By Brian Müller, University of Lorraine.
While political news is marked by strong tensions within the National Assembly and the government is counting on the votes of Republican deputies to have its reform of the pension system adopted, March 4 and 11 marked the fiftieth anniversary of the legislative elections of 1973. An essential ballot at the time which reinforced (at least in appearance) the union of the rights.
The events of May-June 1968 had led to a Gaullist tidal wave in the National Assembly on June 23-30 of the same year. Qualified by part of the opposition elections of fear, they provide General de Gaulle with great latitude of action. The departure of the man from June 18 in April 1969 did not cause a governmental or parliamentary rupture. Georges Pompidou succeeded him in June 1969.
However, the situation changed rapidly in 1972: the Chaban-Delmas government sees its popularity decline because of a series of politico-financial scandals; A referendum on the enlargement of the European Economic Community ended in a victory for abstention in April; socialists, communists and radical leftists gather around a “common program of government” in June.
Elections with multiple candidates
At the beginning of 1973, three coalitions presented themselves for the Palais Bourbon. The first is Union of Progress Republicans (URP) bringing together Gaullists, liberals and the centrists of the Center for Democracy and Progress (CDP). It brings together the members of the outgoing majority and wants to be united around the President of the Republic Georges Pompidou. The second is composed of united left parties, namely the French Communist Party (PCF), the Socialist Party (PS) and the Movement of Left Radicals (MRG). The third is an attempt to federate centrist parties hostile to the Gaullists under the name of reform movement (MR).
On their margins there are organizations of the extreme left and the extreme right, mainly the Unified Socialist Party (PSU) and Trotskyists and the National Front (FN) which is experiencing its baptism of fire.
In order to increase their chances of success, the members of the URP agree to present single candidates from the first round in 415 constituencies. The enmities between Gaullists, liberals and centrists prevented achieving union in the first round in 77 constituencies (of political leaders like Michel Debré and Michel Poniatowski also calling for confrontation everywhere in the first round and not to unite until the second), the unit is then expected only in the second round.
Conversely, the united left agreed to a systematic withdrawal agreement in favor of the best candidate in the second round. There are therefore PS and PCF candidates, MRG and PSU to a lesser extent (they do not have the means to send candidates to each constituency), likely to compete in the first round, which may benefit the straight. However, each right-wing candidate who is not elected in the first round will have more difficulty passing the second since he theoretically no longer has a reserve, where the candidate of the united left potentially has the votes of his allies-rivals. . This is why the ballot looks pretty tight.
A tense ballot
Although they remain limited, the chances of seeing the united left prevail worry the rights. Pierre Messmer, Prime Minister of Pompidou, positioned himself on a anti-Marxist conservative discourse to convince the right-wing electorate of the need to mobilize in support of the URP.
Thus, Gaullist organizations such as the Civic Action Service (SAC), the Committees for the Defense of the Republic (CDR) or the New Frontier Club (CNF) mobilized their members to defend the program of the outgoing majority. The SAC is above all concerned with sticking up posters and protecting meetings, the CDRs with the development of original posters, leaflets and flyers as well as the distribution of press releases, the CNF with writing a collective work which aims to discredit all the measures provided for in the program of the united left.
Although all opponents of the URP are fought, it is mainly the united lefts that are targeted because of their electoral power. The other coalitions and organizations primarily target the results of the outgoing majority, which they deem unsatisfactory.
For the Gaullists and their allies, the priority is therefore to fight against the “Marxist subversion” orchestrated above all by the “socialo-communists”. An alarmist discourse aimed at discrediting the common program of the united left is valued by Gaullist leaders. The possibility of a victory this one is presentedat best as the promise of a restoration of the IVe Republic, at worst like the establishment of a collectivist dictatorship, passing through a regime of food shortages and misery.
If the desire to discredit the very young common program is recent, the arguments put forward are not. This is a resumption of the anti-subversive discourse developed since May-June 1968. The communists, socialists and radical leftists also maintain their “anti-fascist”/”anti-salazarist” rhetoric towards this outgoing majority that they consider authoritarian and liberticidal.
The confrontation of these two anxiety-provoking discourses fueled the tensions already very present during the electoral campaign (accumulation of opposition since 1968, conviction among many activists that fascism or subversion is taking place before their eyes, classic friction during important electoral issues).
It is therefore hardly surprising that incidents accumulate between the 1er January and the evening of March 11 to 12, 1973 – at least forty are raised, even if the real figure must be doubled or even tripled. The SAC and the CDRs are in the front line for the defense of the URP.
They are therefore the two main organizations to find themselves involved in the clashes on the ground. The distribution of responsibilities in violent acts is balanced, the Gaullists being as often guilty of assaults and damage to private property as their adversaries.
Nevertheless, despite the stakes of the ballot, no deaths are to be deplored. This is a first for five years in an election of this importance since during the legislative elections of June 1968, a Communist militant was killed by Gaullist militantsas in the municipal elections of 1971 (a socialist is shot) then the 1972 referendum (a communist is run over by a car). Obviously, the Gaullist organizations have better control over their militants and have been able to improve their management of order. This does not mean that there have not been excesses on both sides: excesses always take place and a tragedy was avoided in Toulouse on the night of March 9 to 10 when a “commando” of the SAC and CDRs emptied their magazines against socialist militants without managing to hit a single one (The dispatch from the SouthMarch 12, 1973)!
Misleading results
Tense, the legislative elections nevertheless ultimately favored the URP.
In the first round, the URP won 38% of the votes cast. The united lefts obtain similar results. If the PCF remains the main left-wing party, the PS is progressing rapidly. The MR is struggling for its part to get by with 12.5% of the votes cast. He is still sufficiently well placed to find himself regularly in the position of referee for the second round in many constituencies. The extremes fail to stand out against the three blocs: the PSU obtains less than 2%, the Trotskyists barely exceed 1% and the extreme right are at 0.52% (1.33% for the FN).
In order to weaken the lefts, the URP manages to conclude a waiver agreement with the MR for the second round. On the evening of March 11, the MR managed to win 31 seats (against 15 in 1968), which was far from guaranteed on the evening of March 4. Of course, the URP is the big winner by obtaining 268 seats.
However, this victory should not overshadow several findings. First of all, the Gaullists are retreating sharply and must now rely on their allies to maintain their base. Then, the failure of great figures like Maurice Schuman and Alexandre Sanguinetti represent a symbolic defeat. Finally, the dependence of the Gaullists on their liberal and centrist allies forced them to grant them more space within the new Messmer II government. For example, Michel Debré, a historic Gaullist, is no longer a minister, while a convinced anti-Gaullist, Michel Poniatowski, becomes Minister of Health.
For their part, the lefts obtained substantial gains, going from 91 deputies in 1968 to 176. Admittedly, the electoral agreement established between the URP and the MR during the second round caused the loss of about twenty seats to the lefts . Nevertheless, the contemporaries believe that the common program of the united left has succeeded in launching a new dynamic which looks promising.
Brian Müller is ATER in Contemporary History at the Picardie Jules Verne University, doctor of the University of Lorraine, associate member of the CRULH laboratory and certified in History-Geography (CAPES).
This article is republished from The Conversation under Creative Commons license. Read theoriginal article.