For a week now, democrats around the world have been celebrating France’s immense victory. Democracy succeeded in preventing the extremist National Rally party from obtaining a parliamentary majority, even denying it first and second place. Strikingly, however, many of those who are now praising this democracy and its achievement were, just a few days ago, mourning parliamentary democracy and its political model, arguing that it lays the groundwork for fascism, or even claiming that it is fascism in disguise.
A clear majority of the French people said, at least for the foreseeable future, that right-wing populism has been set back and that Europeanism is not in question, while discriminating among citizens based on their origins is a step back-ward they refuse to take. This has happened despite France’s poor economic conditions, which have been accompanied by a resurgence of old political and identitarian values that neo-fascism builds its literature and prejudices on.
Even if the snake sheds its skin- and Marine Le Pen replaces her father or chooses the young Jordan Bardella to represent her- the National Rally remains, as a statement written by some French historians put it: ‘’the successor and heir of the National Front, founded in 1972 by people nostalgic for Vichy and French Algeria. It inherited its program, its obsessions and its personnel. It is deeply rooted in the history of the French far right, shaped by xenophobic and racist nationalism, antisemitism, violence and contempt for parliamentary democracy... This party does not represent the conservative or national right but poses the greatest threat to the republic and democracy.”
And if Britain, which is grappling with its own economic problems, has chosen the Labor Party, prominent European countries like Spain continue to ward off the assault of the far-right. Meanwhile, also in Europe, Poland has pushed the far-right out of power, and the same is true for a giant outside the continent, Brazil...
While the emergence of the "New Popular Front," which was named after the "Popular Front" coalition of 1936, contributed to ensuring the defeat of the far-right in France, another crucial factor was the stance of Macron’s centrist coalition “Ensemble,” which coordinated with left-wing parties in the second round of these elections to prevent a far-right victory. In this sense the far-right’s defeat also debunked the theory that "fascism is back," which was premised on France’s position on the Gaza war, validating an allocation of responsibilities based on sensible priorities and a broader perspective. Moreover, it poured cold water on another theory, that the "bourgeoisie"- when weary or confused- aligns with fascism and allows them to reach power and assign them "crushing the popular movement." In reality, when push came to shove, the Macronists chose to coordinate and come to an understanding with the left-wing parties. If they had not done so, we would not have seen this remarkable outcome.
However, celebrating the election results does not lead us to paint a rosy picture of the future. Economic conditions, amid diminishing resources, remain unchanged; and the same is true for the foundations of political stability, including the difficulties impeding the formation of a new government. More importantly, as several observers have warned, the far-right has grown, and the RN now has more seats in parliament than any other individual political party, though the same cannot be said if measured by coalitions.
All of this suggests that obtaining relative political stability is the only way to keep the far-right, both now and in the future, far from power. To this end, several actors must ensure that a few conditions are met.
For its part, Macron’s camp will need to temper its neoliberal economic policies, especially its taxation policy and how costs have been distributed during its time in power. Additionally, the Macronists should refrain from borrowing from the far-right's discourse under the pretext of stripping them of their discourse, as experience shows that doing so only brings this discourse to the forefront of mainstream political debate. "His Excellency the President" must also restrain his conceit, which has reached near-Bonapartist levels fueled by the self-importance he feels because he had not risen to power through a particular ideology or historical party.
On the other side of the spectrum, having the France Unbowed party playing any kind of prominent role would help neither the effort to ensure stability nor the push to build on this democratic consensus to impede the far-right’s rise. Extreme programs, with their impatience and recklessness, lead to public spending rises the economy cannot bear, and they lead to an exodus of investors and businesspeople from France. This is compounded by France Unbowed’s extreme positions on Europe, Russia, and the United States, to say nothing about growing criticism of its anti-Semitism, which cannot be justified by its just criticism of Israel.
Since the National Rally has managed to turn immigration into the key driver of its rise, and has continued to do so successfully, the role of immigrants and those of Muslim origin must be considered. There are no avoiding reassessments that close the door to hate speech and disarm the arguments of the racists who blame immigrants for general crises and their costs. How can a democratic consciousness focused on tangible everyday issues replace a tense and external consciousness? How can a culture of loudly condemning terrorists of “our own flesh and blood” be developed? How can we mainstream a perception of diversity that sees it as the crystallization of common ground rather than a rupture with everything that brings us together? These pressing questions are posed by such struggles, which are haunted by an array of worrying potential outcomes.
