Is “Let’s Block Everything” really the second season of the Yellow Vests movement?
Social unrest and political crisis. Against a backdrop of echoes from recent protests and persistent political tensions, *Bloquons tout* exposes the vulnerabilities of a representative system grappling with multiple sources of social discontent.
François Buton, ENS Lyon and Emmanuelle Reungoat, University of Montpellier
Launched in July, the “September 10 Movement” or “Let’s Block Everything” has become the focus of attention from society, the government, politicians, the media, and local intelligence agencies. Several aspects of this movement clearly echo those of the Yellow Vests movement, which emerged in November 2018. It is a grassroots mobilization, launched by various pre-existing organized groups but amplified by social media (especially Telegram), lacking leadership but structured through websites (Indignons-nous and Les essentiels, which immediately reveal a strong diversity among protesters—ranging from those with a strong nationalist stance and defenders of a Christian France to others identifying with the radical left).
Opposition to the budget proposal
While the protest movement puts forward numerous demands, some more detailed than others, at first glance it is driven by concerns over purchasing power and the condemnation of inequality: opposition to Prime Minister François Bayrou’s budget proposal—criticized for shifting the burden of deficit reduction (40 billion euros in savings) onto workers, the unemployed, salaried employees, those in precarious employment, and the sick—echoes the Yellow Vests’ sense of injustice following the announcement of a new fuel tax. The draft finance bill is criticized by all political forces opposed to the government and appears to be poorly received by the public, who support the upcoming movement, according to a widely cited poll conducted on August 20 and 21 (Toluna Harris Interactive for RTL).
Thus, 59% of French people support the goal of reducing public spending, but 63% support the movement (70% say they are in favor of protests, 58% of roadblocks), 75% oppose the elimination of two public holidays, and 71% say they support a “solidarity contribution paid by the wealthiest French citizens.” For several weeks now, the organization of local assemblies, the creation of maps of upcoming gatherings, and the variety of planned actions (ranging from civil disobedience to the blocking of production sites) have also been reminiscent of the 2018 protests.
The Yellow Vests and Other Struggles
The comparison with the Yellow Vests therefore makes sense, and is frequently drawn in the comments: the Yellow Vests are on “everyone’s mind,” whether as positive or negative role models, or as sources of hope or concern. For those of us who have long studied this movement, the comparison is relevant but a delicate one to navigate. A direct comparison must not obscure the historical context of these struggles: the Yellow Vests are a precedent; potential protesters on September 10 may have participated in them, acquired protest skills, and drawn lessons regarding the movement’s effectiveness, its limitations or dead ends, its duration, or the repression it faced.
But the history of social movements is rich with other protests, both prior to (Nuit debout) and, above all, subsequent to 2018: massive demonstrations against pension reform, farmers’ protests (some wearing “yellow hats”), occupations against highway projects (A69) or agricultural projects (Sainte-Soline), various strikes, the movement opposing the health pass, and even a massive petition (over 2 million signatories) against the Duplomb law last July. It is therefore necessary to take into account the lessons learned from all these mobilizations as preparations are made for September 10 in various parts of the country.
Comparing the “profiles” of the Yellow Vests and potential “blockaders” is no easier to do, not only because, by definition, we do not yet know who the blockaders are, but at best a portion of those mobilizing on social media and willing to answer questionnaires, or those gathering in assemblies, but also because we still need to define who was a Yellow Vest before presenting their profiles.
The Yellow Vests are here, but not all of them
In our own research, for example, we chose to focus on the “super Gilets”—mostly first-time protesters who were intensely committed (sometimes to the point of self-sacrifice) and involved for a long time (some still are!) in a local group. These Gilets are not representative of the movement as a whole, where others were more experienced activists, and the vast majority of whom participated in only a few actions or assemblies: surveys estimate that 3 million citizens participated in at least one Yellow Vest action in 2018–2019.
When we reach out to them to ask what they think of “Bloquons tout,” what they’re doing, and what they plan to do, the responses vary widely. Some, decked out in their vests, have joined local assemblies or Telegram channels, just as they have in most protests over the past seven years; others, on the contrary, are following from a distance, waiting to see, disillusioned by the supposed political “co-optation,” skeptical about the chances of success for yet another street protest, or disheartened by the lack of public support and the severity of the repression—including judicial measures—during the 2018 movement (“let others take the risk”).
There are many different stances, each of which we can explain in detail, but we know that not all of them represent “the” Yellow Vests. One thing is certain: some Yellow Vests are already there, and others are ready to join in.
But one major difference from the Yellow Vests movement—precisely because it began earlier—lies in the intense media attention the “Bloquons tout” movement has been receiving over the past few weeks. While failing to mention the protesters’ immense distrust of the media (we can bet the topic will resurface with the first demonstrations), the media are providing massive coverage of the preparations, asking the usual questions: who are the blockaders, who can embody the movement or even serve as its leaders, who is “behind” it, what do they want, what should we expect, or even what should we fear? However, the intense media attention has undoubtedly had the effect of unsettling political and union leaders of all stripes, when they hadn’t already taken the initiative.
Beyond "appropriation"
Another major difference from 2018—when political parties and labor unions either ignored or even condemned the November 17 protests—lies in the early politicization of the upcoming protests. The term, which has several meanings, does not refer for us to the “co-optation” of the movement by this or that political force—an expression widely used, but one that falls into a stigmatizing political category. It refers to the idea that all forces in the political arena agree, beyond their differences, to redefine the movement and its demands as political, that is, as falling under “political” democracy (elected officials and parties) and “social” democracy (unions). On one hand, the confederations are calling for another “mass mobilization” on September 18, amplifying the strikes announced here and there; on the other, since the “political return” from the summer universities in mid-August, party leaders have been speaking out in support of or against the movement and debating the legitimacy of its demands and methods of action.
The most spectacular political move, of course, came from Prime Minister François Bayrou, who announced on August 25 that he would put his government’s future on the line by calling for a vote of confidence in the National Assembly on September 8 on his controversial budget bill. This dramatic decision effectively brought the purely political agenda back to the forefront: praise or criticism of the move (a return to parliamentary democracy, according to Jean-Luc Mélenchon), various consultations, and stances taken on specific points of the bill (notably the elimination of two public holidays). The rejection of the confidence vote, which is a foregone conclusion, will plunge the country into a political—and even institutional—crisis likely to dominate the media agenda at the expense of the social “crisis.”
It therefore seems today as if elected officials are regaining control at the expense of ordinary citizens. François Hollande’s latest remark ( “I cannot associate myself with something I do not control”) reveals, in this regard, a kind of unconsciousness on the part of the political class, which claims to “hear the exasperation” but intends to engage only in what it controls—namely, political and institutional games—and to give the people a voice only through the electoral process.
Social movements as agents of change
In doing so, elected officials are displaying a blindness that never ceases to amaze. Indeed, another lesson from the Yellow Vests movement is that it has profoundly transformed its initial protesters, if not into activists, then at least into citizens who feel they are finally worthy of being heard, capable of debating and expressing their views on political and even institutional issues (the RIC) that affect the country, and who refuse to be content with simply dropping a ballot into the ballot box every five years.
What we read today on Telegram channels or hear in the first local assemblies attests to the same determination not to be treated like children and sent back to our daily grind on the grounds of a supposed lack of “credentials to speak” (Jacques Rancière). Distrust of national elected officials, already strong in 2018, is even stronger today: the famous “popularity ratings,” insofar as they have any meaning at all, indicate that the most “popular” opposition figures enjoy the trust of, at best, one in three citizens.
It is doubtful that the French are fascinated by the petty games of an institutional and political crisis, since those in power do not listen to them either when they demonstrate en masse (against pension reforms) or when they vote against the majority (in 2024, which is reminiscent of the 2005 referendum), and respond with citizens’ conferences or grand debates whose outcomes they ignore, and with increasingly violent repression.
In this context, “Block Everything” can mean many things: for some, it means creating chaos in a country that is already “blocked”; for others, the real problem lies in the blocking or closure of the political arena, which seeks to reserve decision-making solely for representatives (unions and political parties). The Yellow Vests did not merely protest against a tax; they also learned along the way to propose a different form of democracy. Perhaps it is time to recognize that social movements offer solutions, not just problems.
François Buton, Research Director at the CNRS, ENS Lyon and Emmanuelle Reungoat, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Montpellier
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Readthe original article.