Jean-Luc Mélenchon made very ambiguous remarks this Sunday which may suggest conspiracy. – PHILIPPE DESMAZES / AFP
- Jean-Luc Mélenchon made comments on Sunday that many observers qualified as conspirators.
- Like him, more and more politicians maintain a discourse flirting with conspiracy theses.
- An option of demagogic ease which nevertheless has limits.
Asked on Sunday in the program “Political questions” (France Inter / Le Monde / France Info), the presidential candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon made remarks that are at the very least controversial on the election of 2022: “We are released a another little Macron of the hat […]. It’s the system that invents it […]. You will see that in the last week of the presidential campaign we will have a serious incident or murder […]. All that is written in advance ”.
“We” without ever naming who, “the system” questioned, a scenario “written in advance”… The semantics take up that of conspiracy, even if the leader of the LFI defended himself the same evening, indicating never to have wanted to fall into conspiracy.
But wouldn’t this ambiguity of the discourse be voluntary? Marie Peltier, historian and author ofObsessions: Behind the Scenes of the Conspiracy Story (Inculte, 2018), sees a deliberate ambivalence in it: “Of course, politicians know that they will lose all credibility if they say that the earth is flat or that the Reptilians dominate the world, so they maintain a blur. There are always precautions taken while flirting and carting conspiratorial voices. This vagueness would therefore be a kind of wink as discreet as it is permanent to voters sensitive to conspiracy theories. What the expert calls “the titillation operation”: “They know very well what they are doing and the vagueness they operate on purpose. “
Mass diffusion
No need to make Jean-Luc Mélenchon a special case. Some politicians are even advancing much more clearly on the conspiracy camp, such as Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, Florian Philippot or François Asselineau, supporters of anti-mask, anti-vaccine theories and other conspiracy theories on the coronavirus. A modern breakthrough of conspiracy in politics which owes a lot to the emergence of the Internet and social networks, according to Tristan Mendès-France, associate lecturer at the University of Paris in digital cultures and expert in conspiracy: “L The conspiratorial offer meets its audience more easily and now has increased visibility. Some politicians naturally see it as an electoral pulse. “
The bet seems all the more winning as the conspiracy and its supporters provide an immense sounding board for political leaders. Take the example of Florian Philippot. His anti-mask rallies only bring together a few hundred people at most. However, they are massively relayed online. Tristan Mendès-France: “The conspirators are extremely committed, ultra-active and very militant profiles. They therefore provide, in small numbers, a relay and a very important media coverage. “It is indeed the sense of urgency and danger that accompanies the conspiracy: between a person who thinks that the mask suffocates the children and another who thinks that the mask protects them, it is almost” natural “that it is the first which is the most militant and the most active to relay its conviction.
“It’s just the opposite for consensual postures. They do not ignite and therefore do not elicit as many reactions, ”notes the researcher. Thus, while Nicolas Dupont-Aignant has “only” 305,000 people who follow him on Facebook, the videos he posts on this social network generate more traffic than those posted by Emmanuel Macron, who accounts for 3.5 million people. members on Facebook. “The conspiratorial pulse is exalted, it is in this that it is tempting and profitable politically”, concludes Tristan Mendès-France.
A tendency among all politicians
We must not summarize the temptation of conspiracy by politicians to extremes. In 2017, when François Fillon spoke of a “black cabinet at the Elysee Palace” having wanted to compromise his presidential candidacy, what is it, if not a conspiracy speech? The same goes for Emmanuel Macron, who presented himself as an “anti-system candidate”, points out Marie Peltier. The historian develops: “There were conspiratorial clichés in all the speeches of the candidates for the 2017 election. It is also the vice of conspiracy: we always think that we are not affected by this problem, that this are the others. “
Conspiracy thought has sort of “mainstreamed”, in the words of Marie Peltier: “The conspiracy imaginary is the majority in public opinion, it is logical that all opinion leaders seize it, because conspiracy is an electoral weapon. Politicians don’t really create conspiracy, they just ride it. “
A guaranteed victory?
Is summoning conspiracy theories the ultimate weapon? If the phenomenon knows how to make noise, it is far from being reflected automatically in the ballot boxes. Tristan Mendès-France puts it into perspective: “For the moment, there is social pressure on conspiratorial discourse which means that they are not officially accepted by the majority. This is also why politicians employ so many ambiguities, they cannot say so in broad daylight. “
Same temperance with Marie Peltier, for whom we must qualify the effectiveness of conspiratorial discourse among politicians. François Fillon’s “black cabinet” quickly ran out of steam, as did his political career: “Conspiracy is a bad calculation in the long term, and does not bring back that many votes. For politicians, the bet seems rather superficial or short-term, as one plot hunts another. And those who are heard the most are not necessarily the majority. “
For example, as noisy as the antivax are, the majority of the population is vaccinated, far from the speeches of Florian Philippot and others. The whole limit of conspiracy: drive out the real, it comes back at a gallop.