Article contents
Public Opinion and Political Parties in France
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2013
Extract
To any observer the French party system is bewildering. On the one hand, he sees that ten parliamentary groups are officially established in the National Assembly (not including the Overseas Independents); and, at the same time, he notes that only five of them are really organized throughout the country, and so entitled to be considered “parties” in the true sense of the word: the RPF, the Radicals, the MRP, the Socialists, and the Communists. On the other hand, he observes that the ablest French specialists in electoral sociology—particularly André Siegfried and his disciple, François Goguel—consider that, behind the apparent profusion of political groups, two basic divisions are always found, the continuing opposition of which has supplied for more than a century the essential dynamics of French politics. These two divisions are, of course, the Right and the Left, traditionally called “Order” and “Movement.” Nevertheless, the brief history of the Fourth Republic reveals an attempt to break down these two blocs, and to build a “Third Force” from smaller units. Under various names, such a Third Force has governed France from March, 1947, to March, 1952; and if our hypothetical observer will look back and analyze the political life of the Third Republic, he will find the same tendency there, not so marked and not so strong, but always present.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Political Science Association 1952
References
1 Communists, Progressive Republicans, Socialists (SFIO), Popular Republicans (MRP), Radical Socialists, Democratic and Social Union of the Resistance (UDSR), Rally of the French People (RPF), Independent Republicans, Independent Republicans for Peasant Social Action, and Peasants' Party.
2 See Siegfried, André, Tableau Politique de la France de l'Ouest sous la Troisième République (Paris, 1913)Google Scholar and Géographie électorale de l'Ardêche sous la Troisèbme République (Paris, 1949)Google Scholar; and Goguel, François, La Politique des Partis sous la Troisième République (Paris, 1946)Google Scholar and Géographie des élections françaises de 1870 à 1951 (Paris, 1952)Google Scholar.
3 Of course, this schema often became more complicated. In the Scandinavian countries, the presence of a small peasantry developed an agrarian liberalism; in the Catholic countries, the religious question superimposed itself on political and social oppositions; in Germany and Austria, national and local rivalries displaced the “conservative-liberal” rivalry. Then, too, in the second half of the nineteenth century, disagreements broke out between moderate and radical liberals, sometimes going so far as to result in a schism—but rarely. But in spite of all this, the fundamental opposition between the conservatives and the liberals is easily perceptible in leading European countries during the nineteenth century. The reader is referred, on this point, to Charles Seignobos' fundamental book, Histoire politique de l'Europe Contemporaine, 2 vols., 3rd ed. (Paris, 1928)Google Scholar.
4 Cf. on this point Duverger, Maurice, Les partis politiques (Paris, 1951), pp. 236 ff.Google Scholar, and L'Influence des systèmes electoraux sur la vie politique (Paris, 1950)Google Scholar.
5 This was the ease in France and in Italy. Germany, however, from 1919 to 1933 proved an exception.
6 Cf. Guillemin, Henri, Histoire des Catholiques français au XIXeme siècle (Geneva, 1947)Google Scholar, a passionate and partisan book by a “leftist” Catholic, but accurate on the whole. See also Dansette, Adrien, Histoire religieuse de la France contemporaine, 2 vols. (Paris, 1950–1951)Google Scholar.
7 French Section of the Workers' International, official name of the French Socialist Party since it was unified in 1905, after the International Socialist Congress in Amsterdam.
8 See above, n. 2.
9 The “clerical” problem played a certain role in the 1924 elections because of its introduction into the recovered Alsace-Lorraine, in which were still operative the laws voted at the beginning of the century. These laws provided for separation of church and state, lay teaching, regulation of religious congregations, etc. In addition, the members of the teaching profession, and especially those of the primary grades (who play a fairly important role in the framework of the Socialist Party), have remained very sensitive regarding the problem of private schools—which are virtually synonymous with denominational schools.
10 Catholic Association for French Youth, organized on various social levels: The Christian Working Youth, the Christian Agricultural Youth, the Christian Student Youth, etc.
11 Their stand on the laws governing the press which abolished those newspapers that appeared or continued to appear under the occupation, is very symptomatic. It must be remembered that many of these newspapers were Radical.
12 This law grants, in an indirect and roundabout way, financial help from the state to privately-owned schools.
13 This Congress was held at Bordeaux, May 22–25, 1952.
14 Undoubtedly a certain number of MRP deputies are nearer the Right than the Left. But some Radical deputies (Mr. Mendès-France, for example) are definitely to the Left, so that the one defection mtikes up for the other. Incidentally, among the Radicals under the Third Republic (at the time that party was considered Left), there were also quite a few conservatives.
15 Ministries changed, but the members were largely the same; they perpetuated themselves in office, and general policy was little affected by the changes. As a continuation to Soulier's, A.L'Instabilité ministerielle sous la Troisième République (Paris, 1938)Google Scholar, another book could be written, paradoxically not in any way contradicting it, on “The Stability of the Ministers under the Third Republic.” “The Stability of the Policy Followed by the Ministers of the Third Republic” is also an entirely appropriate title.
16 Mr. Pinay's investiture as President of the Council was made possible because 27 RPF deputies (out of 114) voted for him, in spite of the group's decision to abstain. Since then, according to the balloting, this number has increased to between 40 and 44. Among the deputies are those who very reluctantly follow orders from the Executive Committee. But the RPF left flank, with the General's support, has reacted energetically. In a meeting held on the 6th of July, the Party's National Committee made the “vote discipline” compulsory for the Parliamentary Group. In the future, party members are to vote as directed by the Executive Committee. As a result of this decision 26 RPF deputies withdrew from the Party, strengthening thereby its left wing.
- 8
- Cited by
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.