Chirac’s triumphal plebiscite complements the politics of the government of the plural left in the worst possible manner.
While the results of the first round of the Presidential elections showed clearly that Le Pen would be very decisively beaten solely by the votes of the right, the whole of the left set to work pumping up the windbag Le Pen and, in the name of a fight against a claimed fascist threat, prostituted itself for free to Chirac.
This was a deliberate choice on the part of the left leaders in order to avoid any discussion about the causes of the loss of 2,488,534 votes for Jospin and 1,672,456 votes for Hue - ie, a total loss of 4,160,534 votes.
By brandishing the threat of Le Pen’s election to the Presidency of the Republic, which it knew perfectly well could not happen in today’s context, in evoking a non-existent fascist danger, the left parties have sought, on the one hand, to conceal the reduction in their vote among the popular classes, and on the other have transformed their own retreat into an advance for Le Pen.
But their pressure was enough for you to surrender although you managed to avoid saying Chirac’s name! You carried a resolution which took two or three readings in order to satisfy each of your tendencies. Through opportunism by adaptation to the milieu which surrounds you, you joined the holy alliance around Chirac.
Your hypocritical call for a demonstration on the evening of the 5th May in order to wash your hands of your vote during the day doesn’t change anything.
Your contribution to Chirac’s election was derisory. Independently of your appeal a large part of the far left’s electorate would have undoubtedly given to the pressure to vote for Chirac.
But the fact is that in a situation which required telling the truth to the popular classes whether we are listened to or not, you chose to lie to them, at the behest of the Socialist, Communist, and Green Party leaders Hollande, Hue, and Mamere. You brought your minuscule support for a Chirac vote by presenting it, despite your denials, as a roadblock to Le Pen.
You will understand that in these conditions we will not respond to your proposals which would imply at least a certain political agreement. And we do not wish to endorse an attitude as opportunist as yours.
As for your allies, for the agreement is supposed to extend to others than yourselves, let’s not even speak about them. You are not even sure of being able to convince them to participate in an agreement between the LCR and LO.
There is therefore no question of making out that our respective politics are neighbours while they are opposed.
While posing as activists for far left unity, against what you call Lutte Ouvrière’s "sectarianism" - a word you haven’t stopped repeating during the campaign, which in the context created by the calumnies against us, struck a particular chord - your proposal was in any case hypocritical.
Indeed, in numerous places representatives - including central representative of your organisation - have already designated the LCR candidates for the legislative elections. In some cases candidates have been announced in every constituency in a department, while you were talking to us about dividing up departments between us.
What credibility can we give a proposal for dividing up, when all the evidence shows that you have begun to choose?
Therefore each of us must defend their own politics and then the meaning of the votes will be clear!
With our revolutionary greetings.
Georges Kaldy and Francois Duburg"