Critics of the EU often point out that Europarliamentary elections have no influence on the direction of Brussels’ policies. They serve primarily as an exile or springboard for fringe politicians. In the case of France, however, the Euro elections played the role of a catalyst: Le Pen’s party, led by Jordan Bardella, positioned the vote as a referendum on Macron’s second term. The president took up the challenge, and many commentators see the dissolution as a result of his wounded self-esteem. 

The dissolution of parliament and the announcement of early elections were intended to bring political clarity to France. As a result of President Macron’s decision, no new majority has emerged. Instead of clarity, there is chaos, with none of the three blocs (the president’s party, Le Pen’s party, and the Nouveau Front Populaire or the united Left) able to consider itself the winner. The spectre of a gridlock looms over France.

Nothing appears to be as it seems. Rassemblement National received the most votes in both the first and second rounds but still lost. Meanwhile, the Left secured a largely media-driven victory, built on favourable interpretations from journalistic elites rather than a genuine electoral triumph. The united Left garnered 27.99 per cent of the votes, which is less than their share in the June 9 European elections and represents only 17 per cent of all eligible voters. The Left will only be able to declare a real political victory when it manages to place their candidate in Matignon, the residence of the French prime ministers. Meanwhile, Macron has called on the current prime minister, Gabriel Attal, to remain in office. Gerard Darmanin, the Minister of the Interior and an important figure in the En Marche movement, has already announced that he will not support any law proposed by the Nouveau Front Populaire.

In a letter to the nation published in the press, the president highlighted that the French expressed their will by stopping the “far right”. However, the RN not only won the largest number of votes but also increased its seats in parliament by 58 per cent compared to the 2022 elections. Moreover, France has taken a turn to the right: the total votes cast for the right amount to 46.6 per cent of all votes, almost 20 per cent more than the united left’s result. Of this total, 80 per cent of the votes cast for the right were for Le Pen’s party. Therefore, one could argue that the famous cordon sanitaire, aimed at isolating the RN, is simply an attempt to block the right’s rise to power. 

Although Bardella will not become prime minister, it is impossible to ignore the RN’s progress. It is no longer merely a far-right party but a party representing the entire society, garnering support across all social and demographic categories.

The gender gap has finally closed: in previous elections, 28 per cent of men and 19 per cent of women voted for the RN, but this has now evened out. Suprisingly, among pensioners — a group where the RN historically had the least support due to fears of political extremism — support has reached a peak of 29 per cent. Tolerance for risk wanes with age, but as sociologist Emmanuel Todd noted, “retirees prefer risk with the RN to the economic incompetence of Macron’s people”. Le Pen’s party has also made significant gains among managers, a group where it was the least popular: advancing from 10 per cent in 2022 to 24 per cent in 2024. However, the divide between metropolitan areas and peripheral France still persists, with the RN ranking third in the former and winning outright in the latter. While the RN may have miscalculated with Marine Le Pen’s “dediabolisation” strategy in their quest for absolute victory, the mainstream has nevertheless underestimated the effectiveness of this approach. 

The most important verdict, nevertheless, came from the French themselves. According to an Elabe poll, 70 per cent  are not satisfied with the results and 64 per cent think the decision to dissolve parliament was wrong. As many as 74 per cent believe that the country became ungovernable.

---

The United Left won the most seats in parliament, initially inspiring relief because the RN did not come to power. Then came the economic apprehension. During the elections, the Nouveau Front Populaire announced it would freeze the prices of basic products by decree. Another controversial project is to raise the minimum wage from 1,398 to 1,600 euros. The president of the association of French entrepreneurs warns that that this will deliver a fatal blow to the economy, calling the proposal a sign of delusional detachment from economic realities. In addition, the left promises to increase the number of vacation days and expand the civil service workforce, and advocates for retirement at the age of 60. “You can always promise the moon,” as Finance and Economy Minister Bruno Le Maire remarked on these proposals. A member of his cabinet calculated that decreasing the retirement age to 60 would cost 70 billion euros. Minister delegated to the budget, Thomas Cazenave, calculated that the NFP projects would translate into more than 100 billion euros in total spending. 

The leader of La France Insoumise, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, has announced that money will be found by taxing the rich. He intends not only to increase taxes but also to impose a cap on inheritances at 12 million euros. Anything above that, as he put it, “and I take it all”. The rich are already moving their assets to Luxembourg.

Economist Dani Rodrik points out that the left capitulated in the economic debate after the Great Financial Crisis of 2008, yielding to right-wing populism. Today, the French working class votes for Bardella, while the secretary of the Communist Party loses to the RN candidate. Rodrik believes, however, that the NFP’s result represents an opportunity to create a new reindustrialization platform for ordinary people. Yet the French left has not put forward any industrial policy proposals. It is a party with a consumer, not producer mentality, believing in bureaucratic providerism, not in an activist state that can help builders. 

---

Mélenchon announced that he has no intention of confronting the EU and will adhere to Brussels’ budget rules. Doesn’t this imply he is abandoning any shift in the country’s economic direction? The apparent chaos perhaps conceals beneath its surface an uncomfortable truth about France’s immobilism: fundamental inability to snap out of stagnation.

Many commentators claim that France is finally experiencing its “populist moment,” or that we are witnessing an acceleration of history. Financial markets do not agree; their consensus points to French stagnation. Between the two rounds, the markets were betting on a lack of majority and the impossibility of implementing any reform program, predicting “immobilisme rassurant,” a reassuring immobilism.

When Fitch downgraded France’s rating in 2023 after eight years, it cited political gridlock and the country’s inability to reform. One of the most incisive critics of French politics of the past 30 years, Todd also argues that France has lost the political capacity for change. The first root cause is the adoption of the euro, which stripped the political class of the ability to conduct sovereign economic policy. The second root cause is the expansion of higher education. As a side effect, once the number of educated individuals surpassed 30 per cent of the population, they were able to insulate themselves in their own bubble, convincing each other that their ideas, among them Euro, represent both enlightened and inevitable truth. After adopting the single currency and losing economic sovereignty, the French elites were left with little more than providing a spectacle to the voters, a comedy veiling their real powerlessness. Many perceive Macron’s decision as an incomprehensible, if not foolish, lapse of narcissism. Perhaps it reflects his self-awareness; realising that his fate was immobilism, he decided to rid himself of responsibility for it.

Commentators favourable to Macron often compare him to de Gaulle. Before his death, in conversations with the writer André Malraux, the general, reflecting on Napoleon, mentioned his drive to transform chaos into order, present in “all historical men who are not simply men of theatre.” Macron’s decision, however, contained more theatrics than creative intent, prolonging the immobilism in which France has been stuck for several decades.