The world is captivated by a stunning robbery at the Louvre, the world’s most famous art museum, which took place in broad daylight on Sunday morning. While visitors lined up to enter, thieves were making their escape from another wing after a seven-minute heist targeting the crown jewels. The scene could have been lifted straight from a Hollywood film or an episode of the French thriller series Lupin.
Yet, as shocking as this theft is for France, it mirrors another incredible heist the country has just experienced. Over the course of a week, the French public was led to believe they were getting a new government, only to end up right back where they started—a political drama that feels like a real-life Groundhog Day, with the Louvre theft serving as a fitting symbol.
Here’s what happened: Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu resigned on October 6, less than a month into his term, when it became clear he couldn’t secure support from the National Assembly for his budget. His resignation brought down the shortest-lived government in the history of France’s Fifth Republic. But just 48 hours after declaring his mission as prime minister “over,” Lecornu was reinstated by President Emmanuel Macron, who tasked him with the same job he had just failed to complete.
For the next week, the country was shaken by unprecedented political turmoil, yet we ended up exactly where we began—duped into thinking we had a new government.
This deception traces back to Macron’s risky decision to call a snap election in 2024, after the far right made historic gains in European elections. His “back me or sack me” challenge backfired, resulting in a hung parliament where no one could command a majority. Macron could no longer impose his policies on lawmakers, but he has never accepted that outcome. He has repeatedly refused to appoint a prime minister from the left coalition, which won the most votes, and stubbornly continues trying to form a government aligned with his own views—despite their rejection at the polls. Each attempt has failed, with prime ministers falling one after another.
Lecornu’s reappointment—he is one of Macron’s most loyal allies—means we now have two successive governments that are nearly identical. Many of the “new” ministers are Macron supporters, while others come from the right-wing Les Républicains party, which won only 6.2% in the last legislative elections.
We are now at the mercy of a president long used to dictating policy to a compliant parliamentary majority. His party is on political life support but has made a desperate grab for power with the unlikely backing of a left-wing party. The Socialist Party, which was part of the left coalition that fiercely opposed Macron in 2024, has now struck a deal with the government. They came to the table with high demands, including a “Zucman tax” on the super-rich and the repeal of Macron’s pension reform. In the end, the mere promise to suspend the deeply unpopular pension changes—with no real guarantee—was enough to secure their commitment not to block the entire budget.
The Socialists are celebrating the suspension of the hated pension reform. But according to economist Michaël Zemmour, this is just a delay in the implementation schedule. The retirement age remains at 64, and while a few generations may benefit, there is no structural reconsideration of the reform itself.
It’s also important to note that austerity-driven budget cuts have already caused real harm: in June, the Louvre…Workers went on strike and blocked the museum entrance, protesting staff cuts and inadequate security resources. Yet, instead of defending their constituents, Socialist leaders are allowing Macron to prolong his failing reform agenda.
Last week, I was on a TV panel discussing the new government’s formation. I expressed my frustration that we were in the exact same situation as the previous Monday, only now with the feeling that politicians were manipulating our perception of reality. Another panelist cut in to claim there had been “some progress” and that we needed to “explain it to the audience.”
What is there to explain? People can see and judge for themselves. To me, this response highlights the gap between France’s political commentators, who seem to relish the political game, and ordinary citizens, who are left as mere spectators of a pitiful show that only deepens their everyday struggles.
When Lecornu was appointed, he promised “a major break, both in substance and style”—only to unveil a government with many of the same people and no change in political course. And now we have a prime minister who announced on live TV that he was quitting—only to return to the role. How can French voters trust politicians like these?
Macron’s authoritarian tendencies—and the overwhelming power of the executive branch under France’s Fifth Republic—have long been justified in the name of political stability. This reasoning has been used to support an increasingly hyper-presidential system that now stands as a real barrier to the people’s will.
No wonder French voters feel robbed twice over—left questioning twice in one month who is truly in charge and whether the system can safeguard what matters most to us.
Frequently Asked Questions
Of course Here is a list of FAQs based on the provided statement designed to be clear concise and natural
General Beginner Questions
1 What is The Louvre raid being referred to
This refers to a famous reallife art theft in 1911 when Leonardo da Vincis painting the Mona Lisa was stolen from the Louvre Museum in Paris It was a shocking and bold crime
2 What does the phrase pales in comparison mean
It means that the Louvre raid while dramatic seems much less significant or impressive when compared to the political action taken by Frances leaders
3 So what is this new political maneuver thats bigger than the Louvre raid
The statement doesnt specify the exact event as its likely referring to a recent major political decision in France This could be a significant policy shift a controversial law a diplomatic move or a major reform that has widereaching consequences
4 Why is a political move considered bolder than an actual art heist
While a heist is a physical criminal act a bold political maneuver can change the lives of millions of people alter international relationships and reshape a countrys future Its impact is often far greater than the theft of a single object no matter how priceless
Advanced Analytical Questions
5 How can the impact of a political decision be compared to a famous historical theft
The comparison is a rhetorical device to highlight the scale and audacity of the political action It suggests that while the theft was a dramatic event that captured public attention the political move is of a different magnitudeone that will have deeper more lasting consequences for the nation
6 What kind of political maneuvers in France would warrant such a dramatic comparison
Examples could include a surprise decision to leave a major international alliance a radical overhaul of the pension or tax system invoking emergency powers or a fundamental shift in foreign policy that realigns the countrys global stance
7 What is the implication of saying the raid pales in comparison
The implication is that the political leaders have executed a plan that is riskier more strategically complex and will likely be more historically significant than one of the most infamous art thefts in history It frames the political action as the true heist of the century
