The Crépol tragedy gave rise to hasty and opportunistic political interpretations, as is now the rule. As soon as Thomas’ death was announced, many of them rushed to see it as a sign that they were right, and they made it known on social networks and television sets, with Marion Maréchal in the lead. There was talk of “francocide” or “razzias” (a term which, remember, designates a looter attack in an Arab country). However, the investigation carried out by the gendarmes of the Grenoble section is progressing and undermines this scenario of a premeditated punitive expedition to “kill French people”. Anti-White remarks were indeed made during the brawl, according to some testimonies, but they were not the primary motivation for a fight which appears to have been initially started by a rugby player against a young person from the neighborhood currency. In short, it’s a tragic story, whatever way you tell it, but it happens to support a disturbing narrative.
We cannot be naive enough to think that this political recovery is the sole result of a form of ideological blindness. This drama is summoned to complete a narrative puzzle which is becoming obsessive not only to the far right, but also to the far left: one which, once completed, will draw the contours of a war of all against all. Each news item is now contemplated by radicals of all stripes to see if it could not serve to advance the scenario of imminent collective violence. It’s Crépol, it’s the assassination of little Lola, or the death of Nahel… In all cases, these are tragedies which have reasons to arouse emotion, but, as everyone has noticed, they inspire selective reactions according to the political sensibilities of each person.
These prophets of ill omen are not alike; we find tribunes who stand on very real platforms or others who hold forth from the shelter of their digital pulpit. They all have one obsession: the possibility of insurrection. They claim to fear it, but they seem to desire it. It can take the form of a generalized revolt or a civil war depending on sensitivities. Whether it is Jean-Luc Mélenchon, Juan Branco, Papacito, Marion Maréchal, Eric Zemmour or thousands of others, they jubilantly instill the idea of imminent social turmoil. They certainly have opposing ideological sensibilities, but if we accept to understand that politics is a non-Euclidean space, we can support the idea that they touch each other. Some don’t just wait for the insurrection, they mimic the effects of the actions that could provoke it. Whether they call themselves “Martel division” or “black blocks“, they all hope, according to the old anarchist doctrine, to place the stick of dynamite in the right place which would cause the building to collapse.
We can say that all these little people are looking for discord, and have an interest in it. From this point of view, they are reminiscent of a famous character from the adventures of Asterix: Tullius Détritus. In an album, aptly titled Discord, Caesar sends this scourge to the famous Gallic village. The verbal poison he instills in people’s minds is very close to being fatal. Likewise, this fantasy of civil war could end up being harmful to us. We must remember that the social order, that which protects us from the violence of all against all, only holds because citizens respect the intimidations constituted by the law, convention and morality. In fact, there’s more: they also have to believe that others will respect these intimidations. Because social order is nothing other than the possibility of anticipating the actions of others and thus reducing the uncertainties of coexistence. If this belief disintegrates, all social possibilities unfold. The social order is strong because it is based on this shared belief that we normally have no reason to question, but if we start doubting together, then this order becomes as fragile as glass. And Tullius Détritus will have succeeded in his mission.