Understanding, at the very least decrypting, breaking away from the crowd of commerce and reflecting twice. Pierre Larrouy, who was once a collaborator and friend of Jacques Pilhan, a pioneer in political analysis through psychosociological surveys, describes the situation in which France finds itself and then offers an interpretation.
A free society…but disoriented
“We live in an extremely paradoxical society which, on one hand, claims to control everything, but on the other hand does not see what it is doing, or where it may lead,” he says from the outset. The increase in exchanges, instead of promoting commonality, allowing for the emergence of intense collective life, reinforces individualism and the feeling of cumulative loneliness. Once upon a time and now, an isolated person was seen as someone without parents or friends, widowed or single and elderly. Pierre Larrouy notes that today, everyone experiences loneliness. “Whether young or old, CEO, executive, or employee, this feeling dominates us,” he observes. Everyone is looking for someone to understand them. By being too free, we no longer understand each other.”
The triumph of the imaginary and the loss of the symbolic
Certainly, the explanation of our worries through hyper-individualism is not new. Many sociologists have already denounced this drift. But for our interlocutor, it’s not just that. According to him, we have eliminated the symbolic part, the one that precisely helps us to live. “In general, every limit is rejected (including that of the body, biology, physiology) because it is seen as a hindrance to our freedom, our fulfillment,” he laments. Yet, it is this limit that authorizes us, because it gives us Law. Our society is not lacking in energy, but because it believes that this energy helps it produce symbolism, it goes round in circles. Psychoanalyst Charles Melman writes: “Energy does not allow us to move from the imaginary to the symbolic, it only reinforces the imaginary.”
This refusal of the symbolic is found in the political field in the classic form of a sense of omnipotence. Donald Trump is obviously its most spectacular representative. But in France itself, how can we not find it, following different modalities? When Jean-Luc Mélenchon says, “I am the Republic!” or when Jordan Bardella claims to lead France without ever having held a job before being appointed by Marine Le Pen as one of the leaders of the National Rally, we discern some distinctive ingredients.
But the lack of limits does not only result in a sense of omnipotence. It prevents individuals from fulfilling themselves. “When you ask young people what they are doing, they respond: ‘I have a project’,” notes Pierre Larrouy. This project may not necessarily come to fruition, but that’s not the essential part; for them, having a project means to exist. It’s the dominance of the imaginary fueled by energy. This generation of eternal students who often want to first become creators – and why not artists? – is truly fragile, since, as we just said, everyone withdraws into themselves, rejects the common, asserts their desire as an imperative. The exacerbation of mental health issues is a troubling sign.
The “resentful middle classes” in search of meaning
In this bleak landscape, our analyst identifies a social category whose distress is not adequately measured, one that he refers to as the “resentful middle classes.” They are cultured people who have made the effort to pursue good studies and believe that the elites do not listen to them. “They are like cultural yellow vests,” says Pierre Larrouy. Teachers, public service executives, they see themselves as the lifesavers of a society in decline, as the guarantors of a fraternal society; what characterizes them are not material criteria – although they find it hard not to be able to live in the city centers where they work – but a loss of meaning, the sense of not being heard.”
To overcome this collective crisis, many are calling for the restoration of vertical authority. More than the desire for a return to the old order, it is the aspiration to give meaning to communal life that probably explains the success of so-called populist movements.
It would be appropriate, but that is not our subject here, to emphasize how much this word reflects contempt for the people. Of course, it is rational to avoid generalizations, especially to be wary of the singular when talking about individuals. Does a people exist, in the homogeneous sense of the term? This would deserve further development. But when De Gaulle or Mitterrand spoke of the people, they did not seem to distance themselves from it, to distrust it; on the contrary, they approached it to listen better.
Everyone can imagine how illusory the restoration of unquestionable vertical authority can be. “The response to unlimited horizontality cannot be verticality,” emphasizes Pierre Larrouy. It is consent that creates authority. It is the acceptance of a common destiny, of the willingness to share and of limits that reinforce it, what I call “horizontalism.” In sports as in politics, the great captains are those who generate consent. The next president of the Republic will be the candidate who knows how to recreate consent. May such a personality present themselves.
Read: Pierre Larrouy: “The Resentful Frances
