YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Greg Tabibian : « Emmanuel Macron laisse la situation s'envenimer »

Greg Tabibian : « Emmanuel Macron laisse la situation s'envenimer » — Transcript

by Front Populaire · 7,663 words · 1,185 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:01He is saying that 6 months before an
0:02election, a protest, regardless of
0:04whether it is violent or not, is
0:06problematic because it moves the
0:07democratic arena into the streets when
0:09it should be in debates. He is
0:12fabricating a link between what is
0:15happening there and potential legal
0:18decisions regarding these elections. It
0:21is visible, it is right in front of us.
0:22I think Emmanuel Macron is letting the
0:24situation fester for as long as
0:26possible in order to restore order as
0:28soon as possible. in relation to the
0:31electoral deadline crazy France has
0:38just experienced a week of tumultuous
0:40protests with looting, destruction of
0:42property, and law enforcement being
0:44pushed around or, conversely, acting in
0:46ways that are sometimes questionable.
0:48So, to take stock of this particularly
0:50tense situation, I have the pleasure of
0:52welcoming back the videographer from
0:53the channel "Je suis pas content TV,"
0:55Greg Tabibian.
0:56>> Hi!
0:57>> Hello Greg. So, uh, to start, we're
0:59going to talk a little bit about
1:01Emmanuel Macron.
1:02>> Hm hm. Uh, because, just as it had
1:05almost begun—because it still took a
1:07year for it to happen—Macron's reign
1:10is ending in large-scale protests. We
1:13remember 2018, the Yellow Vests; 2026,
1:16the Yellow Vests again.
1:18>> Uh, that is Emmanuel Macron's legacy,
1:20this fractured France.
1:22>> Well yes, it is a ruined France. It is
1:24a fractured France. Whether on issues
1:29of debt or issues of division, it would
1:31obviously be stupid to make him the
1:33sole and only person responsible, we
1:35are in agreement, but he not only
1:37failed to grasp what he inherited, he
1:39reinforced all of its flaws. The "
1:42neither left nor right" has become the
1:44worst of the left and the right. And
1:48it's true that he is ending once again
1:50with protests that are actually the
1:52expression of all these years. What is
1:56interesting is that the basic Macronist
1:58project, which also took up a bit of
1:59François Bayrou's project, was to
2:01combine the best of the right and the
2:03best of the left, and we end up with a
2:05country that has never been so divided.
2:06>> Yes, of course. We end up with a
2:08country that has never been so divided
2:10because taking the best of the left and
2:11the best of the right means taking what
2:13is intelligent from both. It is not
2:16about taking contradictory proposals
2:18from both and alternating every 6
2:20months to do different things. It's not
2:23about having a Minister of Justice who
2:25holds a near-Taubira line, only to end
2:27up with Darmanin slashing migrant tents
2:28. It's not that, it's the problem of
2:31the "at the same time," it's that
2:33you're doing both. It's not having
2:35Jean-Michel Blanquer swoop in to give
2:37anti-woke speeches on universities and
2:39then, pop, right after Pap Ndiaye, or
2:41before, you see, the whole Blanquer-Pap
2:43Ndiaye sequence, you know, it's—well,
2:46that's it, it's—both. It's, uh, the
2:51worst of what the right does by
2:54monopolizing, by monopolizing wealth to
2:57channel it only into large corporations
3:00that don't need it. But at the same
3:03time, it's, uh, an economic policy of
3:06—well, it's not consistent at all for
3:09a single second, and it contains both
3:13the worst of socialism and the worst of
3:16blind capitalism. Everything is, in
3:20fact, there, so he's not...but
3:22everything adds up and causes an
3:23explosion, since you already know
3:25Macron is there, notably as a
3:27consequence of, in part, a generational
3:29analysis which was that the entire CPE
3:31generation had identified, among other
3:33things, the left-right alternation as
3:35something that prevented this country
3:37from moving forward. But here, he does
3:40it in intervals that are no longer five
3:42to seven years, but sometimes intervals
3:43of just a few weeks or a few months. So
3:46it is, in fact, uh, well, it's the
3:49nuclear core of permanent destruction.
3:52He's devouring himself all the time.
3:55>> So Emmanuel Macron, too, uh, we
3:57remember in 2020, he went to the
3:59theater before the lockdown.
4:01>> Then this year, in 2026, he goes to the
4:03Céline Dion concert before the October
4:0617th demonstrations.
4:07>> So what do you think of this sense of
4:09timing? And I'm still going to dig
4:12deeper and develop the question: how do
4:14you explain this incapacity he seems to
4:16have to sense events, which ultimately
4:18always seem to overwhelm him in the end
4:20?
4:22>> There are two, there are two, there are
4:23two options. Either he doesn't sense
4:24them, or he doesn't care, or he
4:26organizes them. These are degrees of
4:28variation of conspiracy in the
4:29demonstrations slash riots, because
4:31those are two different things we have
4:33experienced. It seems that the doctrine
4:37of maintaining order has been, at the
4:39same time, uh, lax in a delusional way
4:44in some places and disproportionate in
4:46violence in others, and each time
4:48towards populations that should have
4:50been targeted by the opposite. There is
4:56a "bien sûr"[of course] that is
4:57gigantic. I think there is a real one.
4:59Well, I don't know, I've said it before
5:02, I have no criminal record, but I
5:05think this man has a problem with his
5:07relationship to power and certain
5:10things that, in other
5:11socio-professional contexts, could be
5:14diagnosed as pathologies, and this man
5:17doesn't see anything coming. Yes, he is
5:20very bad at anticipating anything. He
5:22has pretty much failed at everything.
5:25Uh, yes, he is consumed by this, by
5:27this. Either he lets it happen, or he
5:29just doesn't care.
5:31>> And, uh, the theory of Emmanuel Macron
5:32as a narcissistic pervert, do you
5:34subscribe to it?
5:35>> I struggle with the notion of "
5:37narcissistic pervert" in the absolute
5:39sense because it's something very
5:40trendy, and it doesn't really exist. Uh
5:42, I'm speaking as the former partner of
5:45a psychologist. In fact, yes, they are
5:47perverse people, they are narcissistic
5:49people, but merging them into a sort of
5:50"narcissistic pervert" pathology covers
5:52a bit of everything and anything. But
5:54what we mean and intend by that, yes, I
5:56find that he fits those criteria. He
5:59wouldn't be the first. There have been,
6:01there have been, there have been
6:03studies, notably by a former British MP
6:05whose name escapes me, who was a
6:07neurologist by training, who wrote a
6:09book some, some 15 years ago, I think,
6:11where he analyzed the specific
6:13pathologies of exercising political
6:15power, which are always the same, you
6:17know. An identification of oneself with
6:21the nation, many things linked to
6:23narcissism, to ego, to sociopathy. And
6:26obviously, the higher the level of
6:27responsibility, the more exacerbated
6:29they become. And with Emmanuel Macron,
6:32who adds a lot of personal issues to
6:35that, I think. Uh, well, it gives you
6:38this, this completely explosive mixture
6:42. I think that right now, he's just
6:43waiting for it to blow over. He's
6:45waiting for it to blow over in the
6:46best-case scenario. But in the
6:48worst-case scenario, he is organizing
6:50—I do think he organized these riots
6:52or not. He is organizing, whatever
6:56happens, the comeback of the central
6:59bloc by completely letting the
7:01situation fester and by offering
7:03useless, uh, ineffective, and
7:06quasi-nonexistent responses. He gave us
7:09a speech, he told us, "It's the mayors
7:11and the prefects who will handle it,
7:12and for calming things down, it will be
7:14up to the parties and the unions to
7:15take care of it.""I'm on vacation, I'm
7:17leaving, I'm going to secure the D3 at
7:19Ormuse." He talks like he's 117, I
7:22don't feel secure at all. I mean, he is
7:25, yes, he is crazy. You have a movement
7:27, you have riots for one night in
7:28France, he turns on his camera and
7:30tells you "What happened is the
7:32consequence of what's happening in the
7:34Persian Gulf, and by the way, I'm going
7:36off to solve the problem tomorrow by
7:38taking a plane." So then, I imagine he
7:40was alluding to the
7:42>> Yes. The fuel price hike, of course,
7:44but it's not the fuel price hike, the
7:47people are in the streets. It's
7:48something else here. It's many things.
7:51But
7:51>> it is true that this fuel issue is a
7:53driver, we often tend to say that the
7:55first yellow vests rose up because of a
7:57carbon tax increase at the time.
7:59>> Yes,
8:00>> but here, that's not the primary cause,
8:01it's the students who started the thing
8:02.
8:02>> Absolutely. We'll talk about it, by the
8:04way, because there are still many
8:06factions—factions isn't the right
8:07term—social groups that are
8:08>> of course
8:09>> protesting. Uh yes, so this speech, you
8:12were just mentioning it a moment ago,
8:14uh, what did you think of this
8:16president who, indeed, acted more like
8:18a prime minister than a president?
8:22Didn't really...Well, personally, I
8:23didn't really understand what the point
8:24of this speech was; there wasn't one.
8:27Well, there is, it's the whole last
8:28part, the final third that is
8:29interesting. Uh indeed, Macron has
8:32centralized all power around himself
8:34and continues, whenever he is in a
8:35crisis situation, to act like a child
8:37who hasn't broken anything and to say
8:39that this guy or that guy, all of whom
8:41are puppets he put there, will deal
8:43with it. So it's, it's a bit disturbing
8:46actually to watch. What is especially
8:50very disturbing is the last part where
8:53he draws a causal link between these
8:55riots and the smooth running of the
8:58next elections, which, when you stop to
9:01look at the sentence, has no form of
9:04coherence. He says himself, "We are 6
9:07months away from the elections." Those
9:09who tell you that you must go out into
9:11the street to protest and to break
9:13things—but he makes a clear
9:14distinction. So even protesting, for
9:16him, is a problem; he's lying and is
9:18harming the proper conduct of the
9:20democratic debate we will have in 6
9:21months. France is a great democracy
9:24that we he is saying that 6 months
9:26before an election, a protest,
9:28regardless of whether it is violent or
9:30not, is problematic because it shifts
9:32the democratic field into the street
9:34when it should be in the debates. Crazy
9:39.
9:39>> We
9:40>> He is creating a link from scratch
9:42between what is happening there and
9:45possible legal decisions concerning
9:48these elections. It's visible, it's
9:49right in front of us. I'm not saying
9:51cancel them, but I'm saying he is
9:53making a link, if only for, and that's
9:55what I think. I think Emmanuel Macron
9:58is letting the situation fester for as
10:00long as possible, in order to restore
10:03order as close as possible to the
10:05election deadline. Because if, 3 months
10:07before the first round, he clears the
10:09streets—which he can do because only
10:10the most utopian activists think they
10:12can do something against 50 riot police
10:14units given the level of violence we
10:15are at—they will no longer have the
10:17popular support that the Yellow Vests
10:18had. He cleans them up, or at least he
10:21puts them away in the closet or in the
10:23suburbs, but that's what we've been
10:25doing for 40 years. Uh, he arrives, the
10:27business reimbursements come in at that
10:30moment, he is the hero, and that 3
10:32months before the elections, if he
10:34manages to transfer the benefit of this
10:36return to order to Édouard Philippe or
10:38even to Gabriel Attal,
10:40>> He hates both of them.
10:42>> Survival of the central bloc. Well, the
10:45central bloc wins. I think he prefers
10:48Philippe to Marine Le Pen or to
10:51Jean-Luc Mélenchon.
10:52>> You don't think he's cynical enough to
10:55want to put in place a quote-unquote
10:57extremist government to then return to
11:00the forefront? If we saw clearly in the
11:02dissolution, that's what he was
11:04expecting. He didn't want the NFP. He
11:07didn't respect it; if it had been the
11:09RN, he would have respected the rules
11:10of the election. I think that's plan B.
11:15Plan A would perhaps be his own
11:17survival anyway. I think it's plan B.
11:21Yes, he would 1,000 times prefer having
11:22the RN in power than France Insoumise
11:24in power. That's a certainty.
11:27Afterwards, I think, I don't know, do
11:29you think you would prefer Marine Le
11:31Pen to Édouard Philippe?
11:32>> I don't think anything. I'm asking the
11:33question. No, no, but I have no idea.
11:36We aren't in his head, so that's why
11:37there's no, it commits you to nothing,
11:39but yes, we all agree at the very least
11:41to say that the option he does not want
11:43is the France Insoumise option.
11:46>> And now, since we had you on twice
11:49>> previously. Every time, the show
11:52revolved around the question of
11:54laughter. Could we still laugh at the
11:56situation,
11:57>> at that? No.
11:58>> And, in fact, the question I am going
11:59to ask you, because there's no reason
12:00not to. Every time you come here, I
12:01think you'll have the right to it. Can
12:03we still laugh at the current situation
12:06? I feel like every time I have you on,
12:07the situation just gets worse.
12:09>> About the current situation in general,
12:11we can always laugh at certain events,
12:12but at others, less and less. So, this
12:15event, if we're talking about the 17th
12:17and what will happen again on the 31st,
12:20>> uh, no. Well no, I mean, well, no, but
12:23nothing's stopping you. Though I'd like
12:26to say good luck, because I don't see
12:28which angle to take unless I fall into
12:31something very cynical, very dark. OK,
12:36but then we wait a little bit because
12:37there have been a lot of shattered
12:39lives there.
12:40>> So, behind the question of laughter
12:42lies that of the state of our country.
12:44>> But I'm for not forbidding anyone from
12:45doing it.
12:47>> No, but
12:48>> uh, what do you think, by the way? I'm
12:51opening a parenthesis, but what do you
12:52think of the state of comedy, of the
12:54current comedy scene? It's, it's pretty
12:56good. Are
12:57>> you satisfied?
12:59>> Well, it's pretty, it's, there are
13:01always good ones and bad ones, but we
13:02aren't living in a period where there's
13:04nobody good. No, no, there are plenty.
13:07Naï is very funny, Franjo is very
13:09funny; the kid from Radio Nova who
13:12reads his scripts way too much, it's
13:14really problematic and you can
13:17literally see his eyes scrolling on the
13:19teleprompter. You like it or you don't,
13:23but there's a generation that has the
13:26same power and fire as Jamel's
13:28generation, but who finally talk about
13:31things a bit more serious than where
13:33they're from and their vacations. So,
13:39we've kept a bit of the talent from the
13:40stand-up generation, but fortunately on
13:42subjects that are at least, well, you
13:43know. And once again, you don't have to
13:47do political comedy, and I'd prefer
13:49people didn't do it at all rather than
13:51all these people who never talk about
13:52it and hold positions of incredible
13:54political correctness, uh, instead of
13:56the right moments when they should. And
14:00so, behind the question of laughter
14:02lies that of the state of our country.
14:04Aren't you personally anxious about a
14:07country that really seems to be
14:09declining from every one of its
14:11ministries? There is absolutely nothing
14:12that works.
14:13>> Every single one. Yes, yes, yes, of
14:14course. No, but the French have started
14:17to see, and they're really faced with
14:20images and levels of violence that
14:23confront them with this problem. As for
14:26the economic problem, they haven't
14:28realized yet that receivership is
14:31coming, that it will be inevitable. Uh.
14:36I see, I watched Mélenchon's big
14:39economic conference and Marine Le Pen's
14:42budget program presentation. Both are.
14:50So delirious, so unhinged. Mélenchon
14:56explains to us that 20 plus 30 equals
14:57250. Marine Le Pen quotes figures that
15:00aren't even the ones on her whiteboard.
15:03Neither of them has grasped what is
15:05happening in the short term, the medium
15:07term, and let’s not even talk about
15:09the long term. These people haven't
15:13understood that AI is here. Well,
15:16Zemmour who wants to replace robots
15:18with Arabs. No, the other way around.
15:21But, uh, but, uh, they haven't, they
15:23haven't understood, they haven't
15:26understood that in less than 10 years,
15:28half the people currently holding jobs,
15:31even manual ones (because robotics has
15:34advanced much faster than we thought),
15:37uh, and especially intellectual ones,
15:39will not be useful to society,
15:42regardless of the level of
15:44deculturation. Or the cognitive dumbing
15:47down of current generations. We even
15:51get the impression that it's fine, they
15:54haven't understood that we need to
15:57start thinking seriously about a model
15:59of wealth creation and redistribution
16:02that is an alternative to the
16:04productivist capitalism based on labor
16:07as we know it, because that’s not
16:09possible, actually. It won't be
16:13possible, and we have the tools for it,
16:14but if we miss this, well, we're just
16:16going to go through the same loop again
16:17. What we are experiencing now is
16:19probably one of the most important
16:20revolutions since, not even just the
16:21Industrial Revolution, but since the
16:23printing press. And I even think it's
16:25beyond that. Uh, we don't, we don't
16:28understand that we are about to start a
16:30new industrial era and in, in the
16:33mechanics of production and wealth
16:35creation. We were lucky enough to start
16:38the Industrial Revolution at the very
16:40top. But this time, we risk starting it
16:42at the very bottom.
16:43>> What you're saying is interesting. We
16:44have the tools for it. I would really
16:46like to know what tools we have today,
16:47because we can ask ourselves the
16:49question of France's greatness. Is
16:50France still a great country? Because
16:54the protests we are witnessing, isn't
16:56that also an expression of of a malaise
16:58, of a deep-seated malaise? Do people
17:01see wealth as confiscated, or not
17:04produced, or sucked away, or diverted?
17:07But we have what we need for many of
17:09the challenges of the coming years. We
17:12have energy independence that we refuse
17:17to use. We have resources that we
17:20refuse to exploit. We give our
17:22electricity, our gas to countries for
17:25free, or almost, or at a loss. Uh, we
17:29already have, on an energy level, I
17:31think we are among the best positioned
17:35to to meet our needs. For example, in
17:38the coming years. It is something that
17:40we have.
17:41>> We remain 60%dependent on hydrocarbons.
17:44>> Yes, I'm talking about nuclear, for
17:46example, about electricity among others
17:47. And then there will be more and more
17:49development of electric power as well.
17:51We have some very strong points. We
17:54have companies that manage to perform
17:56miracles with next to nothing. We are
18:00used to working with little, and I
18:03think our real problem is a debt
18:05problem, concretely, and in the next 10
18:09years, we are heading toward the
18:11continuation of a work-salary-thing
18:14model that will not work. I don't mean
18:19that we all need to be on universal
18:21basic income, etc. It means that at
18:24some point, either you keep thinking
18:26and coming up with things, you create
18:29alternative jobs. I'm not talking about
18:32creating more civil servants. If you
18:33think about what we could have human
18:35beings do in society? Uh, either you
18:39move to a form of universal income or
18:40something, but you can't actually go on
18:42like this. You can't go on like this
18:45with, well, we know there is a re, we
18:47must reorient a large part of French
18:49civil servants who today have
18:51administrative tasks that cost us a
18:53fortune and that produce nothing and
18:55that actually cost us because it's
18:56slower and less well done. Whereas
19:00there are sectors where people need
19:03things that aren't, well, sure,
19:04transforming a, a computer data
19:06subcontractor into into, I don't know,
19:11a nurse, no, but no, it's not the same,
19:14it requires training. You see what I
19:16mean? There is a, there is a real
19:18problem there. The dinosaur is archaic,
19:20and even before this, this change, we
19:23were already archaic, and there it's
19:26visible, you know.
19:27>> One of the issues is also that—
19:29Jean-Luc Mélenchon perhaps less so—
19:31but the RN appeals a lot to an older,
19:32retired electorate, which isn't
19:34necessarily the demographic most at the
19:36cutting edge or most concerned by these
19:38developments.
19:39>> Boomers need to, need to keep quiet.
19:42I’m not of the opinion that we need
19:44to seize the giant pensions of boomers
19:46and so on, because if you start going
19:48down that road, you really have to have
19:50squeezed every single cent of public
19:52waste out first. There has to be
19:54absolutely nothing left in the coffers,
19:56morally speaking, to dare challenge the
19:57contract these people have signed their
19:59whole lives. Uh, they honored their
20:02contract, they—well, they honored
20:03their contract. It’s true that some
20:06would tell you the implicit deal was to
20:08have more kids than that to keep things
20:10running; so, you didn't have kids, you
20:12just enjoyed yourselves. Now, Bernard
20:14and Chantal are in the Maldives, having
20:16had their one and a half kids. There.
20:20That wasn't really the deal at the
20:22start, but hey, they held up their end
20:24of the contract because you can't force
20:27people to have kids either, you can
20:29only encourage them, and...and now, uh,
20:31we have this pension problem in front
20:33of us, which is a totally terrifying
20:35state expense, but it's not...I don't
20:37think that's where we should start
20:39cutting first. But on the other hand,
20:43boomers need to stop having any impact
20:45on the political direction of the
20:48country.
20:50>> That's a bit—that's a bit excessive.
20:52No, but those who contributed, who wa
20:54—
20:55>> No, no, but it's not for them to tell
20:56us how we should do things tomorrow.
20:58>> And yes, the RN is riddled with
21:00boomerism. Their change in position on
21:04social media can be explained, among
21:06other things, by boomerism. Their
21:12behavior regarding the student protests
21:13and pre-riots from the very first days.
21:16Sébastien Chenu, from the very first
21:18days when there were blockades, he said
21:19, "The blockades are scandalous," and
21:21so on. I saw that, I really did. I
21:24rewatched Marine Le Pen’s 2018 speech
21:26. End of Act 4, Paris is in flames.
21:29Three interviews, right? They ask her
21:31who is responsible. She says it’s the
21:32state. Go join the NFP. And now, she
21:35can't manage that. It’s a slap in the
21:37face to everyone. She has descended
21:39into, into, into absolute boomerism. "
21:42The little brats protesting there," she
21:44sees them—that's the headspace she's
21:45in. It's not the only reason, but it's
21:48in there. It's in there.
21:51>> So, we’re going to talk about these
21:52these events. We’re we’re going to
21:54talk about the famous day of October
21:5517th. You were there. So that’s what
21:57interests me. I mean, we saw a lot of
21:59footage that played on a loop on news
22:02channels, and on social media as well.
22:06Uh, and it totally eclipsed the classic
22:08social protest, let's say.
22:11>> Uh, you actually went to see what
22:13happened. So what did you see?
22:14>> I saw a lot of things. Uh, I already
22:16saw many more categories of protesters
22:18than what we’ve what we’ve been
22:20shown. I saw two movements. That’s
22:22the first thing that needs to be said.
22:23I mean, I I was right on the verge of
22:25doing that, and it's quite interesting
22:27because it’s representative. Uh,
22:30there there were two different things
22:33that happened that coexisted for a
22:35while before one not only eclipsed the
22:37others in the media, but also in the
22:39streets. There were riots and there
22:42were demonstrations. And the narrative
22:46of the good protesters versus the bad
22:47rioters isn't subtle enough to
22:49understand what's happening, because
22:50not everyone defines where the bad
22:52rioters start in the same place. Éric
22:54Zemmour doesn't start them at the same
22:55place as Jean-Luc Mélenchon. You have
22:58Titoan, the protester who comes with
23:00his family and runs away every time he
23:02hears a firecracker. You have the
23:05slightly more riled-up activist, the
23:07kid who, well, he builds barricades, he
23:09uses bike-share bikes as bases, and
23:10throws plastic bottles at the riot
23:12police. I mean, yes, there is
23:14aggression, but there is no endangering
23:16of the lives of the law enforcement
23:18officers. Of course, he insults, "f***
23:20the police," and all that, he might
23:22damage bike-share bikes and public
23:23property, but he doesn't attack
23:25businesses. And you have the third
23:27category, which starts to gravitate a
23:29bit around Black Bloc. They might break
23:32windows, they burn things, they are
23:33more violent with law enforcement, but
23:35they don't attack private property.
23:38They don't gang up 10-on-one on a cop
23:40or a policewoman saying, "We’re going
23:42to kill you." And you have the 4th
23:46category, that’s the American
23:48Nightmare category that arrived
23:51gradually, which took over all the
23:53media exposure and street space from
23:56the others at a certain point. And for
24:00some strange reason, lots of people
24:02want to turn these people into
24:04protesters. The right wants to do it in
24:07a reactionary way. But honestly, Eric
24:10Zemmour didn't leave us much room to
24:12maneuver, because Eric Zemmour—I
24:14don't know if you saw his video
24:16reacting to those events on October 17
24:18—says: "It's not the first time that
24:20barbarism has attacked like this and
24:22flooded the streets of Paris," and he
24:24cites the Commune among his list of
24:26examples. There you have it, his margin
24:31of tolerance for what a revolutionary
24:34social movement can be is very low.
24:36It's little Louise Marignon, or
24:37whatever, who was there from the very
24:39first day of the blockades. Yes, but
24:40it's illegal. Well, these are people
24:42who are not truly in favor of the right
24:44to demonstrate. It's historical. For
24:45Marine Le Pen, as I just said, it's
24:47more curious because she is capable of
24:49doing it for the Yellow Vests. She is
24:52more capable of doing it for peripheral
24:54France than for young students and
24:56rioters. Which, for the rioters, is
24:58normal. I think no one should support
25:00those people. And then, you also have a
25:04part of the left, a part of the left
25:07that absolutely wants to "Gavroche-ize"
25:10these hordes of rioters and looters,
25:12since Mélenchon had the misfortune of
25:15using the words looting and destruction
25:18. Because he said: "These are not
25:22protesters, these are looters and
25:24rioters," and he's been getting
25:26hammered for a week by all the bored
25:28little bobos. Who are busy criticizing
25:32him for using those terms, even though
25:34he's not making any generalizations; he
25:36limits them to the smallest fraction of
25:38the people who were there, he
25:40distinguishes them and all, but no, you
25:42have—and it's always the same
25:43profiles. These are all the little
25:45white streamers and so on. These are
25:48all the influencers, once again
25:49essentially white, like that little
25:51chick on BFM, the blonde who tells you,
25:52"But yeah, but I was there." No, you
25:55weren't there. Sandrine Rousseau said
25:57the same thing to Consigny. I know what
25:59I'm talking about. I was there. No, you
26:01weren't there. That's why I'm talking
26:03about these movements. What you were
26:05doing was playing diabolo and
26:06breakdancing between noon and two. And
26:10me, if I had just taken off when I
26:12arrived at the protest at noon until 2
26:14PM, taking selfies. It’s a
26:15meet-and-greet with 18-year-old kids
26:17who follow me. If I had stopped at that
26:21, I couldn't allow myself to offer my
26:23opinion or say that I was in the middle
26:25of all this stuff that everyone has
26:27been commenting on for days, meaning
26:29the nightly riots of vandals, looters,
26:32and capitalist barbarians. I wouldn't
26:34be able to allow it. And so, what are
26:36they doing? They’re doing it because
26:38they want to create a sort of
26:39romanticism for themselves. They want
26:42to imagine that they put themselves in
26:44some kind of physical danger, which
26:45they obviously didn't. Uh, setting the
26:49Gloria, which seems, yes, at the heart
26:51of it. No, you were at home. Him, I'm
26:54not even sure he went to play diabolo.
26:56Him, they all do it. They all do it and
26:59it's very cringe-worthy. Well, not all
27:00of them, actually, but a portion. So,
27:02it's not the Left, it's the petite
27:04bourgeoisie that won't even allow
27:07Mélenchon to talk about vandalism and
27:09looting, accusing him of using a
27:12narrative. That you don't call it
27:14terrorism for the Bataclan, sorry, for
27:15what’s happening in Palestine. It's
27:18indecent, but I can understand it. But
27:21really, do you think Mélenchon can run
27:23in 6 months and have the slightest
27:24chance of making it to the runoff, or
27:26even 3rd, if for 6 months, while the
27:27images we're seeing on loop are playing
27:28, he says: "This is not vandalism, this
27:30is not looting"? You know, that "this
27:32is not a..." thing, it's delusional.
27:34You're not asking him to adopt a
27:36narrative, you're asking him not to use
27:37words that are in the dictionary. They
27:39imagine that Mélenchon has to, they're
27:41just there. It's a major historical
27:42error. These young people are in the
27:44street. These young people, last night,
27:46they were there. There are videos where
27:48they explain it's because of the 49.3,
27:50because Macron doesn't recognize the
27:51elections. No, these young people
27:53didn't loot micro-banks because of
27:56Élisabeth's 49.3, stop with that stuff
27:58, it's false. You know it perfectly
28:00well, but you want to incorporate them.
28:01Even though these people read Marx all
28:03year long, and they're quite right to.
28:06They are there. It’s—it’s really
28:08a demonstration of Marx's theory on the
28:10lumpenproletariat as the wreckers of—
28:12of the workers 'revolution, of the
28:13proletarian revolution, sorry. That's
28:16where Marx basically says: "They are
28:18the worst possible allies." And well,
28:20they are the ones choosing them as
28:22allies and they need to—I—I will
28:24defend this—it's—it's influencers,
28:26little white girls who are there,
28:28saying: "Look guys, be careful," and
28:30all that. They are grotesque, actually,
28:33and that's it. And it's—there are
28:34also these people who want an
28:35imperative when, in fact, you shouldn't
28:37—you shouldn't bring them in, you
28:38have to isolate them for what they are.
28:40You were told to do it, and those
28:42idiots will go on to say later: "Yeah,
28:44but no, we are Fanonian.""For us, the
28:47lumpen is the armed wing of the
28:49revolution." You aren't Fanonian
28:51because three-quarters of the team
28:53shits on the working class and
28:54peasantry 24/7, calling them fascists,
28:56reactionaries, and racists. If you were
28:58Fanonian, you would do the exact
29:00opposite. So you are nothing at all.
29:02You are caught up in issues, a desire
29:05for provocation, and ethno-racial
29:07affects that are linked to your
29:09slightly—slightly uncomfortable
29:11neocolonial imagination. And what is—
29:15what is—what is, I'm sure that all
29:17these people, who are currently making
29:18reaction videos to say: "Oh my, these
29:20small shopkeepers who are crying, these
29:21little bourgeois who will collect their
29:23insurance anyway," they will only do it
29:24for white small shopkeepers. Because
29:27the hundreds of thousands of
29:29Arab-Muslims that we've seen on social
29:31media for several days who are saying,
29:34"You are pieces of, what you're
29:36doing is shameful.""For many of us, you
29:38come from our community; it's pathetic.
29:40""You are not protesters, you are
29:42rioters and looters and your place is
29:44in prison." They will never have the
29:46courage to look at them and say, "You
29:48are horrible reactionaries." They can't
29:51, and many of them are cowards. But
29:53anyway, I say it because it's less
29:54visible than the reactionary position
29:56of the right, which—which surprised
29:58no one, right? It was there from the
30:00very first day. Since the very first—
30:02since the first kick to a university
30:04door, they were already saying that
30:07they were "Islamo-thugs." There was
30:09nothing to be done on that front.
30:13>> And, uh, because what you were saying
30:15just now about revolutionaries, it
30:18makes me think of the reaction from the
30:20lawyer and presidential candidate Juan
30:23Branco, who accepts that in order to go
30:26through a revolutionary phase, there
30:28must be unrest. He accepts the unrest.
30:32Do you understand his position? I
30:34understand the general position, let's
30:37simplify it. You can't make an omelet
30:39without breaking eggs. Yes, but for
30:41that, you have to intend to make an
30:43omelet. The people who came out tonight
30:46are not politicized. They have no class
30:49consciousness, except in the minds of
30:51white leftists. They have no class
30:53consciousness. They didn't come here,
30:55contrary to what Mour said, for
30:57Palestine. Even that, it wasn't a,
30:59there were no demands, there were no
31:01flags, there were no...They were there
31:05to break things and loot in an
31:07organized and prepared way, that's all.
31:10So no, I don't agree there. I didn't
31:13see how Branco said it. I disagree with
31:15that. These people are not comrades.
31:18These people are agitators who, since
31:211848, have been bought off by the state
31:24. It's called buying social peace,
31:26which is what we've been doing for 40
31:27years. And, and, and there, no, what he
31:31says is valid for the third category of
31:33protesters I was talking about, that is
31:36to say the one that is the angry
31:38militant, with a bit of black bloc
31:40gravitating around it. The one that
31:43throws hard objects at the riot police,
31:45the one that burns trash cans, that
31:47smashes public property, but not the
31:48one that breaks into shops saying "Give
31:50me the cash or I'll rape you." Not that
31:52one. That's not true, actually. One of
31:56them can be discussed morally; it's
31:58violent activism with moral compasses
31:59that won't be the same for everyone.
32:01The other one is not up for discussion.
32:05>> And, uh, as someone interested in
32:07history, what similarities do you find
32:08in our current situation compared to
32:10the history, particularly the
32:11revolutionary history, of our country?
32:13I think, well, obviously of the 18th
32:15century, 19th century, and we can even
32:18go back to May '68 and even further
32:20with the CPE if we want.
32:21>> Yeah. Yeah. Well, it depends, it
32:24depends on what it is; it could be a
32:25revolutionary history if it's the first
32:27three categories of protesters that
32:29prevail. But if it's the second, and
32:31for now it is prevailing in the media,
32:33it won't be comparable to our
32:34revolutionary history. It will be
32:36comparable to other aspects of our
32:38history, but not revolutionary.
32:40>> And to speak of more recent times, we
32:41actually mentioned it earlier regarding
32:43the first Yellow Vest movement, what
32:45similarities do you see between the two
32:46movements? Are we talking about the
32:49same thing? I understood that it is
32:51indeed a movement, but
32:52>> one of them is not a movement.
32:53>> Yes, yes. Not not, but what I meant
32:56>> between the student protests and the
32:57Yellow Vests.
32:57>> Yes, that's it. First there were the
32:59student protests. Furthermore, we could
33:01talk about the farmers and fishermen
33:03who had already anticipated the issue,
33:05and so it’s agglomerating. All of
33:07this is currently agglomerating into a
33:09movement we now call Yellow Vests.
33:11>> Oh, well, that could, that could be
33:12good, right?
33:13>> But is it comparable to this mass
33:15movement we had in 2018? Because we
33:18must remember that today, in 2026, it
33:20does not have the same scale as 2018 in
33:22terms of numbers. I'm talking
33:24>> in the sense that it's more or less
33:25>> less.
33:26>> Yes. No, but then it could be something
33:28quite unprecedented, right? It would be
33:32the fusion of Pierre Poujade and May 68
33:35. That's also why Marine Le Pen
33:39supports the Yellow Vests more than the
33:41students, because in their DNA, small
33:43workers and small shopkeepers shouting
33:45because gas is too expensive, we feel
33:46at home, it smells like Poujadism.
33:49Whereas Sciences Po students playing
33:51rebels, that reminds people more of May
33:5368, which doesn't necessarily bring
33:54back good memories. But there, if there
33:57were a convergence of that, this
33:58convergence could absolutely not happen
34:00ideologically, but through fed-up-ness
34:02and the real-life situation. It would
34:03be very good. It probably won't happen
34:06because the lumpen at the service and
34:10and and and of the State which uses
34:12them, in fact—I'm not removing any
34:14individual responsibility here—I'm
34:16saying they have no class consciousness
34:19. They are capitalists who are there to
34:21loot. The State puts them in the media
34:23spotlight, and they have their role of
34:25occupying the political-media ground.
34:26No one is talking about these protests
34:28anymore, and I don't think anyone will
34:30again. Unless, I believe that the State
34:34will do everything so that the rioters
34:37who latch onto them every time—when I
34:39speak of a rioter, yeah, barbarian,
34:41whatever you want, but truly those who
34:44are, once again, not violent protesters
34:46, but something else. The State will
34:49let those people occupy the media
34:50foreground and the others won't be able
34:52to do anything. And it's normal, 300
34:55guys trashing shops in Marseille,
34:57there's nothing you can do about that.
35:00It's normal, actually, that we don't
35:01talk about the rest. It's a shame. We
35:03take the microphone out too much to try
35:05and show those people as well, but it's
35:09going to occupy the media apparatus
35:11because no one is going to want to say,
35:12"Wait, stop, let's, let's start this
35:14over." But just before, we agree that
35:16we isolate them and we, we get rid of
35:18them all, really, because they have no
35:20business being there. We condemn them
35:22all, right? Those who don't want to
35:24condemn them to avoid grouping them
35:25with the protesters, well, both
35:27actually. But, well, Mélenchon has
35:30taken a clear position on this now.
35:34These are more like leftist militants
35:37in the primary sense of the term,
35:39because that's what they reproach
35:41Mélenchon for, stating the reality.
35:45They are leftists in the Leninist sense
35:47of the term, I mean, obviously, that is
35:49to say, petty bourgeois people, rightly
35:52terrified and rightly scandalized by
35:54the horrors of capitalism, but who
35:56transmute that into a projection there
36:00you go, just to, just to indulge
36:01themselves. And as long as everyone
36:03hasn't, hasn't agreed to say: "These
36:06people are people who have nothing to
36:11do with this," because, once again, not
36:15in terms of proportion, which are
36:17disproportionate here compared to usual
36:18, but the acts themselves, we have the
36:20same ones whenever there's a Champions
36:21League win. So these people are not
36:24there for that. They are there no
36:26matter what happens, or almost. Uh We
36:32must...No, no, we are only going to
36:34talk, I fear, unfortunately, about the
36:37barbarians, and we will forget the good
36:39guys.
36:41>> You have, uh, I said it, you were there
36:43. So you were able to see how law
36:45enforcement intervened
36:48>> because we saw these scenes of people
36:50whose shops had been looted who seemed
36:53totally alone, actually. Alone,
36:56absolutely.
36:57>> And it's confirmed by numerous
36:58testimonies from police officers who
36:59say there was no intervention and it
37:01was, there was an order not to
37:02intervene. In any case, that's what
37:04many of them say. Where I saw cops 20
37:06meters from a betting shop, we film it
37:07being looted in front of me. There is,
37:12at once, the worst of the worst,
37:14meaning that against the first two
37:16categories of protesters, there are
37:18acts of police violence, uh, absurd and
37:20stupid; it's random baton blows against
37:22kids who don't, who don't, who don't
37:24even really block the public space.
37:28There is violence being committed
37:33against these first two categories that
37:35is abnormal, but in parallel to that,
37:37there is no reaction regarding the
37:39businesses. It’s not conspiracy
37:42theory to say that. The mayor of
37:43Marseille said it, he is asking, I
37:45don't know if you saw the video, he is
37:47asking, he says now really, someone is
37:48going to explain this to me. I need
37:51someone to explain it to me, because I,
37:53I saw it, cops who kept, kept hitting
37:55kids when there was no need to do so,
37:57and there were businesses nearby 200
37:59meters away where they were needed,
38:01because he had to send his municipal
38:03police who said: "We don't understand
38:05what our colleagues in the national
38:06police are doing, we don't understand."
38:11It it is very complicated. Then the
38:13numbers, well, Act 4 of the Yellow
38:15Vests, it was 136,000 according to the
38:17Ministry of the Interior. There were
38:20125,000 police deployed, 120,000 The
38:22famous joke: one protester for one, one
38:24, one cop. Here, there are between 550
38:26and 800,000, so there are seven times
38:28more. They deployed 60,000 and not
38:3110,000 as we were told. It’s a piece
38:33of fake news that circulated, due to
38:35Nunez's remarks which were distorted.
38:37Fake news from the mainstream for once,
38:39and unintentional because he tells you:
38:40"We have deployed more than 10,000 law
38:42enforcement officers." Well yes, 60,000
38:44you're right, that is more than 10,000,
38:45but when we look at the state budget,
38:47these people have a problem with
38:48numbers. So it it is not a coherent
38:52management of public order, and let
38:54them not say they weren't warned.
38:55Intelligence services had warned them,
38:56a school had already started burning in
38:58the morning, they had already held a
38:59defense council, they could have
39:00brought in more. There is no world in
39:02which this is a coherent public order
39:04doctrine. Nunez obviously offered his
39:05resignation, which Macron refused. Even
39:10he cannot cover up something that at a
39:11minimum involves criminal liability in
39:13terms of managing public order. It is
39:15is is crazy. There had been 120,000
39:19plus 14 armored vehicles after all.
39:21Here, saw nothing. I know it's hard to
39:24say we saw nothing in the face of so
39:25many images of violence, to say we saw
39:27nothing. We saw nothing. Regarding this
39:32yellow vest movement, I understood that
39:34you were rather pessimistic about what
39:35was going to happen. Um, do you think
39:39that, in any case, this type of
39:41movement can function without a savior
39:43figure behind it? Can a "providential
39:47people," to use an expression used by
39:49Michel Onfray, succeed in overthrowing
39:52the current system?
39:55>> Well yes, you need, well you need
39:56elites, you need intellectuals because
39:58you need elites in any group. It's,
40:00it's false; the idea of no elites, that
40:02doesn't exist. It's just that these
40:03elites need to come from a, from a
40:05specific background. From what
40:06background do your elites come, that's
40:08all. So there would be a providential
40:10people led by providential elites, or
40:13at least guided by providential elites.
40:16Yes, but it depends on which social
40:17body and where those elites come from
40:19and what their political fight is. That
40:22is
40:23>> And right now, do you see an
40:24incarnation today that would be capable
40:27of representing all these, all these
40:29political movements, these social
40:31movements, shall we say? Without
40:35falling into a left or right camp,
40:38etcetera. Ran will yell if I don't say
40:42him. But yes, maybe to lead or to
40:47represent something, but I don't think
40:49one should lead anything at all. You
40:51have to be humble, not lead these
40:54people. You must be humble and do, in
40:56all humility, what needs to be done for
40:59them, that is to say, take care of
41:01building a media showcase, a storefront
41:03, an intellectual vanguard that allows
41:06for expressing what they have already
41:08understood but cannot formulate, just
41:10for lack of cultural capital. That's
41:13all. But the moment you start saying "
41:14This is what must be done, this is what
41:16must be done," you step out of your
41:17role and it is not for you to do that.
41:18That's why I am very wary of
41:19politicians who are going to get
41:21involved in this. Very. I prefer to see
41:23intellectuals rather than politicians
41:26in these movements.
41:27>> And so now that we are also talking
41:29about politics, there is a part of the
41:31political spectrum that has accused La
41:32France Insoumise of finally having
41:34instrumentalized this movement, or at
41:35the very least, doing everything so
41:37that this movement would one day happen
41:39. Do you agree with this analysis? Well
41:42, the proxy thing is still relatively
41:44too much, honestly, if you want the
41:46argument that consisted of saying, "
41:48Look, it's LFI behind these protests
41:50because there are only LFI guys, only
41:53LFI politicians in there." They showed
41:56plenty of images of LFI politicians at
41:58the protest, and it's not proof of
42:00organization, and I don't even want to
42:02say it's proof of exploitation. The
42:06latest polls among 18-to-25-year-olds
42:09show Mélenchon at 41%, and all the
42:11other left-wing candidates are at zero,
42:14zero—not 0.2, 0.3, just zero—the
42:16line is flat. So, structurally, it
42:19could only be him. So, no matter what
42:21happens, it's absurd. If you want to
42:23prove he organized things, you need
42:24intelligence service reports and so on,
42:26which supposedly exist. I haven't been
42:28able to see them myself, but I do think
42:30Mélenchon, on the other hand, is
42:32shopping around and capitalizing on it.
42:35But it's obvious, even many people,
42:37including people from LFI—there's one
42:38at the very beginning of the street
42:39interview who says it—well yes, it's
42:40not our problem. It's normal, it's not
42:43as if La France Insoumise were in a
42:46position to organize movements like
42:49that, urban mobs of tens of thousands
42:51of people, uh...
42:54>> they’ll go and fan the flames, for
42:55example. I have my doubts.
42:56>> Yes. No, but that famous discourse they
42:59always have of condemnation, always
43:00with the word that’s just off, just
43:02to create. It’s a strategy of
43:05constant buzz, but as soon as they
43:06start getting their fingers burned a
43:08little too much, they calm down. I’m
43:11not necessarily talking about
43:12Mélenchon, who now talks about
43:13violence, but even—oh boy, oh boy,
43:15when the tire is really burning. You
43:16see it on TikTok, he’s scared. So, I
43:19think once again, they’ve lost those
43:21little white kids we were talking about
43:23who are having fun and slumming it with
43:24their new skirmishers. I think
43:28they’ll get kicked out by these
43:29people, and it will be very

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Greg Tabibian : « Emmanuel Macron laisse la situation s'envenimer » by Front Populaire, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 7,663 words across 1,185 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.