How Working People of France Stopped Neo-Fascism

France has had a glorious revolutionary history of the Left beginning with the French Revolution of the 18th century, the Paris Commune in 1870, the anti-fascist Popular Front of the 1930s, the anti-fascist resistance against Nazi German occupation in the 1940s and the May 1968 people’s movement.

In the snap parliamentary elections triggered by French President Emmanuel Macron, the New Popular Front (NPF), drawing on the revolutionary legacy of the Left in France, has organised the defeat of the neo-fascist National Rally (who are the contemporary heirs of the Nazi collaborators of Vichy France of the 1940s). Therefore, the attainment of neo-fascist hegemony over the neo-liberal project has been halted. How did this happen?

Before turning to the 2024 French parliamentary election process let us examine its political economy context. The crisis of neoliberalism arises from a fundamental feature of the capitalist system i.e. it is incapable of ensuring an economic trajectory with high and stable employment and low and stable inflation.

It is arguable that historically there have been three distinct phases of the capitalist system, namely, the colonial phase, the dirigiste phase after 1945 and the neoliberal phase since the 1970s.

To begin with, in the colonial phase, the capitalist metropolis was able to attain relatively high and stable employment and relatively low and stable inflation, during which nation-state based finance capital emerged to dominance since the 1870s, because of the multifaceted exploitation and oppression of colonies which underwent the most extensive genocide in history.

Next, in the dirigiste phase since 1945, the capitalist metropolis was able to attain high employment through extensive deployment of Keynesian policies (involving among other things counter-cyclical fiscal policy, regulated migration from the periphery to the metropolis, imperialist hegemony of the US, transient disciplining of finance and the concessions that the capitalists were compelled to make toward the workers principally due to the existence of the socialist system), but this ended in the high inflation of the 1970s.

Finally, neoliberalism since the 1970s, involved a capitalist solution to the problem of high inflation by policy-induced generation of unemployment and precarious employment that was proximately induced by the emergence of international finance capital that was centred in the US, whose imperialist hegemony was reinforced since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. While neoliberalism is also the mythology of the current phase of the capitalist system, this integument is but one component in the neoliberal project.

However, this policy-induced generation of unemployment and precarious employment cannot be even transiently sustained politically unless this process involves the segmentation of the working people.

In the capitalist metropolis (including in France) and elsewhere, this segmentation involved the strengthening of racist cleavages between white (European origin) and immigrant communities (which in France is predominantly but not exclusively of African origin) at the behest of international finance capital which coalesces to a varying extent with domestic monopoly capitalists of different countries. This provides the material basis of the emergence of the neo-fascist tendency. As the crisis of the neoliberal phase of the capitalist system is furthered, this neo-fascist tendency crystallises into a potent force that functions as a bulwark of capital in the quest to thwart any revolutionary challenge to the crisis of neoliberalism.

Centrist political parties (Ensemble), in France too, (who ostensibly espouse their bond to a non-existent “inclusive” neoliberalism) do not let go off any political manoeuvre to further undermine the already decaying welfare state. Let us briefly examine some relevant trends.

The worsening of macro-economic conditions in France within the rubric of the neoliberal project can be captured through the examination of some relevant indicators. Figure 1 shows the annual forecast of growth rate of real gross domestic product (GDP) in France and other OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries for the year 2025 quarter 4, which is very low at 1.5%, and less than the OECD average, of 2.0%.

 Figure 2 also reflects lower nominal GDP growth forecast in France for 2025 quarter 4 at 3.3%, lower than OECD 5.0%. This implies that inflation rate forecast at 2.8% in France and 3% in OECD.

Figures 3 and 4 show the extent of the unemployment crisis in France when compared to other OECD countries. The unemployment rate is at 7.8%, which is higher than the OECD rate, which is 5.0%. The unemployment crisis has disproportionately impacted the youth in France where the youth unemployment rate for those between 15-24 years old is 17.9%. This high figure is also higher than the OECD’s respective average youth unemployment rates 10.8%.

Given France’s relatively higher unemployment rate (with its negative effects on wages), household income and savings too are low resulting in household debt crisis. The ratio of household debt to net disposable income is very high in France at 127.2%.

Under the rubric of the neoliberal project which generates a persistent trend toward overproduction, fixed capital formation tends to atrophy. The forecast for annual growth rate of gross fixed capital formation in France, shown in Figure 6, is merely 1.4% in 2025 Q4 while the average for OECD is 3.1%.

The crisis in French unemployment is organically interrelated with a lower forecast for annual growth rate of domestic expenditure at 1.6% for the 2025 Q4, which is once again lower than the OECD average, which is 2.1% as shown in Figure 7.

As French industry atrophied during the neoliberal period, France has faced balance of payments problems. The ratio of the forecast for current account balance to the forecast for GDP for 2025 Q4, is as shown in Figure 8 while the OECD average is 0%.

 These macro-economic trends are reflected in higher economic inequality which as we argued previously is a necessary consequence of neoliberalism. In France, the Gini coefficient which is one measure of inequality stands at a fairly high 0.3 as shown in Figure 9.

Unsurprisingly, the neoliberal cocktail of unemployment, economic inequality and high debt is associated with lower public spending in the social sector including education. As shown in Figure 10. The ratio of public spending in education to GDP was 3.5%. This is lower than what is the case in the Scandinavian countries such as Norway where this ratio is 4.7 .

 As we argued previously, the neoliberal project seeks to squeeze the workers’ share in income (by increasing unemployment and precarious employment) in order to stabilise inflation which also results in an increase in the share of surplus in income. Tax policies in France are working to achieve this objective as shown in the abysmal levels of the ratio of corporate tax on profits to GDP in France in Figure 11. However, this is the case in other countries too to a greater or lesser extent.

Source: This figure is constructed by the authors using data of the OECD outlook

While the ratio of tax on corporate tax to GDP in France is 2.9, the ratio of tax on personal income to GDP is 10% (shown in Figure 12) which is in line with the neoliberal project. But this gap between the two ratios is France is adverse even with respect to other OECD countries.

In order to try and continue their undermining of the welfare state (thereby weakening the bargaining power of the working people of France) which we have synoptically surveyed previously, Ensemble has adopted a twin strategy. First, Ensemble has stirred up the neo-fascist forces (National Rally) by “main-streaming” their racism (centred on Islamophobia) resulting in segmenting of the working people and consequently their political disarming. On its part, the National Rally as it “matures” has explicitly sought to position itself on the right side of the ensemble of international finance and French monopoly capitalists by an explicit and implicit changes in policy proposals.

Second, Ensemble has sought to establish a false equivalence between the neo-fascist National Rally (by labelling them as extreme right) while baselessly claiming that the France Unbowed as an extreme Left party. Ensemble then seeks to position itself as a moderate force that lies between two the “extremes”. This two-pronged strategy of Ensemble has evolved in a manner that is attuned to the institutions of France’s fifth republic. Let’s see how.

France has a two-stage ‘first past the post’ parliamentary election system. In the first round, all those candidates are declared elected who satisfy two conditions: first, they secure more than 50% vote in a constituency; second, the constituency’s voter turnout exceeds 50%. Those candidates in the first round who can't satisfy both criteria will have to face a second round. But only those candidates who secured 12.5% or more votes (but less than 50% votes) in a constituency in the first round are eligible to contest in the second round in each constituency. That candidate who has the highest vote share in the second round is declared as elected in each constituency.

This two-stage system was fashioned when the Fifth Republic was established with the ascent to power of Charles de Gaulle in 1958. The aim of this system, which replaced the party-based proportional voting system, was to reduce the representation of the Communist Party of France in Parliament by aggregating the votes of non-communist parties behind the strongest rival to the communists in each seat. As a result, the Communist Party of France, which had 150 out of 595 parliamentary seats with 25% votes in 1956, was reduced to 10 seats out of 595 in 1958 even though it secured 20% votes.

There is an informal but robust political tradition of a Republican Front, that principally emerged due to the decades long political-organisational struggles of the Left against fascism, whereby all non-fascist parties withdraw their respective (second round eligible) third place or lower placed candidates from each constituency so that the remaining non-fascist candidate in each constituency has the best possible opportunity to defeat the fascist candidate in that constituency in the second round. In other words, what originated as an anti-communist political manoeuvre was ironically deployed to try and combat fascism (however incompletely due to the connivance of Macron with the fascist forces).

Macron reacted to the neo-fascist National Rally coming first in European Parliamentary elections (and Ensemble’s setback due to Macron’s aforementioned twin strategy to further the neoliberal project) earlier in 2024, by dissolving the French Parliament and calling for early elections.

Macron's electoral calculations assumed that Ensemble will stand first or second in most constituencies in the first round even if the National Rally stood first in many seats and therefore will become the main opponent to the National Rally in most constituencies.

As per the Republican Front tradition, Macron expected the various Left parties to withdraw their candidates (who Macron assumed would be third or lower in the first round) from most constituencies. Therefore, Macron seems to have surmised that Ensemble will get a parliamentary majority in the second round due to the adherence of the Left to the Republican Front tradition.

But Macron's cynical ploy (to try and ensure that Ensemble remains at the helm of the neoliberal project in France) was thwarted by the formation of the four party New Popular Front (NPF) of the Left (drawing on the anti-fascist legacy of the Popular Front of the 1930s in France) consisting of the France Unbowed Party, the Socialist Party, the Ecologists Party and the Communist Party of France.

The NPF then put forward a political programme that constituted a significant (but not a complete) break with the neoliberal project. This was followed by a vigorous round of political-organisational mobilisation by the NPF, in the first round of the parliamentary elections, to both combat the neo-fascist National Rally and expose the anti-people governance record and duplicity of the Ensemble.

The NPF in the first round stood first or second in significantly more constituencies than the Ensemble. In terms of vote share in the first round, the National Rally stood first (with 33.15%), the NPF came second (with 27.99) while Ensemble was third (with 20.04%).

Now, as per the anti-fascist Republican Front tradition, Ensemble should have withdrawn all its third placed (and lower placed) candidates from those constituencies (without an outright winner in the first round) before the second round of the vote. While the NPF withdrew most of its third or lower placed candidates of the first round in various constituencies, the Ensemble did not do so to the same extent. In fact, they did not withdraw their third or lower placed candidates from most seats where the France Unbowed was first or second. Ensemble did so because it sought to reiterate its attempt to establish a false equivalence between the neo-fascist National Rally and the ostensibly extreme Left France Unbowed Party. The Ensemble did this firstly because they were worried that the NPF could otherwise achieve a parliamentary majority on its own.

In other words, the Ensemble’s partial betrayal did not lead to any increase in its seats but it reduced the seats of the NPF, especially of the France Unbowed Party. Further, Ensemble sought to keep alive the possibility of driving a wedge between the different components of the NPF. In spite of the political shenanigans of Ensemble, NPF displayed a deep political maturity by remaining united in the vanguard of the anti-fascist Republican Front tradition.

In the second round of elections, the Republic Front tradition did halt the National Rally’s quest to attain a parliamentary majority. But the partial betrayal of the Republican Front by Ensemble resulted in an incomplete victory of the NPF. As a result in the second round, the NPF stood first but well short of the majority mark in the Parliament with 182 seats while other Left parties secured 12 seats; Ensemble came second with 168 seats and the National Rally was pushed to third place with 143 seats. The defeat of the neo-fascist National Rally is a historical achievement of the working people of France under the leadership of the NPF.

Macron's next ploy to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, is to try and split some components of NPF, such as the Socialist Party and the Ecologists Party, to distance themselves from the other components of the NPF and join the Ensemble and the Republicans (a Right-wing group different from National Rally and who are fourth in number of seats i.e. 66 after the second round) to cobble together a new “centrist” coalition government to continue with neoliberal policies.

Alternatively, Macron could try to set up a technocratic government of unelected ministers (composed of dyed in the wool neoliberals) but this is constitutionally permissible only for a short interregnum. But both these alternatives will merely lead to the further strengthening of the neo-fascist National Rally.

The Left in France can conclusively defeat neo-fascism only through a thorough break with the neoliberal project. This will require a successful challenge to the ensemble of international finance capital and French monopoly capitalists, imperialist hegemony of the US and the neo-fascist forces by politically mobilising the working people. Any attempt to challenge one of the three aforementioned planks while disregarding the others will end in failure.

If some components of the NPF try to combat neo-fascism while operating within the ambit of US imperialist hegemony that underpins international finance capital, they will merely end up strengthening the neo-fascist forces in France since alternative economic policies cannot be implemented otherwise.

The NPF can move forward from its success in halting the neo-fascist National Rally only if their future activities are governed by two factors. First, it must remain united, including in their election of their parliamentary leadership; Second, the NPF (or some of its components) should not seek to outdo Ensemble in terms of “inclusive” neoliberalism but instead break conclusively with the neoliberal project. Only then would the NPF be able to politically mobilise the working people to conclusively defeat neo-fascism.

Narender Thakur is professor, Department of Economics, Dr. BR Ambedkar College, University of Delhi. C. Saratchand is professor, Department of Economics, Satyawati College, University of Delhi. The views are personal.