The significance of the French presidential elections

From La Riposte, French Marxist website

Editorial note: This article, on the first round of the French presidential election, is taken from the French Marxist website, La Riposte. But although it has been dated by Macron’s subsequent victory in the second round, it contains analyses and arguments that still apply after the second round…

The results of the first round of the presidential election reveal a significant change in relations between social classes in France.  One of its most striking aspects of the first round is the collapse of the Socialist Party (PS). For decades, starting with the about-face carried out by the Socialist-Communist government of 1981-84, the leadership of the Socialist Party cynically betrayed the aspirations it claimed to embody.

And yet, for a long time it may have appeared to be the only realistic alternative to the right.  It was by playing this card that Francois Hollande won the 2012 presidential election, but he only continued the work of his conservative predecessor, Sarkozy, following a policy of social regression, in the exclusive interest of the capitalist class.  Anne Hidalgo, this year’s PS candidate, thought she would do the same thing, but the game is over.

Its calamitous score of 1.74% confirms the decline of the Socialist Party as a leading electoral force. This is a salutary event which, from the point of view of the left is a huge step forward, because the “right-wing reformism” of the PS is totally discredited. It has given way to the radical reformism of the France Insoumise, of Jean-Luc Mélenchon, which is undoubtedly becoming the left force with the most important social reserve.

Failure of the traditional right-wing parties

The other highlight of the first election was the failure of the right-wing party which for decades and despite successive changes of name (RPR, UMP, LR) has been the main political arm of the French capitalist class. It has been eliminated.  Its place has been taken by Le Pen’s National Rally, formerly the National Front, despite the fact that its political orientations risk harming capitalist interests, just like those of Trump in the United States or Boris Johnson in the United Kingdom. The capitalist masters must now deal with new watchdogs, carried by populist demagogy, who do not necessarily obey all their commands.

So let’s look at the whole process. The “classical” right and the Socialist Party, which by taking turns in power for an entire era brought a certain stability to the social order and the state institutions of capitalism, are collapsing. France Insoumise, which although inadequately (with an “anti-capitalist” program that does not touch the foundations of the system) emerges vigorously on the left, while an uncontrolled nationalist capitalist party emerges on the right. In between is an unstable political construct around Macron. Already weakened and discredited, “Macronism” would probably not survive the test of a new mandate. It is in danger of collapsing in its turn, too.

Marine Le Pen’s vote testifies to the radicalization of political opinion. By integrating into her policies some themes from the left, Le Pen is exploiting aspirations for a transformation of society. Like Macron, who pretends to review some aspects of his reactionary platform, she can see which way the wind is blowing. But if Le Pen ever wins an election, hers would be a crisis presidency from day one, it would be a ‘victory’ that could well provoke a popular revolt of revolutionary proportions. If the [French business organisation] MEDEF prefers Macron, it is for the same reason.

Le Pen dropped key policies, like leaving the EU

The history of Le Pen’s National Rally links it to the fascist movements of the 1930s and far-right groups that formed after the Second World War.  But its leaders, and Le Pen in particular, have had to give guarantees of “good governance” to the ruling class. For example, it has modified its program on key points such as dropping the idea of leaving the European Union.

The parallel with the fascist parties, especially the Nazi Party, invariably comes up in discussions, but the rise of fascism in Germany took place in a very different context from that which currently exists in France.  Defeated in 1918, the German economy was in ruins. The sense of national humiliation and the failure of two revolutionary uprisings (1918 and 1923) allowed Nazism to develop a broad social base and build up a paramilitary force.  Key to the implementation of the program of fascism, was the total destruction of the organizations of the workers’ movement: political parties, trade unions, press, etc, and in that sense, fascism is the program of civil war. Le Pen’s program is a long way from that.

In the context of major economic instability, the political representatives of the French ruling class will have to combine repression with division. Macron will evolve even more strongly in this direction than he did during his first five-year term.  It was his Minister of the Interior who considered Le Pen “too soft”.  It was his government that introduced the law against ‘separatism’, fuelling xenophobia against people of the Muslim faith. It was under his mandate that we experienced the strongest police repression in decades, directed in particular against the gilets jaunes. In practice, the policy of Macron’s party, La République en Marche, is not very far from that of Le Pen’s National Rally.

Polarisation is a symptom of permanent social crisis

The ongoing political polarization is a symptom of a deep and – on the basis of capitalism – permanent and irremediable social crisis, as is the massive abstention rate, which indicates a lack of trust, hostility, even a hatred of the established order on the part of a large and growing fraction of the population.

It is not a question of passivity, but of an awareness that the entire current system operates to the advantage of the powerful and tramples on the people, and that no solution will emerge from the ballot box.  It is an idea that is profoundly correct. 

This “grey” or “indifferent” mass will soon rise – with its own methods and   goals. It will have no other choice. It is just waiting for the right time. The   most astute representatives of the capitalist order understand this well; it is not for nothing that the means of intelligence, surveillance, control and repression are in full development.

The result of the first round means that the left is no longer in the race for the presidency. Mélenchon narrowly lost, but he lost all the same. In the second round, two enemy parties will fight each other.  To call for a vote for Macron is to make a concession to Macron. It feeds the illusion that it can be a bulwark against the far right. We must tirelessly explain that we can never trust a representative of capitalism. Low participation would weaken the winner. 

Inflation eating away at workers’ meagre incomes

But instead of focusing our attention on the outcome of this macabre duel, let us prepare the extra-parliamentary struggle – in the streets, in businesses and in working-class neighbourhoods. Moreover, the social situation will become increasingly explosive as inflation eats away at the value of the meagre incomes of workers, pensioners and the unemployed.

The repercussions of the Russo-Ukrainian war are likely to cause a recession in virtually all European countries, including France.  Whether under Le Pen or Macron, racism and authoritarianism will be key levers of government policy. We cannot support either Le Pen or Macron.   Both defend a reactionary policy. The winner will immediately go on the offensive against the workers.  All our attention must now turn to the preparation of a mass struggle against the new executive, whatever it may be.