DEMOSCIOCRACY/ DEMOSCIOCRATIE

France in 2026: a democracy running out of steam, a model to reinvent

In 2026, France is experiencing a crisis of political trust on an unprecedented scale. Record abstention, widespread social anger and a sense of abandonment across large parts of the country: the institutions inherited from the Fifth Republic can no longer channel the expectations of a fragmented society. In response, a proposal is emerging: Demosciocracy, a model that seeks to put public decision-making back into citizens’ hands continuously, rather than only at election time.

This article examines the major political and social problems facing France in 2026, then shows how Demosciocracy could offer practical responses through direct citizen participation, transparency and the removal of certain institutional obstacles.

1. The democratic crisis and mass abstention

Election after election, the same conclusion emerges: abstention is increasing, even in votes considered the most decisive. In 2026, it is no longer unusual for more than half of voters to stay away from the polls. For many citizens, voting means choosing between political offerings they consider remote from their concerns, without any real opportunity to influence decisions once the elections are over.

This democratic crisis feeds a sense of powerlessness: voting appears to be a symbolic gesture with no real influence on public policy. The majority-based electoral mechanism, combined with a highly top-down institutional system, reinforces the idea that a minority of elected officials governs for itself, far from citizen oversight.

How Demosciocracy responds to the participation crisis

Demosciocracy rests on a simple principle: involving citizens continuously in public decision-making through regular consultation, deliberation and voting at national and local levels. In practical terms, this means:

• secure public platforms on which laws or public policies can be proposed, amended and voted on;
• citizens’ assemblies selected by lot, tasked with examining proposals in depth, improving them and ensuring their balance;
• an effective right of citizen initiative, allowing issues ignored by traditional parties to be placed on the political agenda.

By restoring real decision-making power to citizens at regular intervals and on concrete issues, Demosciocracy transforms political action: participation is no longer limited to casting a ballot every five years, but becomes a continuous process, helping reduce abstention and restore the sense that voting is useful.

2. Growing social and economic inequality

Despite decades of redistributive policies, France in 2026 remains marked by inequalities of income, wealth and access to public services. The middle classes feel squeezed, those with the least see their situation deteriorate, while a minority concentrates wealth. This divide fuels social anger and the impression that effort is no longer fairly rewarded and economic decisions serve particular interests.

Current economic decision-making mechanisms — often technocratic and heavily influenced by pressure groups — struggle to incorporate citizens’ practical concerns: local employment, nearby public services, working conditions and genuinely progressive taxation. Budgetary trade-offs are too often made out of public view.

Economic choices under citizen oversight

Demosciocracy proposes putting citizens back at the heart of major economic choices by introducing shared decision-making mechanisms on:

• major tax policy directions, including the degree of progressivity and the distribution of taxation between households and businesses;
• budget priorities, such as education, health, the ecological transition and defence, through large-scale national and local participatory budgets;
• policies supporting struggling regions and economic sectors.

These decisions, subject to public deliberation, would be prepared by mixed committees of independent experts and randomly selected citizens, tasked with presenting several costed scenarios and their consequences. Citizens could then make an informed choice through a vote.

By breaking through the current opacity of economic trade-offs and giving citizens real influence over the choices that shape wealth distribution, Demosciocracy helps legitimise collective effort and reduce the sense of injustice that fuels social tensions.

3. The territorial divide between Paris and France’s “deserts”

In many rural or suburban areas, public service closures, increasingly scarce transport, shortages of healthcare and a lack of investment fuel a sense of abandonment. In contrast, Paris and a few major cities concentrate skilled employment, cultural infrastructure and centres of decision-making. This unequal geography of opportunity generates deep anger, often directed at a “centre” seen as deaf to the realities of the “real country”.

Current decentralisation measures have only partly addressed this divide. Local elected officials lack financial room for manoeuvre, while many major decisions continue to be taken in Paris. Citizens in areas described as “deserts” feel their priorities carry no weight on the national agenda.

Restoring power to territories through Demosciocracy

Demosciocracy proposes a thorough reorganisation of territorial decision-making based on two pillars: genuine subsidiarity and direct local participation.

Genuine subsidiarity: any decision that can be made effectively at local level — municipality, intermunicipal grouping, department or region — must be made there, with corresponding financial resources. The national level intervenes only on matters that cannot be decided locally.

Direct local participation: residents of an area can initiate binding consultations on locating public services, reopening a railway station, prioritising energy renovation, creating a health centre and so on.

A single national platform, adapted locally, would allow every citizen to participate in decisions concerning their area: ranking investments, choosing between projects and monitoring implementation. Local authorities would have to respect these choices or publicly explain any departure from them.

By directly involving residents in territorial decisions and giving them a permanent right to scrutinise implementation, Demosciocracy reduces the sense of abandonment and rebalances the relationship between centre and periphery.

4. The purchasing-power crisis and persistent inflation

Since the price surge at the start of the 2020s, inflation has durably eroded household purchasing power, particularly among working- and middle-class households. Energy, food and housing weigh heavily on budgets, while wages have not followed the same trajectory. Many French people feel that monetary, budgetary and wage decisions are made without them, in circles far removed from their daily lives.

One-off measures — energy vouchers, price caps and exceptional bonuses — are seen as temporary patches adopted in haste, without a lasting strategy to protect the most vulnerable or a real debate about how value is shared between capital and labour.

More transparent and deliberative economic governance

Under Demosciocracy, major policy choices affecting purchasing power would no longer be the preserve of a few circles of experts and decision-makers. They would be subject to structured public procedures:

• regular citizens’ conventions on purchasing power, bringing together randomly selected citizens, trade unions, employers’ organisations and experts;
• public debate on alternative scenarios for wage policy, taxation of profits, and targeted or universal support;
• citizen votes on coherent packages of measures, with a government commitment to respect their overall structure.

Transparency would also be strengthened: every decision with a significant impact on living standards — social reform, a VAT change, an increase or reduction in support — would have to be accompanied by an accessible, plainly explained impact assessment debated publicly before adoption.

By enabling citizens to influence trade-offs that directly affect their finances, Demosciocracy does not promise an end to economic constraints. It does guarantee that any sacrifices will be decided collectively and perceived as more legitimate.

5. Distrust of elected officials and perceived corruption

Conflicts of interest, suspicions of favouritism and revolving doors between the public and private sectors: in recent years, numerous episodes have fuelled the idea that elected officials serve particular interests more than the public interest. Even where corruption is not proven, the perception of excessive closeness between political leaders, large businesses and lobby groups deeply damages trust.

Existing oversight mechanisms — asset declarations, ethics authorities and transparency laws — seem insufficient to part of the population, which calls for stricter safeguards and direct citizen oversight of the exercise of power.

Radical transparency and permanent citizen oversight

Demosciocracy proposes shifting the centre of gravity of power so that it rests not only with elected officials but also with permanent citizen bodies equipped with real oversight powers. Possible tools include:

• randomly selected citizen monitoring committees empowered to scrutinise conflicts of interest, the use of public funds and relations with lobbyists;
• mandatory real-time transparency about public officials’ schedules, meetings with interest groups and public procurement decisions;
• the ability for citizens to trigger recall procedures in cases of serious ethical breaches or repeated failure to honour commitments.

These tools do not replace judges or independent authorities; they complement them with an institutionalised citizen perspective. Multiplying checks and balances — elected officials, the judiciary and organised citizens — necessarily reduces the grey areas in which misconduct flourishes.

By making decision-making visible and enabling citizens to intervene when things go wrong, Demosciocracy aims to transform the relationship between those who govern and those who are governed: less suspicion, more responsibility and accountability.

6. The failure of structural reforms blocked by the bicameral system

France’s bicameral system — the National Assembly and the Senate — is supposed to guarantee balance and the quality of legislation. In practice, it is often accused of holding back reforms considered urgent by part of the population: the ecological transition, pension overhaul, administrative simplification, renewal of public hospitals and school reform.

Between bills moving back and forth between the chambers, minimal compromises, diluted amendments and constitutional constraints, many reforms reach the end of the process stripped of their substance, or never emerge at all. This impression of permanent deadlock feeds citizens’ frustration: why participate in a system that cannot reform itself?

Overcoming institutional deadlock through citizen sovereignty

Demosciocracy does not necessarily propose abolishing all parliamentary representation, but rather reorganising legislative power around citizens’ direct sovereignty. Several approaches could be considered:

• establishing a permanent citizens’ chamber selected by lot, responsible for co-drafting laws with elected representatives and holding a veto over texts deemed contrary to the public interest;
• providing a legislative citizens’ initiative referendum, allowing laws to be adopted directly when Parliament blocks a proposal supported by a large majority of citizens;
• limiting the passage of bills between the two chambers through strict deadlines, after which a citizen decision takes precedence, through a referendum or a national digital vote.

Within this framework, representative institutions do not disappear. They become tools for giving form to citizens’ wishes, rather than filters for diluting or ignoring them. The current obstacles of bicameralism are offset by the possibility of an orderly and regulated appeal to citizens’ direct judgment.

Conclusion: rebuilding democracy on a scale equal to the challenges

France in 2026 faces immense challenges: a democratic crisis, social inequalities, territorial divides, pressure on purchasing power, distrust of elected officials and institutional deadlock. These symptoms are not isolated: they reveal a systemic crisis in a political model struggling to involve citizens in defining the public interest.

Demosciocracy is neither a naive utopia nor a magic solution. It is a proposal for profound rebuilding, based on a simple idea: in an educated, connected and demanding society, it is no longer tenable to confine citizen participation to a few widely spaced elections. Public decision-making must become a continuous, transparent and shared process.

Rebuilding the system means rewriting the rules: recognising an effective right of citizen initiative, institutionalising randomly selected citizens’ assemblies, opening up public data, strictly regulating conflicts of interest and overcoming bicameral deadlock when the popular will is clear. In other words, accepting that sovereignty is no longer delegated as a blank cheque, but is continuously shared, scrutinised and corrected.

At a time when resignation and authoritarian retreat are increasingly tempting, Demosciocracy offers another path: a mature democracy that trusts citizens’ collective intelligence to confront crises and invent new solutions. It remains to be seen whether French society will be ready to undertake this profound reform of its political system — and whether its elites will agree to share power in earnest.