With only days to go before the first round of the snap legislative elections called by President Emmanuel Macron, French politics remains as dramatically volatile as at any moment since the massive protests of 1968. A hung parliament, with the extreme Right National Rally holding the most seats but falling short of a majority, currently appears to be the most likely outcome of the législatives. But any number of scenarios are still possible, including some very dire ones.
Why such turmoil? While French economic growth has been sluggish since the pandemic, the country is not in recession, inflation has receded and unemployment has dropped since Macron took office. France has not experienced a major terrorist attack in recent years and faces no immediate international crises. Is this simply another example of grumpiness on the part of a people who, as the writer Sylvain Tesson put it, “live in paradise but think they’re in hell”?
The explanation is more complicated. Much of it, of course, goes beyond France itself, and relates to the global wave of populist discontent that first crested with Brexit and Donald Trump’s 2016 victory. In country after country, large numbers of voters, predominantly older, predominantly from outside major cities, feel abandoned and disrespected by their national elites, unprotected from what they perceive as gale-force economic and cultural change (exemplified above all by migration), and receptive to populist leaders such as the National Rally’s Marine Le Pen, who promise to bring back eras of past national stability and greatness. Anxieties prompted by the pandemic and war, the lingering pain of post-pandemic inflation and the outrage-intensifying effects of social media have all reinforced the trend.
But another part of the explanation comes from deep in French history. Since the Revolution of 1789, France’s political culture has been marked by an inordinate distrust of faction that has, again and again, crippled the development of a stable party system. In the United States, where the party system is paralytically stable, populist extremism could only succeed by capturing one of the two dominant parties. In France, Macron himself toppled the weak system that had prevailed for much of the history of the Fifth Republic, opening a breach through which Le Pen’s National Rally now threatens to sweep.
The birth of French democracy in the Revolution was marked by ideological strife accompanied by tragic, large-scale violence. But that very experience generated a desperate desire on the part of successive governments to transcend faction and restore national unity. Despite the country’s reputation for ideological passion, since 1789, genuine radicals have only held power for relatively short periods, such as during the Reign of Terror and Vichy. Otherwise, nearly all France’s regimes — republican, royal, and Bonapartist — have at least paid lip service to the idea of national cohesion. The historian Pierre Serna has gone so far as to characterise post-revolutionary French politics as a repeated return to what he calls the “extreme centre”. As often as not, this has been a politics focused less on ideology than on personality, from Napoleon and Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte to Charles de Gaulle.
When the Fourth Republic collapsed in 1958 amid the strife of the Algerian War, the new constitution put in place by and for de Gaulle included a powerful presidency that would, in theory, stand at a remove from partisan politics and serve as a focus of unity. De Gaulle reluctantly conceded that in order to campaign for the presidency and secure support in parliament, he could not do without a party of his own, but that party accommodated different ideological strains, and went through many incarnations, as shown by its comically frequent name changes (Union for the New Republic, Union of Democrats for the Republic, Rally for the Republic, Union for a Popular Movement, The Republicans).
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThe “extreme right” National Rally? Hmm … perhaps you mean the “super extreme hard far right” National Rally? 😉
You see the issue. By using words too big for your subject, you quickly lose credibility (and run out of words). Then what will you do to describe something that truly needs describing? Like the boy who cried “Wolf!” at shadows, he had no bigger words left, when the real wolves came …..
In the modern world where there are so many articles to consume, you need good filters to avoid wasting your time. Any early use of the term “hard right” or similar just nudges me to read something else. It’s a shame that this will sometimes lead to missing out on an otherwise decent article.
Yep; he describes at length how the RN has been thoroughly modernised and cleansed of extremist elements but his description of it goes in the opposite direction.
Has Macronism become anachronism?
Silly article apparently blissfully unaware of its own internal contradictions.
with the extreme Right National Rally holding the most seats but falling short of a majority,
Is this sort of thing a requirement for getting pieces past the gatekeepers?
‘populist extremism’ means reducing gross immigration from one million per year to 500, 000 per year?
The author is mistaken if he thinks that voting for Brexit was about “restoring greatness” to the national polity – that, in fact, is a very typical Remainer trope.
I can’t speak for Trump voters, but what those who voted for Brexit were concerned with was competence and self-determination. We absolutely weren’t looking to “make Great Britain great again”.
I lived in France for 20 years and raised kids there and return often This analysis of French discontent is inadequate. Here’s my take: You cant fool all the people all the time. French people know that the system is set up to benefit corporate interests and a small class of elite and that everyone else is the worker drones bought off with paid vac ations and decent healthcare. But that is not enough to make life meaningful. Human beings want to be part of a larger national project that promotes human flourishing.
Not mentioned is how the covid crisis and the government response ( all over the world) profoundly undermined people’s trust. Your average person does not read Lancet, or the Great Barrington Declaration, or follow the Fauci lab leak story. But they know something was off. They know that very none of their family and friends died of this deadly pandemic, or if someone did, they were already old and ill. People know that they got the jab and then got covid 5 weeks later. They know people who had weird, sometimes bad, side effects from the jab.
People know that the media would not talk about any of the above. Now add in the war in Ukraine. Add in immigration, immigration into a country with unemployment and an expensive safety net. In our small city in France, we see 60 year old African women who have just immigrated. How will they ever find work? How much will their healthcare cost France? We see families with young children, France has to educate those children.
There are many reasons and there is one big one. People don’t trust the elites, the experts, the journalists, the politicians anymore.
Emmanuel Todd defines the National Rally as a conservative populism rather than a neofascist or extreme nationalism. I think he is right. It does not make this party more sensible.
« Arrogance » : for sure. « Aloofness » : if only he could have remained « aloof » !
As you mentioned, de Gaulle, in spite of his reluctance, created a party to recast the Republic according to his view. His personal prestige was a mean to achieve his «magnum opus », not his aim. He managed to get the approval of the major part of the people and the total support of his party. Instead Macron hadn’t any sustainable ambition for the country, hence he has failed to create a movement to support his lack of plan. As a narcissistic young star, he pretended to be a gaullian president, without any personal fame or long-wide vision or cheering support in the public witnessing the play. As a gambler, he thought Left parties could not unite against him and would let him lead the struggle against the National Rally. He lost. Will he leave the game ? Nobody can tell.
Anyhow, big mess is coming over.
The writer’s bombastic disapproval of the global political scene (“large numbers of voters, predominantly older, predominantly from outside major cities” … “unprotected from what they perceive as gale-force economic and cultural change (exemplified above all by migration))” is what one expects from the progressive professoriate. It throws into question his seemingly insider slant about what’s going on in France. Too much time in the library stacks, not enough shoe leather.