Julien Dumont is a doctoral researcher in political science at the University of Cambridge, and a teacher at Sciences Po Paris.
In his
Memoirs of War
, General de Gaulle wrote of Albert Lebrun, the last President of the Third Republic:
“Basically, as Head of State, two things he lacked: that he was a leader;
that there was a state"
.
This summary judgment illustrates two of the major concerns of Gaullism: establishing the authority of the state as well as that of the executive.
Already in the second Bayeux speech, during the constituent moment of the Fourth Republic, de Gaulle put forward his institutional vision of a strong state led by a reinforced executive.
In 1958, Michel Debré directed the implementation of this vision which would be completed in 1962 with the adoption of the election of the president by universal suffrage.
The Fifth Republic thus perpetuated the Gaullist vision of the state and its institutions.
Built in his image, it endorses the figure of the leader dressed, as Roger Frey said during the 1962 referendum campaign, with this
“unique moral authority conferred by popular suffrage”
.
Read alsoArnaud Teyssier: “The institutions of the Fifth Republic work… provided you know how to use them”
However, a lawsuit for illegitimacy already abounds.
First on the part of those who, like Pierre Mendès France, had lined up in opposition to the constitutional upheaval of 1958. Then on the part of all those who saw the emergence with the direct presidential election of a plebiscite regime with Bonapartist echoes .
This opposition was defeated in the 1962 referendum, but the general failed to obtain a majority of registered voters.
At the end of the vote, de Gaulle was forced to come out of his reserve in order to affirm
"the condemnation of the disastrous regime of the parties"
as well as his wish to see the choice of a "new republic" confirmed during the approaching legislative elections.
The resounding victory of the UNR which follows cannot hide the fact that the one who wanted to be above the parties will now find himself linked to a parliamentary majority, as well as to a party whose partisan ambiguity is dissipating in favor of a center-right profile.
In 1965, the presidential campaign, and the need for de Gaulle to contest a second round for his election, would once again highlight the partisan, and therefore factional, nature of the regime.
The general had for him a singular aura, not to mention the fruits of an unprecedented economic expansion at the peak of the thirty glorious years.
The current president does not enjoy such benefits.
Julien Dumont
Emmanuel Macron does not lack a state.
The Gaullist institutional legacy enabled him to pass a pension reform that most French people do not want, and whose passage in parliament required the use of Article 49.3 of the Constitution.
Notwithstanding the extent of the social movement, and the fierce opposition of a large part of the political class, this reform is now enacted, at the cost of severe police repression.
Only, the President of the Republic sees his quality as leader more than ever questioned.
The Gaullist institutional matrix, already strongly questioned under the aegis of the general, seems close to rupture.
Read alsoJacques Julliard: “Help, the Fourth Republic is coming back!”
Macron, like de Gaulle, presented himself as a figure wishing to overcome partisan divisions and what the latter decried as the
"feudalism of politics, the press, business, unions who would like to hold our France in their ties and continue these strange games which we see too well that they lead to nothing”
.
Both have successfully mobilized their adherents against a political system deemed sclerotic and outdated.
Only, the “velvet populism” of macronism, to use Marcel Gauchet, comes up against solving the impossible equation of Gaullism without de Gaulle.
The general had for him a singular aura, not to mention the fruits of an unprecedented economic expansion at the peak of the postwar boom.
The current president enjoys no such advantages, and the past 12 months have demonstrated a deep distrust of him.
The legitimacy of election by universal suffrage alone appears to be too weak a base to support the authoritarian reformism permitted by the Fifth Republic.
In his second speech at Bayeux, the general quoted Solon who, answering the question of what was the best constitution, said:
“Tell me, first, for which people and at what time?
»
.
Julien Dumont
Those who followed de Gaulle had to bend to partisan games and embrace the intermediary bodies.
The temptation of emancipation has increased over time - Macronism is undoubtedly its climax.
If he wants to politically survive the failure of this temptation, it is time for Emmanuel Macron to take note.
To refuse to do so would run, as was already foreseen in 1962, the risk of the “unknown”, whose face could be that of extremes.
It is therefore up to him to take his word for it, by changing “method”, as he declared last year.
The current crisis provides an opportunity for a definitive questioning of the Gaullist vision of institutions.
A consultation, open to citizens as well as to intermediary bodies,
Read alsoWhat future for the institutions of the Fifth Republic?
In his second Bayeux speech, the general quoted Solon who, answering the question of what was the best constitution, said:
"Tell me, first, for what people and at what time?"
.
At the height of the Algerian crisis, this question was decided in 1958. A figure wanting to mirror the general, Emmanuel Macron would have the task of opening this question again.
