Invité de François Lenglet sur TF1 Info le 25 octobre 2026, Jean-Luc Mélenchon a jugé que la conception française de la propriété « n’est plus supportable » et promis de pouvoir « réquisitionner ces espaces ». Son programme précise l’idée : un plafond de cinq logements transmissibles par héritage, le reste étant saisi par l’État. Le débat sur le logement est légitime. La confiscation programmée d'une partie du patrimoine familial, elle, mérite autre chose qu'un slogan électoral.

LE COURRIER
DES STRATÈGES

Restez libre !

LA NEWSLETTER · GRATUITE

Le Courrier,
chaque matin.

L'essentiel de l'actualité, passé au crible par les cinq plumes du Courrier. Dans votre boîte, chaque jour ouvré.

Gratuit. Vous restez libre de partir quand vous voulez.

JE M'INSCRIS lecourrierdesstrateges.fr

lecourrierdesstrateges.fr

Restez libre !

Jusqu'où l'État peut-il décider de ce qu'une famille a le droit de posséder et de transmettre ?Face à François Lenglet, le candidat de La France insoumise Mélenchon , n’a pas cherché à adoucir ses propos. La propriété, a-t-il dit, est une liberté qui a sa limite.

LE COURRIER
DES STRATÈGES

Restez libre !

ABONNEMENT

Allez au fond
des choses.

Deux grands formats par jour. Les cinq plumes du Courrier. La série Sécession, le dimanche.

Le monde commente. Vous, vous comprenez.

S'ABONNER lecourrierdesstrateges.fr

lecourrierdesstrateges.fr

Restez libre !

Du cinquième au sixième logement, la propriété devient une autorisation politique

La mesure figure noir sur blanc dans le plan « BTP et logement », mis en ligne le 24 septembre et présenté au salon Batimat quatre jours plus tard. Elle prévoit « un plafond de cinq logements transmissibles par héritage ; au-delà, les biens sont réquisitionnés par l’État et redistribués » vers le parc social et des organismes de foncier solidaire. L’État deviendrait ainsi juge de ce qu’une famille peut léguer, et propriétaire de tout ce qui dépasse. Imaginons un maçon qui a acheté, rénové et loué six appartements en quarante ans de chantiers. À son décès, ses enfants en recevraient cinq. Le sixième irait à la collectivité. Le texte publié ne dit rien de l’indemnisation, ni de la manière de compter : par succession, ou par héritier ?

En droit français, la réquisition est une prise d’usage temporaire, assortie d’une indemnité. Ici elle désigne un transfert définitif de propriété. L’article 17 de la Déclaration de 1789, qui a valeur constitutionnelle, qualifie la propriété de droit « inviolable et sacré » et n’admet de privation que pour nécessité publique, sous condition d’une « juste et préalable indemnité ». Le projet devra s’expliquer sur ce point devant le Conseil constitutionnel, et devant la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union, dont l’article 17 protège aussi la propriété.

Des questions demeurent: comment seront évalués les biens concernés ? Les héritiers seront-ils indemnisés ? Selon quels critères les logements seront-ils attribués aux organismes sociaux ou fonciers ? Le programme ne précise pas les garanties, les modalités de compensation ni le traitement des situations particulières. Or, une succession ne se résume pas à un nombre de portes : elle peut comprendre des biens financés par emprunt, des logements loués, des immeubles familiaux ou des appartements rénovés pendant des décennies. La réquisition de logements vacants existe déjà dans le droit français, mais elle obéit à un cadre distinct.

LE COURRIER
DES STRATÈGES

Restez libre !

TELEGRAM · L'INFO EN CONTINU

Entre deux éditions,
le fil.

La newsletter vous donne le matin. Le fil vous donne l'instant.

Gratuit, et en continu.

REJOINDRE LE FIL t.me/resterlibre

t.me/resterlibre

Restez libre !

Derrière la redistribution, un programme de planification à 12 milliards d’euros par an

Toujours dans son programme immobilier, LFI promet 400 000 logements abordables par an pendant cinq ans, dont 200 000 logements publics. Pour y parvenir, le mouvement prévoit 12 milliards d'euros d'investissements publics supplémentaires chaque année dans le BTP et le logement. Le financement reposerait également sur un pôle public bancaire, chargé de mobiliser prêts, garanties et prises de participation.

Le programme entend aussi mobiliser 150 000 logements par an issus du parc existant, notamment par la réquisition de logements vacants, la taxation de la vacance et la limitation des locations touristiques. Mais il franchit un autre seuil avec le plafonnement des transmissions successorales. Il ne s'agit plus seulement de remettre sur le marché des biens inoccupés : l'État entendrait intervenir dans la composition même du patrimoine familial. Le 28 octobre, Mélenchon a d'ailleurs dû démentir: « Je n’ai pas l’intention de proposer la collectivisation de toutes les voitures, de tous les frigos, de toutes les machines à laver », a-t-il déclaré lors d’une conférence de presse consacrée au secteur bancaire. Sarah Knafo, eurodéputée de Reconquête , a riposté en opposant à Mélenchon une conception de la propriété comme valeur « désirable, protectrice, digne et noble », avant de résumer le désaccord d’une phrase : « À la fin, il ne restera qu’un seul propriétaire : vous. L’État ».

LE COURRIER
DES STRATÈGES

Restez libre !

TIPS · SANS ABONNEMENT

Offrez-nous
un café.

Un média libre vit de ses lecteurs. Un pourboire ponctuel, sans compte ni engagement, quand le cœur vous en dit.

Vous donnez ce que vous voulez. Vous restez libre.

LAISSER UN POURBOIRE merci !

lecourrierdesstrateges.fr

Restez libre !

Réquisitionner sans indemnisation à la valeur vénale, c’est exproprier de fait sans respecter la procédure d’expropriation. Indemniser à la valeur de marché, c’est reconnaître que l’État achète ce qu’il prétend réquisitionner et les 12 milliards annoncés n’y suffiraient pas. Entre les deux, il y a un vide juridique que la campagne n’a pas comblé. Chaque famille qui a bâti un patrimoine à la force de ses mains se retrouve avec un seuil à ne pas franchir, fixé par ceux qui n’ont rien construit. Le scrutin aura lieu les 18 avril et 2 mai 2027... D’ici là, les propriétaires auraient intérêt à lire le programme en entier.

Amid widespread protests, Muriel E Cockcroft has sympathy for French youth but fears how much steam will be let out at the next convulsion

I’m writing in response to your editorial (The Guardian view on France’s protests: a polarised country is in a perilous political moment, 19 October). While the focus is on Emmanuel Macron, let us not forget the hierarchical structure of French administration, from mayors to MPs to senators to prefects and heads of region. All are part of the government, but few stood up to bring leaky school roofs and missing teachers to national consciousness. I deplore the senseless destruction of shops and state buildings. But I also deplore the fact that students had to protest to be heard. In the many administrative tiers of this highly hierarchical country, no one acted and inertia prevailed.

Centrally, the government is financially challenged but refuses to acknowledge that having a huge deficit, an ageing population and a low retirement age are perhaps connected. Modest attempts to increase the retirement age also provoked violent protests. Financial tools for individual retirement remain complex and restricted. Thus, this sclerotic system presses on until the next crisis.

French leftist leader warns of weekly demonstrations and an impending general strike.

On Saturday, French radical left leader Jean-Luc Melenchon urged French President Emmanuel Macron to yield to protesters’ demands before leaving office in May 2027.

RELATED:

Two French Protesters Arrested for the Burning of the Limoges Town Hall

“You still have time to give in; afterward, you will have no choice but to leave. Give in and stop wasting our time,” Melenchon, a four-time presidential candidate, said as he marched in the Paris demonstration, which proceeded between Porte d’Italie and Porte de Vincennes.

Melenchon, leader of France Unbowed (LFI), warned Macron that if social demands go unanswered, mobilizations such as the one taking place in France for the second consecutive Saturday “will be repeated every week.”

“This is a very important moment in the history of popular movements in our country,” Melenchon said, convinced that “a general strike is coming” for the authorities.

Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s text states: “A total victory for the social movement. The march has gathered at the newly authorized location and is proceeding calmly along a route over four kilometers long. The provocations intended to incite disorder—orchestrated by the police prefect and Lecornu—have failed completely. It is time for the authorities to yield; otherwise, they will soon have no choice but to head for the exit.”

Macron must decide whether to yield to the demands now or do so later under much more unpredictable circumstances, Melenchon said. He also accused the French president of adopting an attitude characteristic of an “absolute monarchy” by claiming to be “always right” in his dealings with others.

Melenchon said Macron had taken advantage of the state of shock caused by the racist terrorist attack in Trappes, on the outskirts of Paris, to change the route of the protest through the French capital, creating confusion among demonstrators.

“Everything is being prepared to provoke an explosion” and spark unrest, he said. He questioned the deployment of military personnel to protect public buildings and authorities’ recommendations that business owners turn to private security services, arguing that both measures contribute to rising tensions.

“They are doing absolutely everything to provoke an incident,” Melenchon insisted, urging demonstrators to remain calm, follow union instructions and maintain collective discipline “so that everything goes smoothly.”

The text reads, “A massive procession in Paris calling for the repeal of Parcoursup, 10 billion euros for high school students, and an increase in the minimum wage and salaries—as well as the defense of our right to protest! The maneuvers by Nunez and Lecornu have failed.”

For all these reasons, the leftist leader called on the French government to “stop provoking” demonstrators and “adding fuel to the fire,” and to listen to “demands that are not so difficult to meet.”

Melenchon also criticized meetings held during the week between the Macron administration and political parties, describing them as useless and theatrical.

“They live in a bubble, make decisions that have no connection to reality and are not even coordinated among themselves. That is why they are dangerous,” he said.

On Saturday, France faced a second day of nationwide demonstrations called by unions, students and the Yellow Vests movement to protest the rising cost of living and demand more public funding for education.

Following serious incidents on Saturday, Oct. 17, authorities deployed a major security operation on Saturday and banned demonstrations in several French cities, particularly those not organized by unions.

teleSUR/ JF

Source: EFE

A little over a month ago, at a high school on the outskirts of Paris, a group of students blocked their school to protest the condition of the facilities and the lack of teachers. Within days, students from other schools joined in, first in Paris and then across the country, complaining of leaks in classrooms and even cockroaches, and of walls that are cracking. They are cold in the winter and hot in the spring. That image of public schools — long considered a pillar of the French Republic, but gradually falling apart — also illustrates the economic decline of recent years.

Seguir leyendo

The far-right leader’s promise to restore order will appeal to many ahead of next year’s presidential elections – the stakes are suddenly much higher

There is only one clear winner so far from France’s chaos: Marine Le Pen. The violence and rioting that engulfed towns and cities across the country over the weekend, six months before a pivotal presidential election, is a godsend for the hard-right, Eurosceptical, anti-immigration candidate. As buildings burned, shops were looted and police attacked, the rioting largely drowned out peaceful mass protests over the dilapidated state of schools , fuel prices and the cost of living.

Across France and the rest of Europe, people are in shock at scenes of arson and pillage in city centres, the wrecking of symbols of the republic such as the 19th-century town hall in peaceful provincial Limoges and the bust of Marianne in Marseille’s city hall, and the looting of more than 2,000 shops.

Paul Taylor is a senior visiting fellow at the European Policy Centre

The scenes of social unrest and violence at the weekend are an ominous portent, ahead of elections which may deliver a far-right presidency

In Emmanuel Macron’s book Revolution, published ahead of the 2017 presidential election that he went on to win, he promised to restore hope to a country that was losing faith in its future. As Mr Macron’s lame-duck second term enters its last phase against a quasi-insurrectionary backdrop of torched public buildings and looted shops, the failure of that political project appears total.

The worst scenes of urban violence for years overshadowed a weekend of protest that gravely undermined what is left of the French president’s authority. As police lost control of the streets, more than 2,000 shops were ransacked. Far-left groups targeted town halls and local buildings, and engaged in pitched battles with the police, whose disastrously heavy-handed response to last week’s high school protests has succeeded only in escalating tensions.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

What began as a student protest over deteriorating schools has developed into a nationwide revolt against economic hardship, political paralysis and declining public services. With the 2027 presidential election approaching, the violence has exposed problems that neither the government nor its principal opponents have convincing plans to resolve.

France’s latest wave of unrest has developed into one of the most serious domestic crises of Emmanuel Macron’s presidency. More than 550,000 people participated in demonstrations on 17 October, according to official estimates, before violence spread through Paris and other major cities. Shops were looted, police confronted rioters, and the historic town hall in Limoges was largely destroyed by fire.

The scale of the destruction prompted emergency government consultations and a televised presidential address. Macron promised to prosecute those responsible, while stopping short of declaring a state of emergency. Yet the immediate security challenge conceals a more difficult political question: why have protests that began with relatively specific demands over education become a confrontation involving such different sections of French society?

From school protests to a national revolt

The movement originated among secondary-school students demanding better facilities, more teachers and improvements in educational standards. Their complaints subsequently attracted trade unions, workers, farmers and elements of the Gilets Jaunes, the Yellow Vest movement that challenged Macron’s government in 2018.

The resulting coalition has no coherent political programme. Students protesting overcrowded classrooms share demonstrations with workers concerned about purchasing power and motorists angered by fuel prices. Their interests are not necessarily compatible, but they reflect a common dissatisfaction with the government’s ability to deliver functioning public services while containing living costs.

This distinction matters. The presence of masked rioters and organised groups engaged in violence does not establish that the hundreds of thousands who demonstrated peacefully supported their actions. Equally, the destruction of public buildings, attacks on police and widespread looting raise legitimate questions about the state’s capacity to maintain public order.

The economic problem behind the protests

At the centre of the discontent lies a structural problem that successive French governments have struggled to confront: the distribution of public expenditure between an ageing population and the services required by younger generations.

A French government budget assessment published in October revealed that pension obligations accounted for approximately 32 per cent of the education ministry’s budget, including €28.5 billion in pension expenditure. These obligations restrict the resources available for other departmental priorities.

France nevertheless remains a substantial spender on education. According to official figures, expenditure reached €199.2 billion in 2025, equivalent to 6.7 per cent of GDP. However, after inflation, the annual increase was only 0.1 per cent.

The issue is therefore not simply how much France spends, but how efficiently resources are allocated and whether expenditure meets changing educational needs.

The OECD’s 2025 PISA assessment found that French pupils’ performance in mathematics and reading had declined compared with 2022. Results were among the country’s lowest recorded, although broadly comparable with the OECD average.

These figures give the student protests a significance extending beyond the immediate condition of classrooms. They raise questions about France’s longer-term economic competitiveness and its capacity to provide younger generations with opportunities comparable to those enjoyed by their predecessors.

The limits of Macron’s reform programme

Macron entered office in 2017 promising to modernise the French economy and overcome the traditional division between left and right. Nearly a decade later, his administration faces a fragmented parliament, constrained public finances and growing resistance to further structural reforms.

The suspension of his pension reform illustrated the difficulty. Raising the retirement age was intended to reduce pressure on the pension system, but parliamentary opposition forced the government to defer the measure until after the presidential election.

The underlying financial pressures have not disappeared. Nor can they be resolved easily through additional spending when public debt, borrowing costs and budgetary obligations already restrict the government’s room for manoeuvre.

This creates an uncomfortable political reality: the state is expected to provide better services, greater purchasing-power protection and stronger security, while the available resources remain limited.

Can the opposition benefit?

The unrest comes approximately six months before the presidential election, with Marine Le Pen’s National Rally and Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s France Unbowed competing to establish themselves as alternatives to Macron’s political centre.

Le Pen has sought to combine support for economic grievances with demands for tougher policing. That position may attract voters concerned by the violence, but it also exposes tensions within a movement that previously supported the Yellow Vest protests.

Mélenchon faces a different difficulty. Supporting demonstrations against government policy is consistent with his political programme, but the involvement of violent groups risks shifting public attention from social demands towards questions of security.

A recent presidential opinion poll even suggested that Le Pen and Mélenchon could contest the final round, illustrating the weakening position of more conventional political alternatives.

Neither, however, can escape the fiscal constraints that have frustrated Macron’s government. A change of president would not automatically provide the resources required to expand public services, reform pensions and reduce the deficit simultaneously.

A wider problem for France and Europe

President Donald Trump has attributed the French unrest to immigration, although the movement’s documented origins lie principally in education, living costs and dissatisfaction with public services. Without established evidence about those responsible for individual acts of violence, broader claims about the demonstrators’ backgrounds remain speculative.

For the European Union, France’s instability carries consequences beyond its domestic political debate. France is central to European defence, fiscal negotiations and support for Ukraine. Sustained political paralysis would complicate its ability to negotiate and implement decisions requiring substantial public expenditure.

The immediate task for Macron’s government is to restore security without allowing the legitimate grievances of peaceful demonstrators to disappear from political consideration. The more difficult task will fall to whoever enters the Élysée in 2027.

France’s crisis is not simply a repetition of the Yellow Vest movement. It reflects a growing conflict over public resources, expectations of the state and the ability of established political institutions to reconcile competing demands.

The violence may subside, but the economic contradictions that brought such different groups onto the streets will remain. The presidential election will determine who inherits them, rather than whether they exist.