French President Emmanuel Macron on Saturday, February 14, urged calm and restraint after the fatal beating of a 23-year-old French youth aligned with the far-right on the sidelines of a conference by a hard-left lawmaker in the southeastern city of Lyon.
The death of the young man – identified only as Quentin – has intensified tensions between France’s far-right and radical left who are both eyeing 2027 presidential elections.
He had been hospitalized in Lyon on Thursday after being attacked while providing what his supporters said was security for a protest against an appearance by hard-left MEP Rima Hassan at the Lyon branch of the Sciences Po university.
If National Rally were in any position of power, this easily could have become France’s Reichstag Fire moment.
If some of you don’t know this, Macron is surpringly a good “no bullshit” person in international politics, however in terms of internal politics and government issues he’s not that popular.
In other words, he should be in Bruxelles. And he’s be a really solid guy.
The French have seen a lot of political violence during the French revolution. France will create another Napoleon.
Such a tragedy
Unfortunately, optics are incredibly important to win public opinion. As a radical leftist myself, I have little to no compassion for the man who died ; nonetheless I hope this doesn’t start a pattern.
Many people see these things as entirely vibes-based, so if we don’t look like the good guys, to many people that’s enough to decide we aren’t the good guys.
I think the world needs less radical left and more militant left.
We’ve tried talking for the last 80 years or so. Its not working so well. So maybe we need to bring back the violence that defeated fascism last time.
We need less polarisation. The far left and far right are both wrong because the world is a complex place full of nuance.
Personally I consider myself left of centre, but I also find policies that are absolutely core to the left abhorrent. That means I have voted centre right in the past, or centre depending on the situation.
What is absolutely certain is this kid did not deserve to die and the people that did it should JUSTLY face the full force of the law.
“Even if your sainted grandmother is a republican, they are evil and will burn in hell for all eternity.”
- Mike Malloy
Extreme centrism is also a thing. And it is as bad as the other, and reading your comment you could find yourself in this group.
If you’re going to adopt violence, you have to target the exact right people or you just plunge yourself into a long, dumb spiral of public outrage until whatever the organization originally meant to accomplish is lost in the news cycle of violence. People won’t remember what you represented, only what you did. And you can’t fix that with messaging, it’s just not how it works.
I can name a dozen different iconic seditious or rebellious groups in recent history and for every name read, you will see in your mind’s eye terrorism and bombings and violence, not what that group wanted to accomplish or what their goals were.
I get gnashing teeth reminding people of this fact, but Mussolini was not defeated by a plucky band of rebels who dragged him out of his bunker, he was arrested by his own king and government and handed over the opposition. We still need political action or we’re just embracing mindless chaos, we will need politics to both secure an actual victory and we will need politics to deal with the millions of people who didn’t vote for any of your actions but will still live next to us after.
The man who died was a far right militant, member of a group who regularly descends in the street to beat everyone not looking like their idea of a French.
I don’t think killing people is a solution. But if you think violence is sometimes justified against some people, this dude was as close as it gets.
“The means are the end,” to quote a line from The Dispossessed by Ursula K Le Guin (anarchist and legendary fiction writer). While I agree that we need most parts if the left for revolution (Andor does a decent job demonstrating this), I’m highly skeptical that lasting change can be built on revolution that is primarily enacted through violence.
revolution that is primarily enacted through violence
How many incidents does it take before it reaches “primarily”? Because this is one incident.
Mmh… I think that tribal identification is a basic problem (the us vs their conundrum): the danger is obvious, admit this general simplified view to conform the “only two collectives” and judge them by choiced individuals and not by the root ideas and what they bring, if humans cannot overcome this instinct they will remain ants that follow queens for no good reason…
The problem of course is that, bad as it may be to think this way, people (including me !) absolutely do think this way by default, unless consciously making the effort not to.
Maybe this can be deconstructed, but until then we need a good dose of “Realpolitik” that takes those biases into account, at least if we want to achieve anything concrete.
There is some truth to the “us vs them” between elites and the people, and the current elite is (somehow) very good at making a big part of the people they oppress think that “actually, you’re part of the elite too !”
Nazi lives don’t matter
Excuse me, but where does it say anything about nazi?
Not agreeing with the comment but, far-right = Nazi.
Tho I don’t think saying they deserve to die is true, those people have just fallen in the lies of the far right parties and are scared.
This is a war, there may be good people on the other side that were tricked into joining, but they are still on the other side.
those people have just fallen in the lies of the far right parties and are scared.
No, I’m done trying to find novel or justifiable reasons for people to support Nazis. The most likely answer is that there’s something in it for them. Not because they’re scared, but because they believe that naziism will get them something (power, control, money, etc) that they wouldn’t otherwise have. It’s an entirely self-serving ideology, so why would anyone follow it for reasons that aren’t rooted in selfishness?
Self-serving, and ultimately self-destructive.
I believe you’re confusing between far-right leaders and followers…
What do you call a low-level Nazi without any leadership responsibilities?
A Nazi.
Well now they have good reason to be scared.
Everyone is calling people far right nowadays just because they think the boarders shouldnt be kept open to anyone. This is why I ask, because the far left is throwing the word around like Nothin.
This dude was member of a far right collective who regularly would roam the streets of Lyon to beat up almost to death every individual they found not looking like their idea of a French person. This is very well known and documented in French media.
Stunning ignorance on display here.
Why is it called “far-right” and then “radical left”
Aka the “Tubular Left” aka the “Cowabunga Left” aka the “Gnarly Left”
Michaelangelo is part of the Cowabunga left.
also to claim that “the radical left is eyeing 2027 presidential elections” is pretty wild. no radical leftists will be winning any election, sadly.
One is normalized and one is not
I don’t think I’ve heard of “radical left” outside of the US? In Europe I only recall “far left” and “far right”
In France the literal translation would be “extreme right” and “extreme left”.
Because the left is so dope!
It’s not often I’m able to read things in a voice other than my own, but I read this one as Jason Mendoza from The Good Place and it was perfect.
Jason figured it out? Jason? Well, this is a new low. Yeah, this one hurts.
radical /ˈradɪkl/ adjective adjective: radical 1. (especially of change or action) relating to or affecting the fundamental nature of something; far-reaching or thorough. "a radical overhaul of the existing regulatory framework" 2. advocating or based on thorough or complete political or social change; representing or supporting an extreme or progressive section of a political party. noun noun: radical; plural noun: radicals 1. a person who advocates thorough or complete political or social change, or a member of a political party or section of a party pursuing such aims.Radical change is literally the goal.
Denotation ignores connotation, and in the US, “radical left” has specific meaning, especially to nazis.
America has no concept of “radical left”. I can suggest something mild and end up being called a communist.
Precisely. As a progressive, what I want is generally considered pretty normal and basic in any of the other 32 OECD (“developed”) countries.
There are a few that would be “radical”, but they are a tiny minority.
Tell ya what, though, after putting up with fascist bullshit all my life, while I just want basic freedom and a social safety net, I’m willing to listen to these “radical” left. Certainly the regressive right has done fuck all for us.
That’s radical dude. That’s rad.
Radical has always been progressive in america. Right out of the civil rights movement co-opted by hippies.
If you are backing down to the nazis and letting them change the meaning of words I am going to call you a weak dog.
There is nothing radical about progressives in the US. As a progressive… we are centrist in most of the other 32 OECD (“developed”) countries.
Radical left would start with things like no private property, ownership of everything by all, things like that.
So no, friend, I’m not changing the meaning of anything. Calling progressives in the US “radical” is already changing the meaning and wussing out on what actual radical change would be.
Fuck being calm. Rightwingers keep assaulting normies and our own, because they had suffered no consequences. We should change that, forever. It is easy to be conservative, when you don’t pay for the wrongs you commit.
Nazi lives don’t matter.
So are they translating the Horst Wessel Song into French yet?
Removed by mod
If Nazis are doing Nazi things. Yes.
You don’t want to be arbitrarily labeled a Nazi and punched for no reason.
If we need to be prepare for collective self-defense, killing violence is the field of the far right. I’m not saying “it’s wrong”, I’m saying that we will lose. Our collectives are made around care and support, their collectives prepare for war an terror
“Hatred that kills has no place in our country” - Man trying to stop hateful people who want to kill from facing consequences of their actions.
The paradox of hatred of hatred.
We’re experiencing a wave of racist attacks and murders and the only thing they talk about is the attack where a fascist was killed.
We don’t even know exactly what happened yet, most of the noise is coming from Nemesis another fascist “feminist” group.Coincidentally, our biggest leftist party was unilaterally labelled “far left” by our ministry of the interior a few days ago. (Le monde used hard left in the article, legally they are a generic leftist party)
Coincidentally also, mayoral elections are in about 4 weeks, with an uptick from said party.
Nothing to see here, France is definitely not sliding towards trumpism and fascism at a blinding speed.
From what I gather there was a group clash of 20+ people and the nazi dudes ran away leaving 1 behind who just got clobbered.
It was right extremists “counter protesting” and the dead guy seems like a professional agitator providing “security service” to right extremists.
Tl;dr: they fucked around and found out.
deleted by creator
Since when did European media start using Trumps term ‘radical-left’ ?
There is no such thing, this is pure framing by the alt-right!
Trump calls everyone from AOC to Angela Merkel radical leftists.
I despise Trump’s propaganda as much as anyone here, but LFI (the party of the mentioned lawmaker) call themselves “radical left”.
We shouldn’t let Trump turn this expression into an insult.
There is no such thing
There damn well IS a such thing, I’m a radical leftist anarchist specifically. But you’re right in that regular liberals like AOC are not. “Radical” just means outside of mainstream political thought.
you’re right in that regular liberals like AOC are not.
This is why leftists will never be a meaningful political bloc.
DSA, while not as left or “radical” as some on here, are already a political bloc in the US having meaningful impact. I support and celebrate their achievements even if I want more.
So… You’re wrong.
The Democratic Socialists of America is a socialist political organization in the United States. It is the country’s largest socialist organization, with more than 100,000 members as of February 2026.
As of August 2025, there are approximately 44.1 million registered Democrats across U.S. states
There are approximately 37.4 million registered Republicans in states that track party affiliation
I don’t think I am wrong.
Leftists infighting about who is actually left enough is damaging to the movement.
You should be aware that people tactically register for the democratic or republican parties in states with closed primaries. It’s a fairly obvious thing to do when you live in a place where the “safe party” primary is the real election. I disagree with the rest of your argument as well but the numbers don’t paint the picture that they appear to.
It’s fine to disagree but the votes add up to those numbers too.
It is growing pains. This is the necessary hashing out of common thought among any political movement. There is much upset and confusion right now and people are examining the world through different eyes. People are shedding their pre-existing worldviews. So obviously there will be infighting and bickering, as our thoughts settle and coalesce.
The broad statistical categorization of Dems and Repubs that you give doesn’t express the fact that there are smaller groups within those categories who are disagreeing with each other much the same as leftists do here. (e.g. “RINOs”, “never-Trumpers”, the “Tea Party” of recent history) A lot of their internal struggle is kept secret, as they already have fully-fledged parties with the resources and structure to herd their members on common lines. It’s not appropriate to compare open-format discussion online to the outward messaging of fully-realized parties.
As I understand, there are DSA members who are within that “Democrat” label as well who are using the reach of that party to further spread leftist messages. The statistics you list has no bearing on the fact that “leftist” ideas are spreading more rapidly in the US and people are thirsty for change. The current statistics don’t say anything of the future.
When Ho Chi Minh returned to Vietnam and eventually liberated that country from capitalism, it was just him and a handful of others starting out. Different circumstances of course, but the point is things can change rapidly. Demographic statistics are irrelevant to that.
There is still much work to do. Capitalism will end one day - even if outside our lifetimes. No one now can predict how that will turn out, but it will end just as feudalism did when the conditions of the world changed.
One DSA member for every eight hundred Democrats and republicans says a lot actually.
And years ago, there we people saying the same as you about the political parties that we struggle to remember now. I won’t lose hope, but you’re entitled to your speculation.
Spaniard here: Podemos, a prominent leftist party that appeared in the 2010s as third political force, was categorized as radical since its inception by mainstream media. The party has almost disappeared now, mainly due to a plot by the state police and private media in which the police fabricated false investigations of funding by Venezuela and Iran (wonder why these two are always used as dogwhistles) and leaked them to the media to make a huge campaign of lawfare and manufacturing of public mistrust.
The term alt-right is problematic too. I think you meant neo-nazis or just nazis
Fascist. The term you’re looking for is fascist.
Don’t forget to add the proper suffix, “cunt”. Or “scum” if you’re in mixed company.
He calls biden and kamala radical left, it’s a meaningless term like anti semite, no accusation can be taken at face value.
France has been doing that for LFI for a few years, with Macron pushing Le Pen. Right wing media (most of them) have religiously followed suit, calling them radicals and extremists.
And now, the government just officially defined LFI as “extrême gauche”. And I don’t mean in speeches but legally. This pissed off the real “extrême gauche”, stating that there is a difference between trying to tame capitalism vs abolishing it. But hey all the same to the media and the government: don’t you dare criticizing this magnificent system that keeps us on top and you at the bottom
