In the first round of the presidential election, as revealed by the Ifop survey-The cross40% of practicing and non-practicing Catholics gave their votes to the candidates of the identity right, when 69% of Muslims gave their votes to the radical left of Jean-Luc Mélenchon.
→ REREAD. Presidential 2022: why Muslim voters voted for Jean-Luc Mélenchon
In 2017, also in the first round, the Catholic vote going to this same right (Marine Le Pen and Nicolas Dupont-Aignan) had not exceeded 28% and that of Muslims in favor of candidates from the “Islamo-friendly” left. , Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Benoît Hamon, had risen to 54%. We therefore note an increase in the Catholic vote for the extreme right and in the Muslim vote for a left of the revolutionary type. Should we welcome this development?
No, because these votes do not correspond to any classic denominational anchoring. The identity right is not Christian democracy and La France insoumise, a materialist party although carrying utopias, does not have a priori vocation to collect such a marked denominational vote, in this case Muslim.
→ TESTIMONIALS. Politics: reconciling bishops facing divided Catholics
These votes at the extremes, the Catholic as well as the Muslim, reveal tensions, fears, stiffenings. Not everything is symmetrical between them. The identity Catholic vote is that of an identity which thinks of itself as an ideological minority but demographically still a majority and which, animated by a spirit of reconquest mixed with a fear of submersion, affirms, as in the political meetings of the extreme right : ” We are at home ! »
The Melenchonist Muslim vote is less optimistic from this point of view. On the defensive, showing a feeling of vulnerability, even panic, he sets up the leader of La France insoumise as a protector, above all in religious or existential terms, these two dimensions generally going together from an identity point of view. Proof of this search for protection, which challenges us and obliges us, the “Muslim vote” went to 85% for Emmanuel Macron in the second round.
When secularism was self-evident
The confessionalization of votes, to the benefit of the extreme right or the radical left, by choice or by necessity, is not good news. It makes us regret the time when secularism was, so to speak, self-evident. We must here twist the neck of this slightly revisionist discourse which intends to reduce secularism to its legal aspects, those organizing the separation of Church and State. This is to omit that in France, society is secular: the religion of individuals comes under the intimate sphere; apart from a few expressions like “thank God” or “thank God”, it does not mark out social discourse, it does not permeate it; one defines oneself as a believer, atheist or agnostic, and again, the circumstances must lend themselves to it. To say that society is not secular is to lie, or to want to change it, or to see it change.
It is undeniable that the Muslim revival of identity type, from the end of the 1980s, particularly among young people of the second generation of North African immigrants and often at the invitation of Islamist entrepreneurs, has, later on, provoked a religious upsurge among Catholics who had been dormant or ignored each other until then. This was seen in Eric Zemmour’s camp, supported by many young people saying they were rediscovering their faith or hoping to find it, not in interreligious emulation, but in opposition to an Islam perceived by them as conquering. However, these “born again” Catholics, the counterpart of those of the second generation of North African immigrants who had tasted the religious elixir before them, do not do secularism any good by conveying considerations that are in turn vengeful.
“Soft rags” cathos
Already in 2014, while the war was raging in Syria and Iraq, partly under the control of the Islamic State, Catholic groups committed to the defense of Eastern Christians were attracting very little religious young men and girls to their side. , but having the impression of being soft figures in front of a Muslim youth appearing to them as full of self-confidence. The attacks of 2015 and the following ones strengthened the determination of these Catholic or neo-Catholic teenagers. So, no, 40% of Catholics voting for parties that make Islam a political opponent is not good news.
The responsibility of Jean-Luc Mélenchon is great for the present. Nobody is fooled by his game which consists in saying: “What problem? There is no problem. By virtue of which he proposes to repeal the law “consolidating respect for the principles of the Republic”, also known as the “separatism” law, which intends to fight against the Islamist ideology which puts the law of men in competition with the “laws of God”, creating in the process exhausting dilemmas that can turn out to be destructive.
The social sovereignty of Jean-Luc Mélenchon, which recalls, all other things being equal, the constitutional populism of Kaïs Saïed, the current Tunisian president elected on the promise of a more egalitarian and morally clean society, intends to put the “Muslims” in his pocket, socially rather modest, politically rather leftist and religiously rather conservative.
The entire emancipatory strategy of La France insoumise vis-à-vis this Muslim electorate, or considered as such, is based on intersectional disruption, where bare breasts and burkinis are called upon to cohabit in municipal swimming pools – the opposite of non-religious secular society. by convention. It’s a bet. Faced with the social sovereignty of Mélenchon, we find the national sovereignty of Marine Le Pen. Nothing good seems to come out of the competition between the two.