France has been experiencing an unprecedented political crisis since President Emmanuel Macron dissolved parliament in June 2024. For political scientist Rémi Lefebvre, this deadlock is not only institutional: it reveals a crisis of representative governance fuelled by mistrust, social fragmentation and the erosion of majority rule.
Following the dissolution and the legislative elections that followed it, the governments of prime ministers Michel Barnier, François Bayrou and Sébastien Lecornu have all been unable to govern. Many commentators have suggested that this deadlock could be linked to a lack of compromise among political parties, or to unhelpful institutional rules. On the contrary, it seems that the disruption runs much deeper. The relationship with politics in France has changed in recent decades, and the current crisis is merely a symptom of the erosion and breakdown of the link between voter and representative itself.
A disrupted political routine
In France, particularly since the 1970s, we have become accustomed to the “majority system”: the president was elected by direct universal suffrage and needed a majority in parliament, which he generally obtained. Political life had a routine rhythm of alternating majorities. Then this system gradually broke down.
The lack of alternatives to this rhythm has led to a proliferation of political parties, creating chronic disillusionment in each political camp. The rise of the far right, which claims to embody a new path, is associated with the blurring of the left-right divide. In 2017, the arrival of Macron was seen as the result of the exhaustion of this divide and a response to the democratic crisis, driven by a rhetoric of “transcendence”.
But the president has exacerbated the crisis by pushing the margins to extremes and, ultimately, polarising political life while shifting his own position to the right. Macron has fuelled the far right, and he has weakened the left. While there are strong calls for compromise, on the left, the Socialist Party (PS) is under the thumb of La France Insoumise (France Unbowed or LFI) and constantly exposed to accusations of “treason”. The difficulty in building majorities, linked to the tripartite nature of political life, is exacerbated by internal fragmentation within each bloc.
However, this crisis cannot be understood solely in terms of political manoeuvring. We must also take into account changes in the relationship between voters and politics. Since the early 2000s, the very mechanism of elections has been called into question. The legitimacy given to those in power by elections is increasingly weak, as explained by historian Pierre Rosanvallon. This is reinforced by the widespread development of strategic voting: people are increasingly voting “usefully” in order to eliminate candidates, but voters are no longer really expressing their preferences, which weakens their commitment to the appointment of a representative and the legitimacy of that representative. Thus, the electoral process is fundamentally flawed: this is referred to as “negative” democracy. We eliminate more than we choose.
Fragmentation of society
Furthermore, the fragmentation of political identities partly reflects the fragmentation of society itself. The crisis of governance or governability is linked to a more individualised and fragmented society, exacerbated by inequalities and a form of separatism. Identities and divisions are more complex and less structured by homogeneous class identities, as explained by sociologist Gérard Mauger.
If political parties are unwilling to compromise, it is also because they do not want to disappoint the divided social groups that still support them and because they fear “betraying” distrustful voters and increasingly volatile and narrow electoral constituencies. Society is more polarised (the emotional polarisation caused by social media is undeniable), which also makes political compromises more difficult. We could add that the fragmentation and splintering of voters’ political identities is exacerbated by the weakness of the parties and their large number – there are now 11 parliamentary groups in the National Assembly, which is a record. One of the major consequences is that political parties are no longer able to organise public debate around a few coherent and simple visions.
Could the current political impasse be resolved by dissolution, negotiations, new parliamentary elections or even a presidential election? It is doubtful. Ultimately, it is possible that the carte blanche given to a French president, which comes via legislative elections that follow presidential polls, will no longer exist in the future. Political majorities are nowhere to be found, but perhaps neither are social and electoral majorities (ie alliances of social groups large enough to support political majorities).
Mistrust and disillusionment
The economic crisis we have been experiencing for the past year is part of an even broader trend, namely a considerable increase in mistrust of politics.
According to the 2025 barometer of political trust published by the Centre of Political Research at Sciences Po (CEVIPOF), around 20% of French people trust politicians. The French therefore consider the political class incapable of solving problems. They even consider it unworthy. It must be said that the spectacle on offer is rather unattractive, and it can be argued that the calibre of politicians is declining. Political scientist Luc Rouban has shown that this phenomenon fuels a desire to retreat into the private sphere along the lines of “leave us alone, we don’t care about politics”. The current crisis is therefore the product of this mistrust, and the political class’s inability to resolve it reinforces the phenomenon.
Disappointment and disillusionment have been building up for decades. The weakening of the left-right alternation that used to punctuate political life runs deep. Former president Nicolas Sarkozy served only one term, as did his successor François Hollande: both campaigned on volontarisme (the idea that the human will is capable of imposing change), but quickly disappointed. They pursued liberal economic policies that undermined the idea that politics could change things. Macron, who was re-elected, also disappointed. He fuelled the anti-elite sentiment that manifested itself powerfully during the “yellow vest” protests.
Ultimately, each camp is marked by disenchantment and produces mechanisms of polarisation. Thus, the Socialists produced LFI, which was the result of disappointment with the left in power. The far right is also, to a large extent, the result of political disillusionment. These two forces, LFI and Rassemblement National (the far-right National Rally), are hostile to any compromise.
Unavoidable challenges
This mistrust of politics is not specific to France, as political scientist Pierre Martin has shown in his analysis of the crisis facing governing parties. These mechanisms are present everywhere, in Europe and the US. Since the work of Colin Crouch, political scientists have even begun to talk about “post-democratic” regimes, where decisions are increasingly beyond the control of political power.
Globalisation, Europeanisation, and the power of large financial groups and lobbies have devalued political power and reduced its room for manoeuvre. However, politics raises expectations, and politicians attempt to re-enchant the electoral process by making promises at every election.
This situation is particularly difficult to accept in France, where there is a culture of very high expectations of the state. This crisis of volontarisme politique (which sees political leaders saying they will be capable of imposing change, but then failing to do so) is causing repeated disappointment. The latest CEVIPOF survey shows that mistrust is growing and is associated with a feeling of governmental and electoral impotence. The French believe that politics no longer serves any purpose: the sterile game of politics is spinning its wheels, with no impact on reality.
The current situation plays into the hands of the far right, as mistrust of politics fuels anti-parliamentarianism and also reinforces the idea that a political force that has not held office can be a solution.
In addition, a part of society finds itself aligned with right-wing issues: immigration, security, rejection of environmentalism, etc. In this context, the victory of the far right may seem inevitable. It has happened in the US, and it is difficult to imagine France escaping it, given the great fragmentation of the left, its pitfalls and its dead ends. However, if the far right comes to power – which would be a dramatic turn of events – it will also face the test of power and will certainly disappoint, without resolving the political crisis we are currently experiencing. Its electorate, which is very interclass (working class in the north, more middle class in the southeast), has contradictory expectations and it will be difficult to satisfy them.
Rebalancing democracy?
It would be naïve to believe in an “institutional solutionism” that would resolve this political crisis. Democracy cannot be reduced to electoral rules and institutional mechanisms. It is underpinned by values, culture, practices and behaviours.
Given this, a change to proportional representation would encourage voters to vote according to their convictions and marginalise “tactical voting”. The aim would be to better reflect voters’ political preferences through the voting system and to re-legitimise the electoral process.
A Sixth Republic would certainly help to regenerate institutions linked to an exhausted presidential system, as demonstrated by political scientist Bastien François. Nowadays, the verticality of power no longer works in a society shaped by horizontal dynamics. The image associated with the French president accentuates disappointment by creating a providential figure who cannot keep his promises. While the French are not in favour of abolishing direct universal suffrage for presidential elections, it is possible to limit the powers of the president – just as it is possible to reverse the calendar with legislative elections preceding presidential ones.
Many works, such as those by political scientist Loïc Blondiaux, also propose ways of thinking about a new balance between representative democracy and participatory democracy, a more continuous democracy that is less focused on elections. For a long time, elections were sufficient to ensure democracy, but that cycle is now over. This means tinkering and experimenting – with referendums, citizens’ conventions, etc. – in order to find a new balance between participation and representation. However, these solutions are complex to implement, whereas democracy through voting alone was very simple. Finally, democracy is a culture, and it is necessary to encourage participation at all levels by promoting a more inclusive, less competitive society, particularly in schools and businesses.
Another issue is that of political parties: citizens no longer join them because they are perceived as unattractive. Some studies suggest that they should be reformed and that their public funding, for example, should be rethought, with funding being made conditional on the diversity of elected representatives.
Democracy and the economy
Finally, a major democratic challenge is to regain control over the economic sphere. The debate on the Zucman tax highlights the political barrier that needs to be broken down: the power of the financial oligarchy. As long as political power has to bow down to finance, the deceptive logic of post-democracy will continue. However, inequalities have increased to such an extent that societies could demand a rebalancing. In this sense, post-democracy is not inevitable.
Economic forces will attempt to protect their positions and power, but, as political sociologist Vincent Tibérj shows, there is a very strong commitment to social justice and redistribution in France, even among the far right. Under pressure, the elites could therefore be forced to give in.
A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!
