We tend to forget it, but the radical leftists are far from having disappeared, they and their long history. Last March, the PRG organized its 103rd congress and reappointed Guillaume Lacroix as its head. Discreet on the public scene, the elected official nevertheless knows the workings of his political camp, from edge to edge. After having maintained a privileged relationship with Jean-Luc Mélenchon during the presidential and legislative elections, while remaining critical of his line, Lacroix joined La Convention, the movement of left-wing opponents of Nupes led by Bernard Cazeneuve. But the leader of the PRG does not despair of discussing these two for the good of the union of the left…
L’Express: After this reshuffle, what is your assessment Emmanuel Macron’s “hundred days” ?
Guillaume Lacroix: The president should be more lucid. We cannot speak of a lull after what we have just experienced through the riots, which are nothing more than yet another reflection of the pre-insurrectional climate which has reigned in France since the 2010s, and which reigns in the West in reality. The West realizes its frailties which follow one another and have created fears and therefore anger. All this gave Donald Trump or even the victory of the far right in Italy, etc. France is resisting, but not for very long since its political class has resigned from the idea of governing, as if there were an admission of powerlessness. This is what I blame Emmanuel Macron for. He reminds me of Édouard Balladur who, from his gilded office, said that he would be a candidate because the country was doing better. The president, his Prime Minister and the government explain that everything is better, that we must continue like this. There is a form of denial in him, which is explained by the love he has for himself above all, and reveals his inability to reassure the French and give them perspectives.
You, from the center left, make a judgment at least as severe as Jean-Luc Mélenchon…
Which Mélenchon are you talking about? Because it has its eras, a bit like painters. And I would say he’s in his dark period right now. He was able to understand the state of our society and the major movements that are upsetting it, but that does not mean that he provides credible answers. And even if they are, he kills them with his exaggerated postures, his outbursts.
Are you talking about his refusal to call for calm during the riots?
This is one example among many others. He did not call for violence but he legitimized it so as not to give the impression of his disconnection. There is, in Mélenchon, this permanent idea that the revolution of the Third International is underway each time three guys rise up in the street. When the rioters loot the Lacoste and Apple stores, we see the limits of his proletarian revolution… It’s always easy to run after events, to tell people that they have reason to be angry and that they must continue to be angry, as he does. The most difficult thing in politics is to start explaining to them why we are going to turn their anger into hope. His attack on the Representative Council of Jewish Institutions in France illustrates this. He sees a political interest in it. He thinks of making the convergence of the struggles between the proletarians and the neighborhoods, but he only feeds the prejudices and the civil war that he says he fears.
Aren’t you extrapolating a bit? Perhaps he simply wanted to react to a political attack, which he considers unfair, especially on a day of national commemoration?
That the Crif plays politics during the commemoration of the Vel d’Hiv roundup is surprising to say the least. I don’t understand it, for the simple reason that we shouldn’t make party politics a day of national unity like this. But Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s response, to say that the Crif is on the far right because he attacks it, is not worthy! When you aspire to be head of state, you have to place yourself above the fray.
In recent days, he has also accused his critics, including on the left, of making the bed of the far right, if not of being one. How do you explain his reaction?
Jean-Luc Mélenchon must take a vacation. Great holidays even! He needs to rest. In reality, I can’t explain his confinement, I’m not a shrink, but I can see that his attitude has consequences: he does everything he can to ensure that the left never comes to power. La Nupes is the perfect example. Everything was there to unite the left, the traditional parties were down and he was 22% in the presidential election. The “people of the left” gave him reason, but he preferred to make a reduced coalition to settle accounts with those who discredited him during the presidential campaign.
It has often been said that the Nupes will not survive the storms, but it resists…
It was built on a misunderstanding: we made believe in a union of the left, but it was only an electoral agreement. All this led to nothing, and the Nupes, which has no common project, will end up devouring itself. This is what Jean-Luc Mélenchon is working on. If you look at what he has been doing since he left the PS in 2008, you will notice that he has only constructed and deconstructed political tools. He started with the Left Party, then the Left Front, then France insoumise… La Nupes will not escape this. But the union of the left, it will have to be done sooner or later, and it cannot be around the only band of followers of LFI.
Behind who then? Because the left which is not Nupes, from Bernard Cazeneuve to Carole Delga via Michaël Delafosse, builds its political capital on the constant criticism of Mélenchon and his coalition.
We’re not going to shed tears either. If Mélenchon is at the center of passions and criticism, it is because he seeks it and wishes it. The only valid question is whether the left can be a recourse against the extreme right in 2027. The problem is more serious than just his person.
Who sincerely believes in a union ranging from Bernard Cazeneuve to LFI?
But no one has a choice! There is a part of Insoumis who are serious Republicans, who do not let themselves be carried away by fashionable debates. I dare not believe that someone who claims to be on the left can think that the extreme right is better than an agreement with Bernard Cazeneuve, or that the extreme right is better than an agreement with part of LFI. Some have not understood the meaning of the fight that the left must carry out, together.
Will the European elections settle the situation on the left?
Obviously, the French will have the opportunity to express themselves on what they hope for from the left, in its diversity. The European elections will be eminently political. It is the only national democratic deadline that has existed since the presidential election and before the next one. The real national test is here. Unfortunately, it will be on a small part of the population, but we know that those who will vote are those who have something to say. I believe that we need to have a center left, republican and social, which weighs in order to be able to participate in the inevitable debate: who is leading the union of the left? It is necessary to count, to discuss then.
Mélenchon has proven twice, in 2017 and 2022, that when the left leaves divided to count itself, it is he who wins the bet. Isn’t your bet risky?
Do not believe that the presidential election is written in advance. What we do know, however, is that the French are demanding protection and, also, radical change. It is an extremely difficult equation, between the rejection of the status quo and the rejection of chaos. The incarnation on the left will have to position itself in relation to this. Bernard Cazeneuve protects, but is he capable of proposing a profound change in society? The question arises, and I believe so. Jean-Luc Mélenchon proposes a radical change of society, but he does not protect him… Both will have to move, out of obligation.