France is once again experiencing the familiar spectacle of burning vehicles, smashed shopfronts, attacks upon police and public buildings going up in flames. The latest wave of unrest has exposed the profound divisions within French society and the apparent inability of President Emmanuel Macron's government to maintain public order. Yet amid the smoke and destruction there may be a political silver lining. The violence could ultimately strengthen Marine Le Pen and her National Rally party, bringing them closer to winning the French presidency in 2027. In one of the great ironies of contemporary European politics, those who believe that revolutionary disorder will advance their political objectives may instead be creating the conditions for a nationalist electoral victory.
Writing in The Spectator Australia on October 31, 2026, Mark Higgie argues that the riots have become an unexpected political gift to Le Pen. The immediate background is the extraordinary escalation of protests that began with grievances among French school students concerning educational conditions, inadequate facilities and their prospects for the future. These initially peaceful demonstrations expanded into a much wider movement involving other dissatisfied groups. Unfortunately, violent militants and opportunistic criminals also entered the picture, transforming sections of the protests into scenes of destruction.
The scale of the disturbances has been considerable. Hundreds of thousands of demonstrators have participated in protests across France, while violent episodes have involved attacks upon police, arson, vandalism and widespread looting. Public buildings have been damaged, businesses have suffered losses and the authorities have struggled to restore normality. It is important to distinguish peaceful demonstrators from those responsible for criminal violence. Nevertheless, the political consequences of the disorder are likely to be felt by everyone involved.
Higgie notes the familiar tendency of sections of the establishment media to minimise the seriousness of politically inconvenient disturbances. Descriptions of protests as predominantly peaceful may be statistically defensible when most participants have committed no offences, but such descriptions can also seem detached from the experience of residents whose businesses have been destroyed or whose neighbourhoods have become battlegrounds. A shopkeeper watching his livelihood disappear in flames is unlikely to be reassured by a television commentator explaining that most demonstrators elsewhere behaved peacefully.
This gap between official descriptions and everyday experience is politically dangerous. When citizens believe that governments and media organisations are more interested in controlling the interpretation of events than addressing the underlying problems, public confidence deteriorates. Opposition parties can then present themselves as the only political forces willing to acknowledge reality.
Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella have been quick to exploit this opportunity. Their argument is that France requires a government prepared to restore public order, strengthen policing, enforce existing laws and confront the failures of previous administrations. Whether National Rally could successfully deliver all these objectives is another question. What matters electorally is that its message has acquired renewed relevance at precisely the moment when Macron's authority appears weakest.
The political arithmetic is revealing. Higgie reports polling placing Le Pen at approximately 36 per cent support, substantially ahead of Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the leader of the radical-left France Unbowed movement. Other surveys have suggested that a growing proportion of French voters regard Le Pen as a credible potential president. These figures are snapshots rather than guarantees of electoral victory, but they indicate that the political environment has become increasingly favourable to National Rally.
There is a historical precedent for this development. During the famous French disturbances of May 1968, student protests developed into a wider crisis involving workers, strikes and challenges to the authority of President Charles de Gaulle. Many revolutionaries imagined that France stood on the threshold of a fundamental political transformation. Yet when parliamentary elections were held in June, the Gaullists won an overwhelming victory. Large numbers of ordinary French citizens, alarmed by disorder and uncertainty, preferred the restoration of stability to the revolutionary ambitions of the streets.
The comparison with 2026 is not exact, but the political mechanism may be similar. When demonstrations become associated with violence, people who might otherwise sympathise with legitimate grievances can turn against the movements claiming to represent them. The desire for security and predictable government may become more powerful than dissatisfaction with existing institutions.
This is particularly relevant to France, where the political system has become increasingly fragmented. The traditional centre-Left and centre-Right parties have lost much of their former dominance. Macron's centrist project promised to overcome the old divisions, but his presidency has instead become associated with political instability, economic pressures and recurring confrontations between the state and sections of the population. His government's difficulties in controlling the present disturbances reinforce the perception that the established political order is exhausted.
There is also the question of immigration and national integration. National Rally has long argued that French governments have failed to maintain effective immigration controls and have underestimated the difficulties associated with integrating communities into a shared national culture. The party has sought to connect these concerns with crime, public security and the preservation of French national identity.
Higgie argues that the riots have strengthened this interpretation of France's difficulties. The politically significant issue is whether voters perceive the government as having lost control of public order and whether National Rally can persuade them that its policies offer a practical remedy.
The position of Jean-Luc Mélenchon is particularly difficult. His France Unbowed movement has strongly supported the wider protest movement and has presented itself as an opponent of the existing political and economic establishment. But association with protests that subsequently descend into violence creates obvious electoral risks. Political opponents can portray the radical Left as either unwilling or unable to distinguish legitimate protest from revolutionary destruction.
There is a paradox here. The more that radical movements emphasise confrontation with the established order, the easier it becomes for National Rally to present itself as the defender of ordinary citizens who simply wish to live peacefully, operate businesses, raise families and travel safely through their communities. Political radicalism can therefore strengthen its ideological opponents by frightening moderate voters.
Nor is this analysis confined to conservative commentators. Writing in Crikey on October 20, historian Peter McPhee acknowledged that the violence accompanying the demonstrations could prove highly advantageous to Le Pen. The Guardian's Paul Taylor similarly argued that the immediate political beneficiary of the unrest was the National Rally leader. Such agreement across ideological divisions is significant. It suggests that the electoral consequences of the riots are not merely wishful thinking among supporters of the French nationalist right.
The consequences could extend beyond France. Across Europe, parties critical of immigration policy, supranational governance and established political institutions have been gaining support. Their electoral fortunes vary considerably, and national political circumstances differ, but a common theme is the belief that traditional governing parties have become disconnected from the concerns of ordinary citizens.
France is especially important because of its size, economic influence and central position within the European Union. A National Rally presidency would potentially alter debates over immigration, national sovereignty, European integration and the distribution of political authority between Paris and Brussels. It would not automatically dismantle the existing European political order, but it could substantially change the balance of power within it.
Nevertheless, a Le Pen victory is far from inevitable. French presidential elections are conducted through a two-round system, and the second round has historically encouraged voters from competing political traditions to unite against National Rally. Le Pen also faces legal uncertainty concerning her eligibility to stand following her conviction in the European Parliament funds case. If she cannot contest the election, Jordan Bardella could become the party's alternative candidate. The political movement may therefore benefit from the riots even if Le Pen herself cannot appear on the presidential ballot.
There is also the danger that the French economic crisis could overwhelm the advantages gained from a law-and-order campaign. France faces substantial public debt, persistent budgetary difficulties and difficult choices concerning taxation and government expenditure. A candidate who promises security must also convince voters that economic stability can be restored. The political appeal of nationalism does not eliminate the financial constraints confronting any future government.
Yet the fundamental political lesson remains. Governments cannot indefinitely dismiss public concerns about security, immigration, economic decline and the perceived erosion of national identity without creating opportunities for their opponents. Nor can movements seeking radical transformation assume that disorder will necessarily advance their cause. Sometimes it produces precisely the opposite result.
There is a broader philosophical issue concerning the relationship between liberty and public order. A free society must protect peaceful demonstrations, even when the protesters advance unpopular or radical political positions. But the right to protest does not include a right to burn buildings, loot shops or assault police officers. When the distinction is blurred, public confidence in democratic freedoms can itself be weakened. Citizens who become frightened of disorder may eventually demand more authoritarian measures than would otherwise have been politically acceptable.
The tragedy is that legitimate grievances can become lost amid the destruction. French students concerned about educational standards, teachers frustrated by inadequate resources and families struggling with living costs have genuine issues deserving political attention. Their interests are not advanced when public attention shifts from reform to arson and looting. Violent activists may claim to be confronting injustice, but their actions can undermine the prospects of peaceful change.
For Australia, the French experience offers a warning about the dangers of political complacency. Our circumstances are different, and there is no reason to assume that French-style unrest must be repeated here. Nevertheless, the broader lesson applies to any democracy. Political institutions that lose public confidence, fail to address legitimate grievances or appear incapable of maintaining public order create fertile ground for movements promising fundamental change.
The irony of the French situation is therefore considerable. Those who imagined that violent confrontation would weaken the political Right may have handed it a powerful electoral advantage. Every burning vehicle and smashed shopfront becomes another image that National Rally can use to argue that France needs a different government. Every failure of the authorities to restore order potentially reinforces the argument that the existing political establishment has exhausted its legitimacy.
France's immediate future remains uncertain. The riots may subside, public attention may shift to economic questions, and political alliances may change before the presidential election. Nevertheless, the unrest has already altered the political atmosphere. National Rally now has an opportunity to present itself not simply as a protest movement, but as a potential government offering security and stability. Out of the smoke and ashes of France's latest political crisis, Marine Le Pen and her party may emerge stronger than before.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2026/10/frances-riots-are-a-gift-to-le-pen/