Analysis of fascism has produced an immense literature, for which the definition of the term is a major problem. This is especially acute in the French context. The most restrictive definition, limiting it to the Italian original and foreign imitators who adopted the name ‘fascist’ or a direct translation of it, can provide only a few unimportant examples. The problem is made worse by indiscriminate use of the word as a term of political abuse. Between these two extremes, however, there is a consensus in academic discourse that fascism is an ‘ideal type’ derived from an amalgam of Mussolini's Italy and Hitler's Germany.
The essence of the concept is that fascism seeks, by electoral means, by violence, or by both together, to overturn the institutions of parliamentary liberal democracy, replacing them with a single party led by a dictator. This brings about not only a political, but a social and economic revolution, creating a new type of totalitarian society and defending the nation against internal and/or external threats, notably that posed by Marxist communism. Antisemitism, a vital element in Nazism, is absent from Italian fascism before 1938. In that it often invokes left-wing ideas, if only to pervert them, fascism differs from the conservative or the outright reactionary position, both of which have been prominent in France.
Given this broader use of the concept, several French movements can be seen as fascist, and others are important as pre-1914 precursors. Some authorities include even Napoleon I among the precursors; more widely, the Bonapartism of the Second Empire, Boulangism [see Boulanger, G.], and the antisemitic and nationalist movements of 1885-1914 have been depicted as proto-fascist, notably by Zeev Sternhell. This interpretation has been strongly challenged by French historians, especially René Rémond, who posits a Bonapartist tradition distinct from fascism.
All participants in the controversy accept that fascism never succeeded in France; there is nothing comparable to what happened in Italy and Germany. French fascism, even widely defined, never won power or really widespread support. Fascism is a phenomenon of the period between the two World Wars, whose pre-1914 origins and post-1945 penumbra can be analysed, as long as it is remembered that they are not identical with it. Bonapartism and Boulangism were successful, but were at best forerunners, whose relationship with fascism is remote and problematic. France since 1945 has seen many tiny groups of the fascist type, but their support has been minimal. There is an inverse relationship between their closeness to the fascist model and their success. The populist movement led by Pierre Poujade in 1956-8 and the more recent Front National gained more support, but are close to fascism only in certain elements of their programmes.
During the inter-war period there is the same inverse relationship between proximity to the fascist model and political success. Some movements have been wrongly categorized as fascist, while those which were genuinely fascist were tiny, ephemeral, and fissiparous. The latter, and their leaders, include the Faisceau (G. Valois, 1925-7), Solidarité Française (F. Coty, 1933-4), the Socialistes Nationaux (G. Hervé, 1932-4), Francisme (M. Bucard, 1933-6). Slightly more long-lived was Jeunesses Patriotes (P. Taittinger, 1924-38), linked to the pre-1914 Ligue des Patriotes [see Nationalism] and the remnants of the Bonapartist parties, and thus not specifically fascist. The only truly fascist party that had broad support was the Parti Populaire Français (PPF), founded by Doriot in June 1936. Until 1938 it was prominent on the political scene, exaggeratedly claiming a membership of 300, 000 and attracting the support of intellectuals such as Drieu la Rochelle. Like the smaller parties, it was weakened by internal dissension; in rapid decline at the outbreak of war, it was later resurrected as a German instrument.
The movement led by Colonel de la Roque was even more successful [see Croix-de-feu]. In spite of its superficial characteristics, however, it was not really fascist in character, and after 1936, as the Parti Social Français, it became a mainstream parliamentary conservative party. It was set to become a major political force, but like the PPF never had its strength tested by national elections. La Roque did not become a collaborator.
Action Française, born out of the anti- Dreyfusard campaign, survived, but its significance was intellectual rather than directly political. Moreover, although included in some surveys of fascism, Maurras's ideology was quite different; a traditional counter-revolutionary theory, it lacked nearly all the specifically fascist elements. One should look here rather than to fascist ideology for the inspiration of the ‘Révolution nationale’ of Vichy [see Occupation and Resistance].
An aspect of French fascism worth mentioning is the admiration for fascism displayed by writers and intellectuals, the most notable being Drieu la Rochelle, Brasillach, Céline, Chateaubriant, and Rebatet. Some, but not all, of them had been influenced by Maurras. France was more important for the development of fascist ideology than for direct fascist political activity. Much of Mussolini's system can be traced to Georges Sorel, while antisemitism, notoriously central to Nazism, was outlined in 19th-c. France more strongly than elsewhere. Inoculated with the fascist virus before 1914, France, with its liberal republican tradition, reacted vigorously. In the inter-war period fascism was foreign, even if some of its roots were French. This alien character enhanced its appeal to some, especially after the defeat of 1940, but ensured that it was rejected by the great majority.
[David Watson]
Bibliography
- Z. Sternhell, La Droite révolutionnaire, 1885-1914 (1978) and Ni droite, ni gauche, l'idéologie fasciste en France (1983)
- P. Milza, Fascisme français, passé et présent (1987)
- A. Chebel d'Apollonia, L'Extrême-Droite en France, de Maurras à Le Pen (1988)
