Allan Massie: French protesters are following a very old script

'Sarkozy, like Louis XVI in 1789, does not seem to have grasped how volatile the situation has become." So writes the Guardian's Philippe Marlière. The involvement of teenagers in the strikes and protests may be the tipping point, in his opinion. Well, perhaps, but more likely not. "But this is a revolt," Louis XVI reputedly said when told of the attack on the Bastille. "No, sire, it is a revolution".

The exchange is probably apocryphal, a political example of what the French call "l'esprit d'escalier", the witty response that comes to mind only when you have left the company and are on your way out. Nevertheless, the French do indeed have a tradition - a much-cherished tradition - of revolutionary action. When students and high-school pupils flock to take part in a "manif'" or street protest, they are playing a role they have inherited, one so familiar they don't even need a rehearsal. Meanwhile commentators dwell fondly on the tradition of "the barricades". The curtain goes up and the drama resumes.

There is only one thing wrong with this scenario. The French are actually no longer much good at the revolutionary game. It is a very long time since it has been played successfully, not since 1848 indeed. Even that was a limited exercise. When the Paris workers tried to take it further a few months later, their revolutionary action was short-lived. As the exiled king, Louis Philippe, remarked sardonically: "Republics have an advantage over monarchies. They can shoot their citizens." His words received added proof in 1871, when the last real attempt at revolution, the Paris Commune, was bloodily suppressed. Since then France has been revolution-free. The Fifth Republic came into being in 1958 as a result of a Gaullist coup d'etat, rather well disguised, not as a consequence of street action. As for the famous events of May '68, now being eagerly recalled by commentators, the English historian Richard Cobb. who was so steeped in French life that his early work was written in French, dismissed the "soixante-huitards" as "comdiens", actors merely playing at revolution. This month's performers are no more committed. The Gaullist president, Nicolas Sarkozy, may be to General de Gaulle himself as Napoleon III - "Napolon le petit" - was to the first Napoleon, but he is no Louis XVI.

Revolutions are attacks on property and the propertied classes. The French are striking these past few days in defence of property - that is to say, their rights to certain social benefits, especially the entitlement to retire at 60, with a full pension at 65. It is not the wretched of the earth - les Misrables - or even the sans-culottes who are on the march.

There are of course the deprived and underprivileged in France today - those trapped in unemployment for years, the kids in the banlieus - but while they may enjoy a taste of violent action, they are not the ones agitating to defeat the government's attempt to make the French work till they are all of 62. The strikers and demonstrators are trade unionists, public sector workers and middle-class kids. They are not rioting for jobs. They are in the streets to defend their right to stop work early and enjoy a comfortable life in retirement.There is of course an edge to the discontent. Sarkozy's proposed reform, which is in reality a small one that won't kick in for years , is seen as a response to the crisis caused by the failure of detested liberal-capitalist economics. Why should we suffer, people indignantly cry, while the bankers who messed up get off scot-free? However natural the outrage, the fact is that Sarkozy would have been trying to shake up the system even if there had been no global financial crash. This was his intention from the start, and, in truth, the world crack-up has delayed his attempt to implement his plans.

The law raising the retirement age has already been passed by the Chamber of Deputies and is now before the Senate. The Socialists, who have promised to reverse the scheme if they win the next presidential election, are spinning out the debate there in order to extract the greatest possible political advantage from the disturbances. Nevertheless, the expectation is that the Senate will approve the law tomorrow or Friday - at which point, incidentally, schools go off for their half-term break and families will have their minds on holidays rather than demonstrations.

What then? Some union leaders have made it clear they see no purpose in prolonging the strikes when the law is passed. The CGT, which used to be the mighty Communist Union, has not yet decided its position. But strikers are losing pay. Some are already drifting back to work. More will do so after the school holidays. Unless there is some notable and stupid act of provocation on the part of the authorities - the police shooting a demonstrator, for example - things will die down and activity will evaporate - until the next time the curtain goes up on the revolutionary comedy.

One unnamed commentator, described by the right-wing newspaper Le Figaro as "an expert on social relations", was quoted as saying: "All the leaders know that Nicolas Sarkozy won't yield and so they are looking for the way to get out of the conflict without too much damage." Actually, it's a long time since the French Left has been revolutionary - in the 20th century threats to the Republic came more often from the Right. As far back as 1936 the Communist leader Maurice Thorez said: "You have to know how and when to end a strike." That "how and when" will probably soon be found.

The French actor Grard Depardieu says: "What's happening in France is ridiculous." Certainly it's a "comdie", which in French means a play. Depardieu's own privileges and property are of course not under attack. But when this present fuss is over, even the French may have to accept that living longer than previous generations means they will have to work just a bit longer too, 24 whole months - apart from generous holiday entitlements - longer indeed.