No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Communist Presence in France
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2013
Extract
Apparent revival of Communist power in the recent French elections raises once again the thorny problem of appraising the strength of this huge and partially submerged political force. Some Western observers, forgetting that the drop in popular support for the party in 1951 was largely a consequence of the bizarre workings of the election law, were distressed by the gains scored in January of this year. In fact, the Communists were competing on an equal footing with the other parties (in contrast with 1951) and could rely on supporters who, in that year, had deserted on election day. Divisions among French center parties in 1956 meant that a vote for the PCF was no longer regarded as just a “throw-away protest.” From the standpoint of political statistics, it is important to recognize that under optimum conditions the party was able to do no more than make up for the setback suffered in 1951. Indeed the Communist vote declined slightly as a percentage of total popular vote, stabilizing at about 4,500,000 in a year when some 2,250,000 more voters went to the polls. The true picture, then, is one of impressive, but not steadily advancing, strength.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Political Science Association 1956
References
1 One commentator with the courage to make his observations before the 1956 elections produced a sober and instructive article on this general topic, offering somewhat different conclusions than the present writer's. See Micaud, Charles A., “The Bases of Communist Strength in France,” Western Political Quarterly, Vol. 8, pp. 354–66 (Sept., 1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
2 In the 1951 election, the center parties profited by the bonus accorded to common lists, or apparentements, by which any alliance of parties, or any single party winning more than 50 per cent of the votes in a district, thereby won all the parliamentary seats in that district. In many constituencies where the Communists were by far the strongest single party, they were completely shut out by alliances of several smaller center parties. In 1956, with the center parties badly divided and rarely able to form wide alliances, the seats of most districts were distributed according to the proportion of popular votes cast for each party. The best discussion of the complicated electoral law is contained in Pickles, Dorothy, French Politics (London, 1953), appendix 1, pp. 288–92Google Scholar.
3 The percentages of the total popular vote won by the Communist party have been—1946: 28.6; 1951: 25.9; 1956: 25.6.
4 One indication of the scope of Communist presence is the fact that, by recent count, there were at least 26 semi-public bodies dealing with educational affairs at the national level in which party members play a major role. The number of regional and local units is not known.
5 Schumpeter, Joseph A., Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 3rd ed. (New York 1942), pp. 341–48Google Scholar.
6 Some decline has, however, been registered in the number of Communist-controlled cantons in Le Nord and Pas-de-Calais.
7 Good comparative figures for the election results of 1952 can be found in L'Observateur, June 19, 1952. Scattered reports of individual plant elections are available in Le Monde, June 12, 1952.
8 A sampling of 1955 CGT successes can be found in Le Monde, May 21, May 29, and June 4, 1955.
9 See especially the contrite resolution adopted by the June, 1954 meeting of the CGT National Committee, after the poor showing of the April demonstration for a minimum wage of 25,000 francs, as reported in L'Humanité, June 21, 1954.
10 See for example the thunderous warning of Frachon addressing the leaders of the Paris area metal workers. Le Peuple, supplement, Sept. 15, 1952.
11 See the caustic report in Le Monde, April 11, 1953.
12 Report of Servin, M., L'Humanité, June 5, 1954 Google Scholar.
13 Ibid.
14 Ibid.
15 See “La Classe Ouvrière se détache-t-elle du Parti Communiste?,” part III of a series by Hamelet, M. P. in Le Figaro, Dec. 9, 1954 Google Scholar.
16 Ibid.
17 The best description of this attitude can be found in Lorwin, Val R., The French Labor Movement (Cambridge, 1954)Google Scholar, Ch. 9.
18 Le Peuple, April 15, 1954, supplement.
19 Duclos', speech appears in L'Humanité, June 4, 1954 Google Scholar.
20 Frachon's autocritique appears in L'Humanité, June 5, 1954. Interesting commentary on Frachon's dilemma is contained in the Catholic journal Syndicalisme, June 24, 1954, under the title, “Autour des Déclarations de B. Frachon.”
21 Actually the CGT had initiated this renewed call for unity in its 29th Congress of June 7–12, 1953. For interesting commentary on the party's redoubled enthusiasm for unity of all members of the working class, see Rioux, L., “Une Nouvelle Orientation de la CGT,” France Observateur, July 1, 1954 Google Scholar.
22 The opposition, led by Le Brun and Rouzard, was spirited, if not widely followed. Le Brun's Congress speech was reported in full by almost all newspapers June 15, 1955. For a detailed if over-optimistic description of the minority, see “Tendances à la PCF,” France Observateur, June 3, 1954 Google Scholar.
23 The CGT Congress was not allowed to vote on the minority economic report presented by Le Brun and his small following of dissidents, and extraordinary efforts were made to persuade him to accept compromise formulas.
24 From the report on party organization delivered by Marcel Servin at the 1954 Congress, L'Humanité, June 5, 1954. A rightist paper claimed that only 230,000 cards were distributed in 1955. See Le Figaro, April 27, 1955.
25 See L'Humanité, Nov. 22, 1954.
26 The speech of Fajon before the Committee is contained in his own journal, L'Humanité, Nov. 13, 1954.
27 See Griotteray-Brayance, A., “Le Parti Communiste en 1955,” Monde Nouveau, Jan., 1955, pp. 28–33 Google Scholar. Even the eminently successful journal edited specifically for peasants, La Terre, is losing ground. See Hamelet, L. P., “Le Parti Communiste et les Agriculteurs,” Le Figaro, April 7, 1955 Google Scholar.
28 The autocritique of the Cahiers is contained in the article by two editors, Michaut, V. and Limbourg, M.: “À Propos du xxxe Anniversaire des Cahiers,” Cahiers du Communisme, Vol. 31, preface (Feb., 1955)Google Scholar.
29 A discussion of this curious and somewhat clandestine replastering of party functions can be found in Le Figaro, Jan. 14, 1955.
30 See below.
31 See the report of Servin, Marcel as reported in L'Humanité, June 4, 1954 Google Scholar.
32 See the interesting commentary on these tight-rein methods in Le Figaro, July 7, 1954. Further rumblings over Servin's inner party police and espionage methods after the Baranes affair are reported in the same paper, Oct. 28, 1954.
33 This is a report from Unir, the organ of the Le Brun opposition within the CGT, as relayed by Le Populaire, June 28, 1955. The writer was unable to obtain back issues of Unir and cannot, therefore, confirm the authenticity of the source.
34 See Hamelet, M. P., “Le Parti Communiste et les Agriculteurs,” Le Figaro, April 7, 1955 Google Scholar. In English the best study is Ehrmann, Henry W., “The French Peasant and Communism,” this Review, Vol. 46, pp. 19–43 (March, 1952)Google Scholar.
35 Hamelet, , Le Figaro, April 8, 1955 Google Scholar.
36 The best English treatment of this question is McLellan, David S., “The North African in France,” Yale Review, Vol. 44, pp. 421–38 (Spring, 1955)Google Scholar. See also Vielle-Michel, A., “L'Évolution des Travailleurs Musulmans en France,” Esprit, Vol. 23, pp. 864–84 (May, 1955)Google Scholar.
37 Dillon's, speech is reported in The New York Times, Jan. 15, 1955 Google Scholar.
38 Thorez', original statement on pauperization appeared in Cahiers du Communisme, Vol. 31, pp. 259–79 (March, 1955)Google Scholar, under the title, “La Situation Économique de la France.” The line is further developed by Thorez, under the title “Nouvelles Données sur la Pauperisation,” Cahiers'du Communisme, Vol. 31, pp. 803–26 (July, 1955)Google Scholar. Official technical elaborations of the doctrine are offered by several writers in various issues of Économie et Politique, Vol. 2, 1955 Google Scholar. For an interesting Socialist (and neo-Marxist) criticism of the new line, see Rimbert, P., “Pauperisation et Niveau de Vie des Travailleurs, I,” La Revue Socialiste, Vol. 88, pp. 179–84 (July, 1955)Google Scholar.
39 The relationship of Mendes-France to the Left in general is the subject of a number of articles in the special issue of the Sartre, -edited Les Temps Modernes, Vol. 10 (Nos. 112–13), 1955 Google Scholar, entitled “La Gauche.” See especially the articles by Lavau, Neville, and Martinet.
40 There is an interesting critique of the pauperization doctrine from this point of view in the pro- Mendès-France, weekly France Observateur, March 3, 1955 Google Scholar, under the title “Durcissement au Parti Communiste.”
41 See above, part I.
42 Le Brun's position before the Congress is given full treatment by Armel, J., “CGT,” France Observateur, April 7, 1955 Google Scholar. See also Hamelet, M. P., “Conflict du Doctrine à la CGT,” Le Figaro, April 22, 1955 Google Scholar.
43 Before the Congress the party let go a couple of its biggest guns against the “Le Brun opposition” in editorials by Frachon, Benoit, the CGT General Secretary, in L'Humanité, May 3, 1955 Google Scholar, and by Vermeersch, Jeanette, in L'Humanité, May 10, 1955 Google Scholar.
44 L'Humanité, July 2, 1955.
45 L'Humanité, July 4, 1955.
46 This was the explanation offered by Marcel Servin at the Central Committee meeting of the party in September, 1955.
47 Estimates of automobile ownership in France are difficult to come by. However, 2,087,900 private cars were licensed in 1955—certainly a low ratio compared to the total population. A better picture of French “motorization” can be obtained by adding the 3,135,000 velomotors, scooters, motorcyclettes, and motorcycles. The combined figures suggest a rough ratio of one unit for every eight persons. Statistics on registration appear in the automobile trade journal, L'Argus, May 19,1955, supplement.
48 Although wages as such are still at dismally low levels, and in some cases barely equal to those of prewar France, two other factors are important in assessing the condition of industrial workers. First is the increase in total take-home pay due to allocations familiales or social benefit payments, amounting in some cases to a sum equivalent to wages. Second, except for scattered areas, employment has been high since the war, with no disastrous lean periods to dissipate small savings. Furthermore, since 1952 there has been considerable success in halting inflation. For details, see Dumontier, J., “La Conjoncture Économique à la Fin 1954,” Économic et Réalités Mondiales, Jan., 1955, pp. 21–23 Google Scholar; Romeuf, J., “Les Salaires en France en 1955,” Les Cahiers Économiques, Jan., 1955, p. 23 Google Scholar; and the anonymous analysis, “L'Évolution Récente des Revenus Salariaux Modestes en France,” Études et Conjonctures, Aug. 8, 1954 Google Scholar.
49 There are interesting comparative figures of all principal French cities and their suburban towns for the years 1936, 1946, 1954 in Annuaire Statistique de la France 1953 (1954 ed.), Vol. 60, N.S. #2, Paris, Institut National de la Statistique, Table I, pp. X–XIIIGoogle Scholar.
50 Collinet, M., Essai sur la Condition Ouvrière (Paris, 1951), p. 55 Google Scholar. Explicit details of occupational divisions in 1954 are available in Bulletin Hebdomaire de Statistique, Institut National de la Statistique, Paris, #369, May 28, 1955 Google Scholar.
51 Bresard, M., “La Mobilité Sociale en France,” Cahiers Français d'Information, Jan.-Feb., 1952, p. 18 Google Scholar.
52 Of every 1,000 workers in 1901, 440 were engaged in raw material production, 373 in manufacturing, and 187 in service industries. In 1951 the figures were, respectively, 330, 415, 255. See the chart of these changes in Collinet, M., “Structure des Classes Salariés en France depuis Cinquante Ans,” Revue Internationale du Travail, March, 1953, pp. 229–52Google Scholar. Other useful statistics may be found in Bleton, P., “Mouvement Économique et Évolution Social,” Économie et Humanisme, July-Aug., 1955 Google Scholar.
53 See “Economic Conditions in France,” published by the Organization for European Economic Cooperation, Paris (Nov., 1955)Google ScholarPubMed. This report indicates (p. 8) that nearly two-thirds of the 1955 increase in production was absorbed by private consumption.
54 Kircheimer, Otto, “Notes on the Political Scene in West Germany,” World Politics, Vol. 6, pp. 306–21 (April, 1954)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
55 At least the O.E.E.C. is not altogether optimistic about the continuance of an untroubled prosperity in the context of present fiscal practices. See note 53, above.
56 See the report of the 1953 Party Congress statistics in “Le Communisme en France,” Bulletin de l'Association d'Études et d'Information Politiques Internationales (March 1–15, 1955), p. 25 Google Scholar.
57 See the interesting statistics compiled by Hamelet, M. P., “Le Parti Communiste et les Agriculteurs,” Le Figaro, April 9–10, 1955 Google Scholar. A general survey of the poorer peasants' disposition to follow the party may be found in Ehrmann, “The French Peasant and Communism” (cited in note 34). See also Goguel, François, “Pourquoi les Français Votent comme Ils le Font,” The French Review, Vol. 28, pp. 318–30 (Feb., 1955)Google Scholar.
58 Interesting commentary on the new form of industrialization coming to the provinces is contained in the case study by Goulier, J., Naissance d'une Grande Cité: Le Mans au Milieu du XXe Siècle (Paris, 1953)Google Scholar. For a warning that the western half of France might become an agricultural backwater, see Philip, A., “France's Economic Situation,” Yale French Studies, No. 15, pp. 87–98 (Winter, 1954–1955)Google Scholar.
59 Bresard, “La Mobilité Sociale en France” (cited in note 51).
60 Ibid. One writer cites a more recent survey in the Seine (Paris) region, in which five per cent of the Lycée students were of working-class origin. Bottomore, T., “La Mobilité Sociale dans la Haute Administration Française,” Cahiers Internationaux de Sociologie, Vol. 12, pp. 167–78 (1952)Google Scholar.
61 Reynaud, P. L., “Le Rôle du Facteur Humain dans la ‘Stagnation’ de l'Économie Française,” Nouvelle Revue de l'Économie Contemporaine, Vol. 4 (July, 1954)Google Scholar.
62 See Micaud, “The Bases of Communist Strength in France” (cited in note 1). and Bottomore, op. cit.
63 From a survey quoted by Bottomore. op. cit.
64 That this problem seriously preoccupies French leaders is demonstrated by the tone and content of the papers offered at the annual lay Catholic national meeting held in 1954. See Crise du Pouvoir et Crise du Civisme, Chronique Sociale de France, Collection Semaines Sociales de France (à Rennes) (Paris, 1954), especially the articles by Auby, Savatier, Delouvrier, Therez, Blondel, and Simon.
65 For interesting commentary on the party's ability to capitalize on these issues see Griotteray-Brayance, “Le Parti Communiste en 1955,” (cited in note 27). For a lengthy, and in places brilliant statement of the fellow-travelling camp see Sartre's, J-P. report, “Les Communistes et la Paix,” in various issues of Les Temps Modernes, Vols. 8 and 9 (1953 and 1954)Google Scholar.
66 Some recent views on this subject may be found in Marcus, John T., “Neutralism in France,” Revieiv of Politics, Vol. 17, pp. 295–328 (Summer, 1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.