When freedom forgets the rule,

By Louis Perez y Cid
From Plato to urban looting, a reflection on authority, responsibility, and the future of our Republic.

More than two thousand years ago, Plato was already questioning the potential pitfalls of human societies. In The Republic, he described a democracy that, by pushing the rejection of all authority to its extreme, risks paving the way for tyranny.

This ancient reflection, in light of the scenes of looting, destruction, and violence recently witnessed in several French cities, could find a disturbing resonance in our current situation.

Was Plato writing for our time? Certainly not. But his questions could invite us to look at our society with greater clarity.

A warning attributed to Plato
Here is a commonly cited French adaptation, inspired by Book VIII of The Republic
.
“When fathers become accustomed to letting their children do as they please,
when sons no longer heed their words,
when teachers tremble before their students and prefer to flatter them,
when, finally, young people despise the laws because they no longer recognize any authority above them, then, in all its beauty and youth, this is the beginning of tyranny.”

— Passage commonly attributed to Plato, The Republic, Book VIII.

This widely circulated formulation is an adaptation of the ancient text and not a universally accepted literal translation. Plato is questioning how the rejection of all authority and an excess of freedom could, according to his analysis, contribute to the transformation of democracy into tyranny. He doesn't exactly say that dictatorship “returns,” but that tyranny could arise from such a process.

When Rules Are No Longer Respected
What would we think of a society in which some young people no longer recognize any authority, where the word of parents and teachers loses its weight, and where common rules are considered constraints from which everyone can free themselves?

Looting, vandalism, and urban violence, when they occur, go beyond the bounds of legitimate protest. Demonstrating and expressing disagreement are fundamental freedoms. Destroying, looting, and assaulting are not. Equating these behaviors would weaken the freedoms that our Republic guarantees to all.

This is not to say that our country has definitively descended into such a situation, but to question the risks of a society that gradually tolerates contempt for the law.

Freedom without responsibility?

If impunity were to take root and citizens were to lose faith in the state's ability to protect them, distrust of institutions could grow. Some might even be tempted to demand increasingly authoritarian responses.

This is where Plato's reflection would become truly relevant. A society that could no longer reconcile freedom, responsibility, and authority could end up demanding, in fear and anger, measures that threaten its own liberties.

Tyranny would not be inevitable. But relinquishing legitimate authority, just like abandoning democratic principles in the name of urgency, could weaken the republican balance.

Authority is not arbitrariness.
For former legionnaires, discipline, cohesion, and a sense of duty are not empty words. Experience teaches them that no community can function sustainably without common rules and respect for its mission.

But authority is not arbitrariness, just as firmness does not mean abandoning the rule of law. Law enforcement must be able to carry out its missions within the legal framework, perpetrators of violence must be held accountable before the law, and victims must be protected.

The response cannot be solely repressive. It also involves education, the transmission of civic values, and a reminder of the responsibilities that accompany every right. Learning to challenge without destroying, to oppose without attacking, to defend one's convictions without denying those of others—this is a crucial challenge for future generations. However, it would be unfair to conflate a minority of violent individuals with an entire generation of young people.

Preserving our republican heritage
Our country does not have to choose between liberty and order, justice and firmness, authority and democracy. It must find the balance that allows these principles to mutually reinforce each other.

Former legionnaires know that serving is not just about defending territory, but also about preserving the values ​​that give meaning to this commitment. This responsibility can be extended today through the transmission of experience, civic duty, and the defense of republican institutions.

Plato might invite us to ask ourselves this question: What would become of a democracy if no one deemed it necessary to respect the rules that make freedom possible?

Dictatorship would be neither inevitable nor an automatic consequence of current unrest. But history would teach us one thing: a nation that renounces passing on its principles and enforcing its laws risks jeopardizing the future of its own freedoms.

France was built on a legacy of duty, courage, and liberty. The Republic is neither the absence of rules nor the rule of force. It is the demanding balance between the rights of each individual and the duties of all.

For those who have served under its banner, this legacy cannot be a mere memory. It is a responsibility: that of passing on to future generations a France faithful to its values, respectful of its laws, and aware of its debt to its history.

Because freedom is a right. Defending it, passing it on and preserving it is a duty.