepted the argument according to which, with the increase in life expectancy, the demands on the pension system justified this extension. In addition, the amount of retirement pensions has been significantly increased over the past ten or fifteen years, without reaching French levels. It must be said that the Conservative Party [NDLR : au pouvoir depuis 2010] relies heavily, electorally, on the elderly.
We owe you the distinction between the “Anywhere” (“those from everywhere”), mobile, graduates of higher education, favorable to globalization, and the “Somewhere” (“those from somewhere”), more rooted, less educated , hostile to immigration Are these concepts relevant to understanding the current crisis?
Rather, it is a traditional conflict between social classes. But this can, to a certain extent, overlap with the opposition between “Anywhere” and “Somewhere”: the latter often have arduous jobs and are more attached to the current pension system. The question is whether the protest can turn into a “yellow vests” type movement.
You also warned against the disproportionate place given by our societies to cognitive intelligence, which has become the only meritocratic selection criterion to the detriment of other qualities. Do we see the fracture between manual workers and intellectual workers resurfacing here?
For those who work in an office, increasing the contribution period does not seem like much. It is true that people who work in physically demanding jobs are more quickly worn out at work and die younger. That said, not all opponents of the reform have arduous jobs.
Does the state visit of King Charles III to France, from March 26 to 29, worry you?
Opponents of Emmanuel Macron always present him as a monarch, an arrogant Napoleon. I wonder if he himself would not want to postpone this visit, because of this symbol of a king welcoming another… But that would be making too great a concession to the protesters. Moreover, the French police are very experienced.