What if the French Constitution of April 1946 is approved by referendum?

Thande

Donor
OTL, following WW2 France drew up a new constitution for the Fourth Republic. This was put to the people for confirmation by referendum. The first attempt, in May 1946, failed as the people voted No. This constitution was particularly influenced by the Communists, Socialists and other leftist groups in the French provisional government, and was campaigned against by the Radicals, Moderates and other centre and right parties. In the end the constitution was toned down through compromise and a new version was put to referendum in October and it was approved. This was the constitution of the Fourth Republic that was in force until De Gaulle took over to form the Fifth Republic in 1958.

However, what if the May referendum had succeeded and the original form of the constitution had taken force? This isn't too unlikely, as the yes/no vote was the relatively close 47/53% in OTL and that was with fervent No campaigning by the right-wing parties. The (English) text can be found here. The chief difference I can see is that it creates a unicameral elected Assembly with a president even weaker than under the Third and OTL Fourth Republics. This would basically create a fully parliamentarian French state as opposed to the awkward compromise of the OTL Fourth and semi-presidential system of the Fifth.

What might be the effects of this?
 
Interesting.

Paradoxally, it could mean more stable cabinets - according to the Constitution, the government does not have to resign automatically upon losing a vote.

Granted, there would be only one Chamber - but the Council of the Republic was so inexistant in OTL's Fourth Republic that the change would be minimal.

The President of the Republic would be elected by the Assembly (two-thirds majority on the first 3 ballots, then three-fifths). I see no big change there - Auriol would still be elected.

The legislative elections' results were as follows in OTL (no reason to have dramatic differences even the first constitution was adopted) :

Communists 182
Socialists 102
Others Left 69

Centre-Right (MRP) 173
Others Right 72

Misc. 29

TOTAL 627

This mean a qualified majority is 314 ; a 2/3rd is 418 ; a 3/5th is 377.

The left has a simple majority - in theory - but still needs the centrists to govern and elect a President. As it did in OTL.

From there, it all depends on what happens in the first few months of the new regime. With more stable cabinets, we might avoid the middle-of-the-road, please-please-let's-make-sure-we-don't-upset-anyone policies of OTL's governments from 1947 to 1954. Still, I don't see how the Communists could remain in the majority after 1947-48. This will mean finding support on the right.

What of the Gaullists? Will there be a clever electoral trick to rob them (and the Communists) of an electoral success in 1951 - as it happened in OTL? Will there be a reform of the electoral law to institute a two-round system (OTL's Fifth Republic electoral system), likely to result in more stable majorities?

Looking at everything that happened between 1946 and 1958, we see that the Fourth Republic's main problem was not mainly its Constitution. It was the fact that the 2 major political parties - the Communists and the Gaullists - were excluded from the system (the Communists because of their alignment on the USSR ; the Gaullists because of De Gaulle's opposition to the institutions), making the only possible majority an unlikely - and changing - alliance of socialists and conservatives.
 

Thande

Donor
From there, it all depends on what happens in the first few months of the new regime. With more stable cabinets, we might avoid the middle-of-the-road, please-please-let's-make-sure-we-don't-upset-anyone policies of OTL's governments from 1947 to 1954.

That's what I was thinking, although your point about the exclusion of the Gaullists is significant.

Don't know enough about France in this period to know if this is plausible, but: what if de Gaulle, disgusted with not getting his way, ends up going to Indochina instead of Leclerc to seek glory and ends up getting killed the way Leclerc did? Then the Gaullist movement disintegrates and most of them join the regular conservatives that accepted the constitution.

(If our goal here is to preserve the fourth republic rather than just ask WI disinterestedly, that is).
 
That's what I was thinking, although your point about the exclusion of the Gaullists is significant.

Don't know enough about France in this period to know if this is plausible, but: what if de Gaulle, disgusted with not getting his way, ends up going to Indochina instead of Leclerc to seek glory and ends up getting killed the way Leclerc did? Then the Gaullist movement disintegrates and most of them join the regular conservatives that accepted the constitution.

(If our goal here is to preserve the fourth republic rather than just ask WI disinterestedly, that is).

De Gaulle resigned abruptly in 46, convinced that without him, there would be chaos, and that he would be called back quickly, with a special mandate to change the Constitution. It worked, except for the "quickly" part; it took 12 years for him to be called back!

This being said, had De Gaulle died in the 50s, the Fourth Republic would have had to reform itself in order to deal with Algeria - and my personal opinion is that it could have succeeded - reforms were already under way when De Gaulle came back to power in 58.

Another interesting POD during that period: the 1956 legislative elections were won by the Republican Front (alliance of Socialists and Radicals) on the name of former Premier Pierre Mendès France. But President Coty appointed Guy Mollet, the leader of the Socialists, as head of government - he simply followed the tradition of appointing the leader of the main party of the winning coalition. What if he had followed public opinion instead and appointed Mendès? With De Gaulle dead by 1956, many Gaullists would have rallied on Mendès, and from there anything is possible...
 
I'm pretty sure that, in that TL, De Gaulle would have waited for his triumphant comeback until the end. Such a Fourth Republic, as Johnjackos said, would have probably reformed itself during the Algerian Crisis, probably along the lines of the German "Kanzlerdemokratie", with a strong executive facing a strong Parliament.

This said, without De Gaulle, I guess that the MRP would have become the dominant center-right Party, the Gaullists finally rallying either the Moderates, the MRP, or the Radicals under Mendès France (note that, would the SFIO fall under Mollet's leadership, I could see very well the more advanced Socialists like Mayer and the members of the PSU joining the left Radicals around Mendès in some kind of non-marxist left-wing party, which would be ironically a Gaullist party in reverse, except that Mendès had no taste for personal power). You could also have an overthrown of Thorez and the Stalinist leadership of the PCF after 1956 if the Party is not as isolated in French politics, with "Italians" (i.e. early eurocommunists like Casanova, Servin, and to a lesser extent Waldeck-Rochet) leading the PCF to an PCI-style liberalisation.
 
I agree with you 100%, Captain, and I find your notion of "Gaullist party in reverse" under Mendès particularly interesting.
 
More seriously - and, Thande, I hope I'm not derailing your initial topic - I would like to have your thoughts on what the French Left could have become with De Gaulle out of the picture (either dead in the fifties or killed in 62 at Petit Clamart) and a political system where the real executive power resides in the head of government rather than in the President of the Republic? Would Mitterrand's strategy re. the Communist Party be the same? Or would we see the emerging of a centre-left coalition of social Gaullists (Chaban, Jeanneney, Sudreau...), followers of Mendès France and people like Savary, Rocard, Daniel Mayer?
 
I'm inclined to favor the second option, because parliamentary dominance will partially butterfly the sharp bipartisanism experienced after 1958 and may favor centre-left coalitions around, either a reformed SFIO and Mendesian Radicals, or a rump Socialist Party and a larger center-left Mendesian party going up to moderate, liberal electorate, the other option being dominated by the MRP and the Independants. As long as the system can work without integrating the PCF (and, without De Gaulle, I don't think the Left has any interest in it, unless the PCF greatly reforms), it would.

However, should the Mendesian coalition fall apart and the more rightist elements of the left join a center-right solution à la Giscard, the Left Union gambit may became more appaling to socialists. But I doubt Mitterrand would be the man behind this strategy : without De Gaulle, he'd probably be more of a rival and heir to Mendès than a genuine Socialist. His role might be fulfilled by a more orthodox socialist, like Jean Poperen, or a young Chevènement.
 
Don't know enough about France in this period to know if this is plausible, but: what if de Gaulle, disgusted with not getting his way, ends up going to Indochina instead of Leclerc to seek glory and ends up getting killed the way Leclerc did? Then the Gaullist movement disintegrates and most of them join the regular conservatives that accepted the constitution..

No need to even have de Gaulle seek glory in foreign adventures - have de Gaulle show less gumption than he did in RL, and somehow accept he has missed the opportunity to lave his mark on postwar France, and you'll have Gaullists dissolve into more traditional Conservative movements.
 
In a case of first 1946 Constitution approved and abortion of Gaullist resurgence (Atlantic Friend, not all Gaullists were conservatives. Actually, an influential minority was economically and socially center-left), you would have obviously a change in foreign policy.

The reality in this TL : France would stay closer to NATO? but, assuming that Suez takes place like in OTL, France would still develop autonomus strategies, especially in Africa and the Arab World. France would still be a nuclear power as well. The main diffrence is that the relationship with the US are not as rocky, and probably that the EEC revolves less around France and Germany. The UK will probably be accepted in earlier.

But since I like to tease you, it would rather work that way : Mendès would make France leave the integrated structures of NATO and NATO as well, sell nuclear secrets to the Chinese, the Iraquis, and the Paraguayans, and the French military would build super anti-Anglo-Saxon cybernetic weapons that would look suspiciously like salt and pepper shakers. They would be known as "Les Dalèques" and would be parachuted over London and Washington D.C. on first occasion, proppeled by their terrible camembert reactors, shooting terrible -yet deliciously perfumed- death rays and shouting frantically : "WE ARE ZE DALEQUES ! EX-TER-MI-NER ! EX-TER-MI-NER ! OUH LA LA (gesture of the robotic arm) ! EX-TER-MI-NER !"

Sorry, I couldn't resist, there's a Doctor Who marathon on France 4 channel tonight.
 
I'm inclined to favor the second option, because parliamentary dominance will partially butterfly the sharp bipartisanism experienced after 1958 and may favor centre-left coalitions around, either a reformed SFIO and Mendesian Radicals, or a rump Socialist Party and a larger center-left Mendesian party going up to moderate, liberal electorate, the other option being dominated by the MRP and the Independants. As long as the system can work without integrating the PCF (and, without De Gaulle, I don't think the Left has any interest in it, unless the PCF greatly reforms), it would.

However, should the Mendesian coalition fall apart and the more rightist elements of the left join a center-right solution à la Giscard, the Left Union gambit may became more appaling to socialists. But I doubt Mitterrand would be the man behind this strategy : without De Gaulle, he'd probably be more of a rival and heir to Mendès than a genuine Socialist. His role might be fulfilled by a more orthodox socialist, like Jean Poperen, or a young Chevènement.

Yes but does this means that the Communist Party is left on its own? Can a stable left-wing majority be achieved in the parliament without the PC?
 
Last edited:
Actually, I don't think we would have the Left as we know it in OTL, especially after the Epinay Congress. The PCF would still be in opposition during the 1950's and probably the first half of the 1960's, for both international political reasons, and the fact that the PCF is probably the most Stalinian party in the West. I think the 1946 constitution would favor either center-left (SFIO-Mendésistes-UDSR, maybe MRP) or center-right coalitions (MRP-CNIP, then Républicains indépendants, and maybe a small Gaullist party created by the conservative wing). The right itself would have to deal with a resurgence of nationalism in the 1950's, either under OTL Poujadist' form or, which is perhaps better (or worse), some kind of protest right-wing party gathering the losers of economic modernisation, the nationalists (and the pro-Algérie Française), the more rightist Gaullists who would call for the death of the current Republic, and some bleached Pétainists.

However, a left coalition might work like the Popular Front, being supported by the Communists without Communist ministers in the Government. This solution is possible 1956 onwards, especially in 1962-1963 (assuming that the war in Algeria is ended by the Fourth and that social turmoil takes place as in our 1963).

This said, without De Gaulle, Thorez and the old guard would have a hard time to further delay the Party's destalinization. I can't see it happen in 1956, because Budapest put the Party at odds, and the Party was on the defensive, which favored conservatism. But, would a center-left government rule in Paris and handle successfully the Algerian crisis in 1959, I'm quite sure that the Evry Congress would have made Thorez and the Thorezians step down in favor of the Moderates from the Servin-Casanova faction, backed up by Frachon, Waldeck Rochet, Séguy, and even maybe rehabilitated leaders of the Resistance (like Charles Tillon). Such a move would be given a OK signal from Moscow at the time, and you'd probably have a more Eurocommunist PCF during the 1960 and the 1970 (Marchais would never come to a proeminent position, for that matter).
 

Thande

Donor
But since I like to tease you, it would rather work that way : Mendès would make France leave the integrated structures of NATO and NATO as well, sell nuclear secrets to the Chinese, the Iraquis, and the Paraguayans, and the French military would build super anti-Anglo-Saxon cybernetic weapons that would look suspiciously like salt and pepper shakers. They would be known as "Les Dalèques" and would be parachuted over London and Washington D.C. on first occasion, proppeled by their terrible camembert reactors, shooting terrible -yet deliciously perfumed- death rays and shouting frantically : "WE ARE ZE DALEQUES ! EX-TER-MI-NER ! EX-TER-MI-NER ! OUH LA LA (gesture of the robotic arm) ! EX-TER-MI-NER !"

I'm sure I've seen the idea of French Daleks in a parody before, although they were called the Galeks (as in, garlic, = French :p )

The political info is very illuminating. I like the idea of the French Communist Party liberalising the way the Italian one did OTL.
 
This is actually a very interesting and informative thread with many plausible alternate possibilities presenting themselves.
 
Top