Leadership of a Fascist France

In a world where the US stayed neutral in WW1 and the Central Powers won and forced harsh peace terms on France, leading to France falling to *Fascism in the alt-Great Depression, who would it's leader be? How would said French Fascist regime be organized?
 
I think Charles Maurras of the Action Française or Marcel Bucard of Parti Franciste could be very likely candidates.
 
Bucard's health probably too precarious. Spent a lot of time dealing with recurrant complications from war injuries. What about de la Roque or Pierre Taittinger or Pressant (aka Georges Valois)?
 
Of course a different war could butterfly away Bucard's war injuries. Doriot I would not see successfully getting to the top, an agitator not a statesman. Not quite as lacking in class as Julius Streicher but that sort of role. Darnand more a fighting man (or thug/enforcer) than a politician. Herold too young for the top job in the early 1930s.
 

Archibald

Banned
I think Charles Maurras of the Action Française or Marcel Bucard of Parti Franciste could be very likely candidates.

Leon Daudet is another possibility. He was the son of writer Alphonse Daudet (an anti - Dreyfuss, the apple never fall far from the three) Maurras and Daudet were the two leading figures of Far-right France in the 30's. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Léon_Daudet

Or just take Wikipedia page about Vichy France. There is no lack of fascist son-of-bitches there. But you'll add to bleach your computer after that.

Here the complete list of those bastards.

Notable figures

See also: Category:French collaborators with Nazi Germany

Pierre Pucheu in 1941, who was executed in 1944.

Xavier Vallat
Non-Vichy collaborationists
 
Maurras' was an intellectual leader of the French right in the ultra-montanist strain, not truly a fascist. He also would not have been a politician, more an eminence gris. The question is whether or not you'd see in France a hard right nationalist government, like Franco in Spain or Horthy in Hungary, or a fascist one like Mussolini or Hitler. In some respects the label does not matter, but it does in others. In either case you'd see a strong anti-republican government, antisemitism, anti-foreigner, and pro-military. The list of would be dictators and followers whether right/nationalist or fascist is long.
 

Deleted member 94680

Maurras' was an intellectual leader of the French right in the ultra-montanist strain, not truly a fascist. He also would not have been a politician, more an eminence gris. The question is whether or not you'd see in France a hard right nationalist government, like Franco in Spain or Horthy in Hungary, or a fascist one like Mussolini or Hitler. In some respects the label does not matter, but it does in others. In either case you'd see a strong anti-republican government, antisemitism, anti-foreigner, and pro-military. The list of would be dictators and followers whether right/nationalist or fascist is long.

Murras as an ATL fascist figurehead? As a President who wouldn't cause any problems for the Prime Minister and Government whilst still being happy to provide soundbite statements on their activities?
 
Assuming Italy still goes under Fascism with Mussolini, I suspect a Kaiserreich would be quite cold towards Italy through the Twenties at least, would France shifted hard right align with Mussolini to counter Germany? And would the British still flatter and flirt with Italy to counter Germany? I could see Mussolini's ambitions chilling relations with the UK by about mid-1930s as he begins to seek glory in Africa, i.e. his Ethiopia adventure. I suspect much depends upon the fate of A-H. If it survives, albeit weak, it must give the CP a looming presence on the continent, but if fractured it dilutes the point of friction to Germany and her relations with the pieces, rump Austria and especially the east. Are we also assuming the Germans have held onto Alsace-Lorraine, or just Alsace, or bargained it to France for a chilly peace? I will assume that Germany surrenders any other territory of France to get a secure Armistice?

My theory is that the "collaborationists" and Vichy government have been painted harshly by a France that prefers to lay all blame at their door just as Petain sought to lay blame for defeat at the "weak" and "decadent" Third Republic. My read is that Vichy was more nationalist and less fascist, I think you had a dose of Nazi sympathizers, but I feel they are a sop to the Nazis and the Vichy leaders were looking at getting out from under the German occupation thumb, no moral high ground, but less black and white. Thus I think any right-wing government is going to be quite French, a messy sort of affair. I would not rule out a DeGaulle or man like him to lead the revitalization of France, a nationalist, someone more like Franco or even Mussolini rather than a Hitler. Sadly though I suspect some xenophobic frenzy will be at play to get the people excited about surrendering liberty.
 

Babatus

Donor
I agree with the post before. It's not downsizing the treason and the crime a lot of them were responsible for (at their own initiative in a lot of cases), but my personal analysis is that for a lot of "top" leaders they were more.
faithful to their own glory and their own "vision" for France than "pro German". A lot of Vichy figurehead were ready to turn coat as soon as a German defeat might become certain, and were ready to collaborate with the Allies, hoping to keep their position. Those were not the most hardliner, but don't forget than Darlan actually managed to do it and passed a good deal with the americans.


To come back to the original thread question, I guess that's also depend what kind of "flavor" of french "fascism" you want. If what you're aiming for is something like "a pretty authoritarian regime combined a strong nationalism and revanchism", I think an interesting scenario would be to use a more radicalized version of De La Rocque's "Croix de Feu".

Of course they were not a "fascist" party OTL, and more in favor of a strong presidential regime (by opposition to the parliamentary nature of the 3rd Republic), but a defeat in WW1 (and maybe a short civil war against communists?) might drive them to take a more extremist stance and/or suspend civil liberties in order to maintain order/"l'Unité Nationale", resulting in something that would be an authoritarian but not necessarly totalitarian regime.

Also don't forget than a lot of ultra collaborationist/ pro german figure, like Doriot or Déat, might decide to stay in the PCF or the SFIO in this timeline (like they does in the KaiserReich TL) depending on how on handle the immediate post war period.
 
Let's assume that the French fascists are basically a more competent version of Fascist Italy as opposed to a French version of the Third Reich, folks.
 
Top