Who Are ‘We’? Right-Wing Meaning-Making and the Struggle Over Identity in France

What happens when a distant war becomes a linguistic battleground at home? Across contemporary Europe, political actors increasingly transform global crises into opportunities to redefine who “we” are, what the nation represents, and which political futures are possible. France offers a striking example: during the 2022 presidential campaign, right-wing politicians seized upon the Russo-Ukrainian war not merely as a matter of foreign policy but as a discursive resource for reshaping national identity, sovereignty, and France’s place in Europe. This research investigates how Éric Zemmour, Marine Le Pen, and Valérie Pécresse strategically reframed the war to wage a domestic struggle over meaning – what patriotism entails, what Europe signifies, and how democracy should be defended or reimagined. Using Critical Discourse Analysis and focusing on their Twitter communication during the first months of the full-scale invasion, the study uncovers how the war was domesticated into a narrative of identity crisis. Far-right candidates employed the conflict to strengthen exclusionary, ethnocultural understandings of Frenchness and to legitimize a civilizational opposition between France and its perceived internal and external enemies. In contrast, centre-right discourse mobilized the war to reaffirm France’s role within a wider European community, framing solidarity and integration as essential components of national strength. The research highlights the rhetorical tropes that enable these redefinitions. Catachresis emerges as a key mechanism through which incompatible notions, such as a France that is both sovereign and deeply integrated into Europe, are forced together, generating productive identity tensions. Paradiastole, meanwhile, allows far-right actors to recast nationalist or authoritarian positions as pragmatism, responsibility, or moral clarity. By examining how geopolitical conflict becomes a symbolic resource for domestic political struggle, the study demonstrates how contemporary crises accelerate discursive polarization and blur the distinctions between mainstream and extremist rhetoric. In doing so, it provides new insights into how democratic language can be appropriated, stretched, and transformed in moments of uncertainty. The aim is to illuminate the subtle yet powerful ways in which political actors use crises not only to persuade but to reshape the conceptual foundations of national identity in France, and, by extension, across Europe.