No to the exploitation and perversion of communalism by the citizen movements and the institutional left
Social ecology and communalism form a political project radically opposed to capitalism and all forms of state institutions. They are part of a perspective of profound social transformation, aiming to give people back the power over their living conditions, by organizing society on the basis of decentralized and self-managed structures – confederated eco-communities – “In conceiving them holistically, that is to say, in terms of their mutual interdependence, social ecology seeks to unravel the forms and patterns of interrelationships that give intelligibility to a community, be it natural or social.” [1]. However, as the 2026 municipal elections approach, we are witnessing a growing co-opting and perversion of these ideas by citizen movements and parties of the institutional left, who are trying to exploit the communalist dynamic for base electioneering purposes.
1. Communalism: a radicalism led astray by citizenism
Social ecology, developed by Murray Bookchin, is based on the idea that the ecological crisis is inseparable from the social crisis. It advocates a political organization based on decentralization, direct democracy and self-management of local communities, in a dynamic of breaking with capitalism and the State. Communism is its concrete translation: it is about structuring political life around sovereign popular assemblies, capable of federating locally (bioregions, etc.) and confederating supra-locally (internationalism) to form an autonomous counter-power, gradually replacing state and market institutions.
However, this ideal is now threatened by the spread of civic-mindedness, which claims to promote citizen involvement without fundamentally questioning the existing power structures. Municipalism, in its contemporary forms, is limited to a cosmetic participatory democracy, seeking to humanize institutions rather than to destroy and replace them. It contributes to adding confusion to the confusion and thus constitutes a deviation that neutralizes the radicalism of communalism by emptying it of its subversive substance.
2. “The town hall is YOURS”: an attempt at electoral recovery
A blatant example of this drift is the “La mairie est à VOUS” (The town hall is YOURS) project. Presented as an initiative aimed at encouraging the involvement of residents in the management of their municipalities, this movement is in fact secretly supported by several parties of the institutional left, such as PEPS – PEPS – For a Social and Popular Ecology, Ensemble!, the Union Communiste Libertaire (UCL) and the Nouveau Parti Anticapitaliste (NPA-A), etc. These organizations, despite their revolutionary or libertarian rhetoric, continue to operate according to a social-democratic electoral logic that only serves to strengthen the institutions they claim to criticize.
The guide published by “La mairie est à VOUS” claims to propose a participatory and democratic model of municipal management, but it confines itself to superficial adjustments within existing institutions. Instead of promoting the emergence of autonomous popular assemblies and self-management structures, it encourages integration into the dominant political order, transforming communalism into simple alternative local management, but still subject to state and electoral rules.
3. La France insoumise and its opportunistic appropriation of communalism
Even more emblematic of this shift is the case of La France insoumise (LFI), which today dares to claim communalism in its “strategic orientation text”. Yet it is difficult to imagine a greater contradiction between the communalist ideal and the political strategy of LFI. This party, which presents candidates in all elections, including the presidential election, is fully in line with the institutional and statist logic. Its claim to communalism can only be an opportunistic attempt to attract a militant fringe critical of the state and traditional parties, while remaining faithful to an electoralist and centralizing strategy.
By claiming to defend communalism while maintaining its roots in the parliamentary and presidential system, LFI contributes to a harmful confusion, making it more difficult to spread a genuinely libertarian and anti-state communalist project.
4. A danger to the communalist ideal: confusion and delegitimization
These attempts at co-optation are not harmless. By stripping the communalist ideal of its revolutionary content, they risk transforming it into a simple variant of reformist municipal management, or even a tool for renewing the credibility of state and electoral institutions through management. Does this not fall into the trap of participation, the fad of the New Public Management, a direct offshoot of the OECD, created in 1980 to modernize public administration? This is the debate on forms of cooperatives [2] – of enterprises or of production – some of which claim the status of self-managed enterprises, just as competitive and aggressive on the market. Thus, by associating communalism with opportunistic politicking strategies, these movements risk discouraging sincere activists, giving them the impression that this idea is just another empty slogan intended to serve electoral interests.
At the rate things are going, it would not be surprising if the far right also seized on this idea and distorted it in its own way. See also the recent distortion of the feminist cause. [3]
Recent history is full of examples of political movements that, after being stripped of their substance by institutional recuperation by the state, ended up disappearing or becoming harmless to the established order. It is essential that communalism does not suffer the same fate.
5. Reaffirming authentic and subversive communalism
In the face of these attempts at perversion, it is necessary to reaffirm the fundamental principles of communalism:
- Refusal of all participation in state institutions: communalism cannot be reduced to a simple alternative municipal management, it must be part of a logic of breaking with the state and its structures.
- Construction of a decentralized and autonomous counter-power: social transformation will not come from local elections, but from the organization of popular assemblies and self-managed cooperatives.
- Demystification of electioneering discourse: it is crucial to denounce the strategy of parties which, under the guise of communalism, in reality perpetuate an institutional model contrary to its subversive essence.
- Development of a political culture of autonomy: strengthening training and the transmission of self-management knowledge and practices in order to ensure the sustainability of the communalist project outside of any institutional supervision.
- Creation of a true communalist movement: it is imperative to unite communalist initiatives into a coherent network, rejecting any institutional appropriation and rooted in a coherent and creative dynamic with a desirable and shared horizon.
True communalism can only be a project of radical emancipation, opposed to any form of delegation of power and to any compromise with existing structures of domination. Only the patient and determined construction of a movement with the goal of leaving capitalism behind, made up of autonomous popular assemblies working together, the embryos of new self-institutions in tension with those of the State, will allow us to open a breach towards a truly egalitarian and ecological society. It is therefore up to us to preserve and defend this ideal in the face of attempts to co-opt it, which aim to strip it of its substance and divert it towards reformist and institutional ends.
Notes:
[1]: The Ecology of Freedom, p. 87
[2]: Co-operatives
[3]: How the far right uses feminism to better spread its anti-immigration message
Translated by TerKo with the help of a free translation tool.
Rebounds: