Opinion
What the French election means for the future of Europe’s growing far-right movement
Dennis Glover
Author, speech writerAround the world, people have been watching in shock at the relentless rise of the far right, which we supposed had been killed off in 1945. Many are wondering whether the advance of this dangerous political steamroller, which has so far rumbled into Hungary, Italy and the Netherlands after comprehensively flattening Vladimir Putin’s Russia, can be halted? Can we prevent the extremism that led to the Second World War from repeating?
Events of the past week suggest that yes, the far right can be stopped, but only if important lessons from its disastrous debut in the 1920s and 1930s are heeded.
People gather at the Republique Plaza following the second round of French legislative elections.Credit: AP
Lesson one is to capture the middle ground. The British Labour Party’s victory under Sir Keir Starmer, who successfully repositioned Labour in the political centre, crushed the Tories, whose increasing extremism produced Brexit and political chaos. Starmer demonstrated the fallacy of believing that the best way to counter the far right is to swing to the far left, as previous Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn had tried and failed to do so spectacularly in 2019.
In the shadows of this triumph, though, danger has still appeared. The far-right Reform UK party, led by the xenophobic demagogue Nigel Farage, secured 14 per cent of the vote. Thanks to the first-past-the-post system, though, this translated to only four House of Commons seats. Ominously, Farage said on election night that this was the first step in the creation of “a mass national movement” that is going to come after the Labour Party and “stun” everyone. This strategy and violent, threatening language is straight out of fascist playbooks of the inter-war years.
Historical lesson two is never give the far right the opportunity to take power.
French President Emmanuel Macron took a huge risk by calling an election for the National Assembly just as Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally party surged in the European parliamentary elections.
It could easily have ended in disaster, but fortunately the parties of the left (the New Popular Front – which, tellingly, takes its name from the French left’s Popular Front of the ’30s) and the centre (Macron’s Ensemble Alliance) co-operated to avoid splitting their vote in the second round run-offs, relegating the National Rally to third place.
Macron had hoped the surprise poll would force voters to confront the actual, rather than theoretical, possibility of far-right government for the first time since the Vichy regime during World War II. Placed in this situation, he reasoned, they would choose the sensible alternative. In the event the far-right did win, he calculated, it would be forced to face the realities of government and rapidly split and destroy itself.
Macron’s gamble paid off, but it is one that doesn’t bear repeating too often. History shows that handing over power to the far right in the hope it will either moderate its policies or politically implode is potentially suicidal for democracies.
In January 1933, Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Party was placed in power by conservative schemers hoping that it would be tamed and eventually discredited by the messy realities of governing. The rest, as they say, is history.
National Rally supporters react following the party’s defeat in the French parliamentary elections.Credit: Getty Images
Lesson three is never let the far right gain a monopoly of energy, forcefulness and contemporary relevance. Or to put it another way, the forces of liberal democracy should avoid being captured by old leaders who are out of touch with the times – a failing highlighted in the recent US presidential debate between Joe Biden and Donald Trump. While it’s possible Biden will recover from his obviously age-related stumbles, keeping him would be risky, and again, history has much to tell us.
In the late 1920s and early ’30s, the leadership of the largest democratic grouping in Germany – the centre-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) – had become a gerontocracy. Lacking vigour and ruthlessness, it found itself unable to compete with the more energetic and modern Nazi leaders, who were, on average, two decades younger and able to symbolise the future. With their backs to the wall, the old SPD warriors made many fine and stirring speeches – before being forced into exile or imprisoned in Dachau.
Lesson four is for parties of the centre and left not to cannibalise each other by allowing their hatreds and rivalries to get the better of them. This too happened in Germany in the early ’30s, when the SPD and Communists sometimes disliked each other more than they disliked the Nazis. Many paid for this distrust and pigheadedness with their lives.
In the coming days as a new French government is being formed and protests across the country are quelled, this last lesson will be crucial. While Macron-supporting moderates and the various far-left groups that form the New Popular Front may wish to pursue alternative programs, the most important program of all – stopping the far right from staging a recovery and getting their hands on the levers of power – must override this.
This necessity for unity and common purpose is of course a lesson with far wider applicability, and one US Democrats would be well advised to follow as they potentially look to replace Biden: They must unite and choose the person most likely to win.
As we attempt to create a safer world out of democracy’s hour of peril, history can be our friend, but only if we heed its lessons. Recent events suggest that maybe, just maybe, we are up to the task.
Dennis Glover is a Melbourne-based speechwriter and author. His book Repeat: A warning from History is scheduled for release in August 2024.
The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform your own. Sign up here.