The struggle of seats?

The question of the "subject of emancipation", that is to say the question of the players likely to be the vectors of social transformation is at the heart of the book book Christophe Guilluy. "France device" is a worthy attempt but without fulfillment and simplistic to re emerge the popular classes.

Very long time, the working class was the main operator of the changes of the modern world. Its centrality was the result of a demographic balance but mostly the product of a construction and an efficient political statement. Similarly and conversely, the disappearance of any subject of emancipation, undertook a systematic deconstruction (victorious neoliberal offensive) and a deliberate political renunciation (weak conceptual and moral standard of the left). Building the social space, which organizes the practices and representations of agents, says Pierre Bourdieu in "Distinction" is construct theoretical classes as homogeneous as possible. Thus the theory of exercise effect, strictly political effect of viewing a reality that does not exist until it is completely unknown and recognized. For Christophe Guilluy, the country is divided between metropolitan France (largest twenty-five cities and inner suburbs 10% of communes, 40% of the population and two thirds of GDP) and a peripheral France grouping the remaining territory ( rural villages, suburban communities, small and medium cities). For him, the world economy successful in France. The job market certainly is there the big difference between very and absolutely no skilled positions but includes all people and especially precarious and immigrant classes. For cons, the world economy, says the author, fails (or succeeds only too well) on the outskirts of cities. On the outskirts, it relegates, away places of wealth creation and employment; it assigns no opportunities for mobility (travel costs and the real estate) a majority of the small population. The geographical area is divided accordingly between winners and losers of globalization, between visibility and invisibility, between support and rejection of political parties of government abstention and voting National Front. Denying the existence of the working classes, as strives to make successive Government parties is in the final analysis, says Christophe Guilluy, deny the existence of differences and principles of differentiation. This is what paradoxically, since they retain the term class, those who claim that today the French company is not a huge middle class.

Christopher Guilluy reasoning based on unquestionably comments relevant to socio-territorial dynamics at work and felt the people. It should certainly be placed, as he courageously alongside the popular classes in the exact opposite approach to that advocated one day "Terra Nova", "since the people had become reactionary, left, had to change people ". Report constantly populism, as does the left government is trendy today way to ignore the poor with it and not to discourage Boboland. Must we therefore grant discharge to the popular classes when they voted overwhelmingly FN? We must criticize the author's reasoning questionable culturalist bias and more qu'hasardeuses simplifications that seem popular condone the worst excesses. The people are quite permeable to the world of the ideology that divides. This assertion is unfortunately sorely tested throughout the labor movement and the same time of Marx. This setback also be born Marxist concepts of class in itself and class for itself, of false consciousness and true consciousness. The problems faced by the working class, for our geographer, would not be primarily economic. They are mainly related to the management of migratory flows and the emergence of a multicultural society. Denying our history and feel the most obvious reality absurdly Guilluy Christophe, who gets away with it all division speech that led to the overwhelming victory of the liberal revolution, says like so many others before him, "The process of assimilation and acculturation that accompanied all the waves of immigration to the eighties no longer works. " He adds equally absurdly: "It is legitimate not to want to be a minority in a given territory." Who is today? The author does not he write, contradictorily, a few lines later: "There is a separatism among the working classes. French or former Immigration popular categories no longer live in the same territories as popular immigration categories feel. " This political strategy of division, by blindness Christophe Guilluy describes as identity, is also well described in the book. The PS is a liberal party crossed with cultural leftism of bobo gent who deliberately hampered the left bottom. His election speech that targets minorities, plays "little Beurs, small black" systematized the right. Right turn, repeating the National Front speech, plays the "little white" against immigrants and Muslims. But "A truly political left is to fight against the categories of perception imposed by the social order, to forge new desires, to change the report to possible" remind us Benedict Breville and Pierre Rimbert in a fascinating article on Guilluy in "Le Monde Diplomatique" of March 2015.

Building the social space, which organizes practices and representations of the agents, again, is construct theoretical classes as homogeneous as possible. If I am a political leader and I propose to make a big party bringing together both employers and workers, I have little chance of success because they are very distant in social space; some conditions, in favor of a national crisis, on the basis of nationalism or chauvinism, they can get closer, but the rally will remain superficial and very provisional says Pierre Bourdieu. We are witnessing such a comparison in terms of so-called new radicalism in the periphery. The iconic red cups movement is a good example of false consciousness. Do not we see the popular classes to join the employers? Conversely, it is not, as claimed by the author, of a deadlock between the two components of the lower classes, the long established and the new entrants. Recent immigration succeeds in metropolises unlike the little people of the peripheries, this statement Christophe Guilluy that relies solely on the rate of residential mobility in sensitive urban areas (60%) as a social indicator of success is in no demonstrated time. The author does not take into account the mobility of ZUZ in ZUZ (1/3 of cases), the over-representation of young people, renovations of buildings, etc. 'The popular classes perform as poorly in metropolises and their suburbs: more unemployment, less training, more poverty'
The great merit of Christopher Guilluy in this book is to escape what Frédéric Lordon called lately the posturalisme whose sole spring looking postures' advantageous and safe it goes without saying. No abstract internationalism and anti-racism in the author. The demands of the popular classes, often just and legitimate (protectionism, relocation, social state against free trade, mobility '). These are the popular classes, in adversity, pain, alone and without instructions that build a motley society. They run daily thousand ethno cultural issues not falling into hatred and violence written rightly Christophe Guilluy.
On the red banner "France Device" the united praise of "Marianne", "Le Journal du Dimanche", "Le Figaro". The pledge oneself completely safe is often given in hollow by a media unanimously whatever she chooses to celebrate passionately. We really need the world has changed basis for newspapers so diverse that degree of communion swoon in anything disturbing. The latest book by Christopher Guilluy is not stunning but still stimulating for a reflection that is to come.