The gilets jaunes, a group of French protesters named after their iconic yellow vests donned during demonstrations, have formed a new type of social movement. Although historical parallels have been drawn by commentators – ranging from the peasant revolts of pre-revolutionary France (the jacqueries), the French Revolution, the Paris Commune of 1871, the workers’ movements of 1936 or 1947–48, to the évènements [events] of 1968 – no comparison entirely corresponds to the movement and its consequences. It is a sui generis movement rather than a repetition of a previous upheaval. The gilets jaunes are not quite a revolution as they do not seek to take over the functioning of the state, not quite akin to the student revolt of 1968 relived half a century later, not a workers’ movement organized through trades unions and workers’ representation, and not an attempt to establish a communist utopia. If anything, the movement has claimed to be apolitical and breaks away from the betterorganized and more engaged movements of the past. It has no links with existing political parties and has resisted attempts by politicians to join or co-opt the movement. The ‘apolitical’ claim of many in the movement is more a reaction to politicians’ attempts to jump on the bandwagon than a statement about the movement's aspirations, which are inherently engaged and demanding. I will show that the movement is non-partisan rather than apolitical –it makes many political claims, although it is true that it has not been attached to any political party and that it does not fit neatly on the left/right political spectrum. A popular movement at its heart (it encompassed all layers of French society at some level, including in overseas territories), it has challenged the foundations of political order in a country that prides itself on its revolutionary past, on its resistance to authoritarian political authority, and on its proclamation of human rights. Scenes of violence, by protesters and police, have rocked the liberal consensus that the post-Cold War state has reached its final form and that the end of history has arrived, as Francis Fukuyama (1992) once claimed – with only twists and tweaks needed to reform political organization. It also challenges the claim that future conflicts will be between clashing civilizations, as Huntington (1996) had argued, as the movement is clearly a French phenomenon with few links outside of the hexagon.