Introduction
Robert Brasillach is the archetypal figure of fascism in France. He was a prolific writer, publishing two volumes of poems, seven novels as well as other miscellaneous work, as well as his journalistic career. He edited ‘Je suis partout’, an openly collaborationist newspaper during the Occupation. Under his leadership readership increased from 50,000 before the war to 300,000 by 1943. This reinforces the influence of Brasillach as a key representative of French intellectual collaboration during the Second World War. Brasillach was executed on 6th February 1945 after a brief trial in January. The date here is significant, marking eleven years since the Paris riots which signalled the rise of a fascist movement in France.[i]
These Stavisky Riots reflected the fragility of the Third Republic. As Richard Corliss put it in an article for Time Magazine, Brasillach was ‘killed for his words,’ but what the implications of his words and how did they reflect the key elements of fascism?
Brasillach’s article entitled ‘Les camrades restent,’ published 18th April 1941 embodies some of his fascist ideas, allowing us to look further into the implications of these words during the Occupation. As the title suggests, the article explores comradeship and camaraderie both in a military and a broader sense. Using this article we can explore the following facets of fascism: the aesthetics of Brasillach’s fascism and anti-intellectualism, criticisms of the Third Republic and Brasillach’s vision for France through a spiritual rebirth driven by comrades.
The words ‘par Robert Brasillach,’ are very large and written in a bold font (Figure 3). This formatting is representative of Brasillach as an intellectual celebrity, attaching his name to an article would encourage potential buyers of the newspaper.
Aesthetic fascism and anti-intellectualism
Brasillach’s writing style represents aesthetic vision of fascism, evidenced in his descriptive style, for example his evocative retelling of his experiences of war, ‘je me souviendrai d’une après-midi d’août ou de septembre, sur une herbe maigre, au soleil encore doux, entre les barbelés,’ (Figure 4).
The reader imagines the soft sun, the grass and the contrasting image of the barbed wire, reflective of Brasillach’s typical multi-sensory descriptions, Brasillach tended to focus more on fascism in an aesthetic sense than in any doctrinal or philosophical sense.[ii] He never formally aligned himself with a political entity, preferring to write about his own view of France, fascism in a subjective sense, using his creativity to create his own vision.[iii] This is reflected in broader conceptions of fascism according to Paxton who describes the lack of a formal philosophical position within fascism as a whole.[iv]
Brasillach’s reluctance to discuss any formal political doctrine links to the related notions of anti-intellectualism and anti-rationalism. The quotation: [La camaraderie] ne nait pas, à proprement parler, des idées »(Figure 5) reflects a clear anti-intellectual stance. Camaraderie, for Brasillach, is not formed of ideas. Brasillach doubles down on this, continuing: “Ou plutôt, les idées n’ont de poids et de valeur que lorsqu’elles sont préceismement incarnées dans des corps humains, que lorsqu’elles sont vécues par des camarades » (Figure 5).
Brasillach’s preference for ideas emanating from the body reflects a stark contrast with rationalism. Paxton refers to anti-intellectualism in fascism, nothing that intellectualism is subordinated in favour of ‘the promptings of the blood and the historic destiny of the group.’[v] Therefore, rather than taking a rational stance, Brasillach, as a fascist, relies instead on physicality, a primitive strength that perhaps reflects Brasillach’s rejection of materiality, and a yearning for a simpler existence. It also suggests a focus on ideas producing action, rather than mere intellectualism.
Furthermore, this anti-rational stance can be contrasted with an earlier period, the First World War where, in a message delivered by the President Raymond Poincaré (President of the Republic from 1913-1920) he referred at the end of the speech to the key values of ‘la Liberté, la Justice et la Raison.’ This direct reference to reason provides a clear contrast in the values of the Third Republic and the values of Brasillach and the fascists of the occupation. There are several further contrasts that can be drawn between the Third Republic and Brasillach’s brand of fascism.
Criticisms of the Third Republic
This article expressly criticises the Third Republic, describing a ‘vile “République des camarades”’ (Figure 6) that must not be returned to. Brasillach puts ‘république des camarades’ in quotation marks, suggesting that he wishes to distance himself from the phrase, making sure it is clear that these are not his words. This reflects the general view of fascists in France during the occupation where the Third Republic was condemned by Petain’s government.
The belief was that the Third Republic had allowed ‘forces’ such as materialism and socialism to distort the moral compass of the French population.[vi] French fascists argued that it was moral considerations rather than economic ones which led France to the perceived state of disrepair, explaining in part why the French fascist regime involved fewer economic reforms than within other fascist regimes of the time.[vii] This focus on a new set of French moral values can be seen clearly in the replacement of the motto of France from ‘Liberté, égalité, fratérnité’ to ‘famille, travail, patrie,’ this new motto was invented by the Croix de Feu in the 1930s reflecting the promise of spiritual renewal and a return to more traditional values, notably the importance of the family unit.[viii] It was, according to Roger Griffin, a hostility to the Third Republic which united the wide spectrum of elites involved in the collaborationist project.[ix] Despite hailing from different places in French society, a distaste for the values of the Third Republic bound these parties together, including military elements, the Church, royalists and Bonapartists.[x]
The ‘vile” république des camarades”’ described by Brasillach is reflected in the idea of the union sacrée. The phrase ‘union sacrée’ was coined by President Raymond Poincaré in a message published on the 4thof August 1914. He states that France will be ‘héroïquement défendue” by a ‘union sacrée’ whereby the people of France are ‘aujourd’hui fraternellement assembles dans une même indignation contre l’agresseur.’ This suggests a horizontal camaraderie between the French people, regardless of their political persuasion. We see various groups that had been oppose d to war join against the German threat, for example workers’ movements had previously threatened a general strike in the event of the outbreak of war.[xi] The concept of French national camaraderie can also be see on the battlefield, « Cette camraderie si franche, si loyale qui a fait de lui « la grande famille »is a quotation from an account from the 272nd infantry regiment during the war, reflecting this spirit of camaraderie.
Evidently, Brasillach’s concept of comradeship is very different from this Third Republic view, he presents a more limited view of what a ‘camrade’ is, limiting it from the outset with the title ‘Les camarades restent,’ suggesting that those who have not stayed and have abandoned the cause do not qualify. This presents a very different notion that reflects the critiques of the values of the Third Republic.
Loss and Rebirth
This article embodies another key element of fascism, loss and rebirth. This is highlighted near the end of the article: ‘La France renaîtra. La France sera vive et belle,’ (Figure 9) As well as a spiritual renewal, Pétain’s government promised a ‘national revolution’ in France.[xii] Roger Griffin emphasises that the myth of death and rebirth (the palingenetic myth) is at the core of all fascist movements.[xiii] Returning to Brasillach’s phrasing, he is looking forward to a new era where France will be ‘vive et belle’. The use of the future tense rather than the conditional tense and the use of two short, unqualified sentences suggest certainty, reflecting Brasillach’s confidence in the fascist project.
The importance of the camarades
Soucy refers to the ‘homo facista,’ as a quintessential fascist figure, i.e., the common fascist man.[xiv] Brasillach uses a military term ‘camrade’ to refer to those who he believes represent his cause, linking to the value placed on violence in fascism.[xv] The military term also suggests a focus on youth and strength, ideas which can link to the extreme nationalism essential to fascism and the focus on violence.[xvi] For Brasillach, the use of the term ‘camrade’ suggests that he is appealing to a certain group of people in a call to arms, i.e., people of fighting age and capability. This seemingly sidelines large sections of society, not only those of different political inclinations but also anyone middle-aged or older. Brasillach’s intention therefore seems to be to include those who will be able to continue these new ideas of fascism to the next generation. He refers at the end of the article to ‘une nation de camarades,’ using the future tense in the sentence. This suggests that he believes that there is not currently camaraderie within the nation of France and that it will be possible following a move away from the values of the Third Republic towards this new camaraderie.
This admiration for youth and virility can be seen in other texts by Brasillach, notably his account of his experiences at Nuremberg in Cent heures chez Hitler where he admired the youth divisions that were represented, comparing the strength of the German youth to his perceived weakness of the French under the democratic Third Republic.[xvii] Indeed, Brasillach believed that the adolescent period of life was where one was the most incorruptible, believing that after one loses their youth the rest of one’s life is spent in regret.[xviii]This is further evidence of Brasillach’s belief that the youth are vehicles for change.
Final thoughts
Overall, this article mirrors Brasillach’s general vision of fascism, a movement built not on intellectualism but rather a movement of like-minded visionaries towards a new, imagined future. Brasillach himself existed within several small cliques throughout his life from his privileged education at lycée Louis-le-Grand and the Ecole National to his work at Je Suis Partout and his friendships with other fascist intellectuals in Paris.[xix]Brasillach lived within a series of small echo-chambers, suggesting that his vision of ‘camrades’ here does not reflect the majority of society, as the same notion did when it was used during the First World War under the Third Republic.
Very limited extrapolation is required to link Brasillach’s words to the key principles of fascism, notably his exploration of ‘les camrades,’ a qualified and exclusionary term reflecting a key facet of fascism, unity through exclusion. Therefore, can Brasillach’s version of camaraderie, dependent on complicity, truly be considered as such?
[i] David Shalck, ‘Fascist Engagement’, The spectrum of political engagement: Mounier, Benda, Nizan, Brasillach, Sartre (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979), 76-109, p.83
[ii] William Tucker, ‘Politics and Aesthetics: the Fascism of Robert Brasillach’, Western Political Quarter (15.4, 1962), 605-17, p.606
[iii] Ibid p.613
[iv] Robert Paxton, ‘The Five Stages of Fascism’, The Journal of Modern History (70.1, 1998), 1-23, p.4
[v] Ibid, pp.4-5
[vi] Roger Griffin, The Nature of Fascism, (Routledge, London, 1993), Chapter 5
[vii] Robert Soucy, ‘The Nature of Fascism in France’, Journal of Contemporary History (1.1, 1966), 27-55, p.49
[viii] Joan Tumblety, The Oxford Handbook of Fascism (Oxford University Press, 2012), part IV, chapter 27, s.iii
[ix] Griffin, The Nature of Fascism, Chapter 5
[x] Ibid Chapter 5
[xi] David Drake, French Intellectuals and Politics from the Dreyfus Affair to the Occupation (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), p.53
[xii] Griffin, The Nature of Fascism, Chapter 5
[xiii] Ibid Chapter 2
[xiv] Soucy, ‘The Nature of Fascism in France’ p.50
[xv] Paxton, ‘The Five Stages of Fascism’, p.7
[xvi] Soucy, ‘The Nature of Fascism in France’, pp.47-48
[xvii] Robert Brasillach, ‘Cent heures chez Hitler’, Notre Avant-Guerre (Paris: Plon, 1941), 264-279.
[xviii] Tucker, ‘Politics and Aesthetics’ p.613-14
[xix] Ibid p.613
Appendix
Figure 1 : https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FRobert_Brasillach&ved=0CBYQjRxqFwoTCNjJjrjXnJEDFQAAAAAdAAAAABAI&opi=89978449[accessed 01/12/2025]
Figures 2-6 & 9: https://www.retronews.fr/journal/je-suis-partout/18-avril-1941/1/635def7d-ff01-45cb-a715-419f05b98879[accessed 04/11/2025]
Figure 7: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Procès_Pétain.jpg [accessed 01/12/2025]
Figure 8: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Raymond_Poincaré_officiel_(cropped).jpg [accessed 02/12/2025]
Further Reading:
Brasillach, R. ‘Cent heures chez Hitler’, in Notre Avant-Guerre (Paris: Plon, 1941), 264-279
Drake, D. French Intellectuals and Politics from the Dreyfus Affair to the Occupation (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005),
Griffin, R. The Nature of Fascism, (Routledge, London, 1993)
Milza, P., Fascisme Français, passé et présent, (Paris : Flammarion, 1987)
Paxton, R. ‘The Five Stages of Fascism’ in The Journal of Modern History (70.1, 1998), 1-23
Shalck, W. ‘Fascist Engagement’ in The spectrum of political engagement: Mounier, Benda, Nizan, Brasillach, Sartre (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979), 76-109
Sontag, S. ‘Fascinating Fascism,’ New York Review of Books, (06/02/1975)
Soucy, R. ‘The Nature of Fascism in France’ in Journal of Contemporary History (1.1, 1966), 27-55
Sternhell, Z. Neither Right nor Left : Fascist ideology in France (Berkley: University of California Press, 1986)
Tucker, W. ‘Politics and Aesthetics: the Fascism of Robert Brasillach’ in Western Political Quarter (15.4, 1962), 605-17
Tumblety, J. The Oxford Handbook of Fascism (Oxford University Press, 2012)
Intellectuals and the Media in France 
.jpg){kind=link}