Sometimes, we sometimes fantasize and even believe in a humanitarian burst in everyone-including the most ideologically marked people.
Sometimes people say to such blatant facts, as indisputable, that they will bend to reality. Not our reality, that which one desires to be perceptible, but to the scientific reality. The one that is irrefutable or that one believes as such.
But we realize that for some it is inadmissible.
And I must make it clear it is even more the case for the ideologue of left than for the ideologues of right.
And one of those topics that shatters the denial of reality is that of Israel and anti-Semitism.
The height of history is that a certain left (the extreme left, which is joined more and more by a fringe of the so-called social-democratic left wing) is crying out for fear of being accused of anti-Semitism .
And yet, yes, yet! It is this Proudhonian left that is at the heart of the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe, and especially in France!
The article, published on Slate.fr, branch of the very leftist Washington.post, is the sad example!
The author Nicolas Lebourg is a researcher in human and social sciences (Center for Political Studies of Latin Europe). In 2017 he published with Isabelle Sommier "The Violence of political margins" at Riveneuve, with Jean-Yves Camus "Far-right politics in Europe" at Harvard university press, and with Jérome Fourquet "The New Algerian war n 'will not take place' at the Jean Jaurès Foundation. It is therefore a pure, a true anti-racist!
He thinks that his "hunt on the far right" "cleanses" him and protects him from any accusation of anti-Semitism.
Yet, just read his last article (below) to pierce the strength of anti-Semitism that gnaws at him without him noticing!
For him, the "Manifesto against anti-Semitism" published in late April, signed by 350 personalities and more than 100,000 French citizens, would be a ploy conspiracy!
In the aftermath of the denial of Justice in the Halimi Affair, this article appears as a real plea for "peaceful anti-Semitism", an insult to our Jewish fellow citizens, and a call to see them leave so as not to confuse their hateful message!
The author dares to put on an equal footing the deadly anti-Semitism that sweeps our country for nearly 20 years and a pseudo "Islamophobia" used, very intelligently, by the organizers of radical Islamism as a counter-fire to the accusations anti-Semitism, which are very real. We have just seen it in Toulouse with the blessing of the Mosque of Paris!
This paper is therefore intended to destroy all the intellectuals who fight, often to their detriment, against the durable installation of antisemitism in our country.
It aims to put the real, anti-Semitism, by the virtual, Islamophobia, which exists only in the tortured and revanchist spirit of a left sick of its impotence!
In his historical review, the author forgets to report the antisemitic fervor of the left since 1840!
Thus, in the 1840s, socialist thinkers shaped the myth of the Jewish banker, "king of finance" and exploiter. From the utopian socialists (Fourier, Toussenel, Leroux, etc.) to the Blanquists, to the Proudhonian school, all the sensitivities of the French left at the time are marked, to varying degrees, by a judeophobic imaginary which draws on Catholic culture and is characterized by a total misunderstanding of the real life conditions of the Jews (the Jewish proletariat is ignored, and the idea that all Jews are financiers and capitalists is a deeply rooted belief).
This anti-Semitism of the left has a programmatic aim. Before Toussenel, Fourier proposes to return to the emancipation of the Jews and to regulate their economic activity. Until the Great War, socialist economists, poorly Marxist, give in anti-Semitism - well, Regnard, Delaisi or Louzon.
For a part of the left, anti-Semitism is therefore seen as a "stage": thus unintentionally, the anti-Semites would do "revolutionary work". Moreover, anti-Semitism is a hot topic, which is discussed in avant-garde journals, which fascinates some intellectuals.
Finally, with the pacifist anti-Semitism of the 1930s, anti-Jewish hatred struck the heart of the left for the last time.
Thus, for almost fifteen years, anti-Semitism continues to be, from time to time, a polemic weapon used by the Communist Party against the figure of the leader of the SFIO Leon Blum, a kind of crossroads occurs at the time of the Front popular.
In the passionate climate of the late 1930s, the SFIO is divided. Around Paul Faure, a whole section of the socialists, attached to the pacifist tradition, accused Blum and his entourage of wanting to precipitate France into a war against Germany in solidarity with the persecuted Jews, thus reactivating the old conspiracy myth.
Anti-Semitism broke out during the debacle and with the suicide of the SFIO in Vichy in July 1940. And the left will be widely present in the Laval government, itself socialist.
This is the sad historical reality, Monsieur Lebourg!
So review your courses before accusing! And let those who fight against anti-Semitism do it as their duty to call them.
The article by Nicolas Lebourg (Slate.fr) below:
"The new anti-Semitism in France": who is really in the "denial of reality"?
The collective work in which Pascal Bruckner and Philippe Val collaborated is emblematic of a conspiracy approach to the blindness - particularly state - to Muslim anti-Semitism.
The French Ambassador to Hungary, Éric Fournier, has been replaced. The President of the Republic ordered June 28 the end of his functions, the day before of the article of Médiapart revealing that he had written a note ten days earlier in which he praised Viktor Orbán's regime.
The diplomat believed that criticism of the regime was a conspiracy: the press "French and Anglo-Saxon" would like to divert attention from "True modern anti-Semitism", that of "Muslims of France and Germany", and so would forgethe myth of populism".
In Hungary, this case is getting bigger. Seen from France, it shows how a theory of conspiracy, which wants to be legitimate because fighting anti-Semitism, has become a structuring element of the representation of the world of some of our elites.
Conspiracy has never been booked young people or supporters of his antisemitic version. Antisemitism has the ability to aggregate people of right and left sensibility, often playing signals to each other at the same time, as shown by the photo-montage analysis Sorelian relayed by Socialist Gerard Filoche-justice having relaxed Alain Soral in the case.
This is why the company that wants to make anti-Semitism an exclusively leftist and Muslim product is a growing conspiracy.
A symptom more than a book
A few weeks ago, the petition manifesto, initiated by Philippe Val and signed by 300 "personalities", which accompanied the release of the collective work New anti-Semitism in France engaged many reactions on the dangerousness to reduce anti-Semitism to populations of Arab-Muslim origin - and the danger of reducing them to the former.
However, it was observed that some famous signatures, which could have signed with the polemist his Manifesto against the new totalitarianism from 2006 - thus Caroline Fourest - were not present this time, marking their distance with a text too wobbly and radical.
However, if the buzz to launch the book was powerful, little has been done on the book itself, which proves to be an enlightening symptom of the cultural decomposition of the French elites and an interesting way of entering the world. renewal of ethnocultural tensions. The fundamental question of anti-Semitism can not be abandoned to alterophobic agendas - and Slate has already published 250 articles on the antisemitic question.
The book has some remarkable features. First of all, we understand that it is signed collectively, so much it is certain that it missed an author to coordinate the whole. Each individual chapter, obviously quickly written, repeats elements of precedents. But this has an advantage: we see the obsessions, the shared evidence, in short the confirmation bias that allows authors and others to have a common vision.
It is claimed that only Marine Le Pen would have had the courage to denounce this anti-Semitism, the others being supposed not to have wanted to alienate the Muslim vote.
We also perceive the discomfort that certainly felt some of the signatories of the tribune when they and they were able to discover in this book passages where it is explained that President Hollande has preferred Leonarda at Sarah Halimi (p.93-94, by Barbara Lefebvre) and where it is stated that the French government participates "to the plan of conquest of the planet by the submission of its inhabitants to Islam"(Page 125, by Boualem Sansal).
Among the assertions hammered as truths is also the accusation against media that would do anything to hide Muslim anti-Semitism. It is claimed by several authors and others that among the candidates for the presidency of the Republic, only Marine Le Pen would have had the courage to denounce this anti-Semitism, the others being supposed not to have wanted to alienate the Muslim vote.
Nobody seems to have envisaged that the candidate wanted to federate the Islamophobic votes, on the one hand because Islamophobia would not exist and on the other hand because only the candidates not coming from the far right follow strategies in elections.
The myth of the media omerta
This assertion of the existence of a media omnibus, nor any other over the pages, is based on a datum: this would be an obvious truth that we could not discuss and that we would not would not have to demonstrate, in the same way as that of the former ambassador to Hungary.
However, it is quite simple to know if the French press is interested in the issue of anti-Semitism or not, by questioning the database Europresse, which digitizes and stores information. Here is a graph of the number of articles for the item "antisemitism" published over the last twenty years in the referenced French press.
Admittedly, we can argue that to speak of a phenomenon is not necessarily to treat it with justice. But the idea that there is a media omnibus about anti-Semitism appears rationally as a conspiracy myth.
The use of the brave "padamalgame" by several authors and others shows that it is the aesthetics of the force of conviction that is supposed to reason rather than the rational arrangement of the facts -see Samuel Laurent's Twitter thread, journalist in the World, on the neologism coined in 2012.
This July 6, 2018, an article in one from the Monde site told us that "sentences of between eight and sixteen years in prison were pronounced on Friday, July 6, against Houssame Hatri (on the run), Ladje Haidara and Abdou Salam Koita, prosecuted for kidnapping, extortion, aggravated violence, criminal conspiracy and rape for one of between them. [Justice] also sentenced their two accomplices to five and six years' imprisonment. The Assize Court of Val-de-Marne in Créteil has recognized the aggravating circumstance of anti-Semitisme ". Where are the conspiracies of justice and the media when sentences are pronounced and displayed in one?
"Denial" as a state ideology
Yet, in the chapter of Pascal Bruckner, we read that when a Muslim kills a Jew, "we do not have the right to say that it is anti-Semitism". There are currently 350,000 responses to the query "Muslim anti-SemitismIn Google.
It also reads that the cry "Allahu AkbarUttered by the jihadists would besimilar to the "Sieg Heil" of the Nazis", Making a multisecular religious formula the equivalent of the" salvation to victory "of the exterminators. The author also refers the antifas to fascism: it is there, all the same, to omit all the historical and sociological works dealing with both fascism and this nebula.
The lack of data obviously aims to reinforce the presuppositions. The vulgate on "the new anti-Semitism" asserts that all acts of violence are Arab-Muslim.
The authors and others all repeat the same antiphon: the eleven months between the assassination of Sarah Halimi and the moment when justice decided to retain the motive of anti-Semitism are seen as evidence of guilt and fault that demonstrate that anti-Semitism anddenialWould be a state ideology. On the contrary, we could see them as the sign of a justice that works and operates in a rhythm that is not one of polemics. To tell the truth, the second hypothesis has the merit of intellectual coherence.
The lack of data obviously aims to reinforce the presuppositions. The vulgate on "the new anti-Semitism" says that all acts of violence are Arab-Muslim, in a wave launched with the second intifada in 2000 - year in which anti-Semitic violence is multiplied by six in France.
We called back in this article that the statistics produced by the work of the police and gendarmerie did not designate this ethno-cultural group as having a monopoly on anti-Semitic violence, while the opinion polls showed a polarization of anti-Semitism on the extreme right and a strong prejudice about the power of Jews among French immigrants from the south and east of the Mediterranean.
On social networks, these statistics are often accused of being rigged by those who say they are out of denial, in the face of reality. In practical terms, this assertion would imply that a network would be working in the police stations, gendarmerie barracks and the courts to organize the non-classification of complaint filings, with the complicity of the media and despite political alternations. It is still a conspiracy theory or, if one wants to refine, an epistemological crisis and a systematic doubt pointed by the specialist of international relations Olivier Schmitt.
In the book, the facts are often crippled. This book, which is supposed to deal with contemporary anti-Semitism, talks about parades where anti-Semitic slogans were uttered, listing only pro-Palestinians and evacuating the "Angry Day" event.
Monette Vacquin talks about "trial made by the state to Georges BensoussanFor incitement to hatred - in 2015, the historian had distorted in the program "Replicas" on France Culture comments sociologist Smaïn Laacher on anti-Semitism in Arab families in France. The formula that points to the quasi-totalitarian state behemoth has the advantage of avoiding saying that the League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism (Licra) was a civil party. The writer was relaxed and the Licra did not join the appeal, which he also won, unlike other anti-racist associations.
Jacques Tarnero has the subtlety to speak of this call only to be able to denounce these "useful idiots of anti-anti-anti-racismWhat would the associations be? Some disagreements can be found with some of them, but it is unreasonable to call them anti-Jews. This willingness to arrange with reality goes through all the contributions.
The author also resumes the buzz on the documentary on anti-Semitism deprogrammed by Arte last year, while asking: "PWhy this denial of the real?". In fact, this film was simply a television and intellectual disaster. Telerama had contacted three historians: no one could find anything to save - it was about Johann Chapoutot, from Samuel Ghiles-Meilhac and the author of these lines.
Confusions and amalgam
In the absence of demonstration, the book uses elements that are not well connected. Luc Ferry exposes that anti-Semitism is the work of the far left and the Islamists, but his chapter has various confusions - among others between the far left and the ultra left, which are separate currents.
The author rightly points out the antisemitism of Louis Farrakhan, the president of the black American organization Nation of Islam (NoI). In addition to dating back to the 1970s when she was born forty years earlier, he does not seem to perceive that his remarks are damaging to his demonstration.
In the United States, the most marginal-though marginal- was not "Islamo-leftism": it was the agreements between black and white racists in the name of their joint desire to organize racial separation.
In France, the attempts of implantation of the NoI gave nothing, except the pan-Africanist militant Kemi Sheba, who says to come from it. This ex-black supremacist Egyptian-esotericist for a time, not towards leftism, but towards the ethno-differentialist conceptions of the extreme radical right, before forking on African nationalism -son last book came out with a wide range of pre-cast, including the former footballer Nicolas Anelka.
All in all, yes, there are anti-white racists (for the NoI, whites are creatures of Satan, and blacks of God), but no, it really has nothing to do with the denunciation of a media omnibus on Islamo-leftism.
Yes, there is a tendency to Nazification of Israel in the radicals of the left, as historically absurd as the denunciation of "Islamo-fascism", but no, they do not have the monopoly of this viaticum for anti-Semitism.
Finally, it is not clear why the US NoI would show that anti-Semitism would be a Muslim and left-wing affair, whereas if we look internationally, movements like the Hungarian Jobbik or the Greek Golden Dawn demonstrate that anti-Semitism is doing very well on the radical extreme right - even if Jobbik tried a refocus.
A naive "lucidity"
It will have been understood: the more the book tells us aboutdenial of the real", The more he only builds an artifact. However, for so many people to agree to sign his launching manifesto, it is good that his words refers to a problem that must be seized. In this comprehensive approach, we can reconcile an article outside the chapter of the book that Daniel Sibony sign.
The article is the one that the writer Pierre Jourde devoted to the criticisms made to the manifesto. The tone is much more measured than that of the book, but we find the classic arguments: "denial is the rule»,«voluntary blindnessWould reign among intellectuals and intellectuals complacent with Islamism and blind to Muslim anti-Semitism.
But the author has formulas that allow us to understand the production of his point of view: "When I was a student in the late 1970s, anti-Semitism seemed like a Martian thing. Who could be anti-Semitic after 1945? Some old Petainists rancid, and that's all. Moreover, racism was reserved for the Dupont-Lajoie with whiskers that we vomited, and we should not touch our buddies Arab or Malian".
In other words, the author has imagined a peaceful society, where the Evil is residual to the "beaufs". He imagined it defeated anti-Semitism, while in 1977, to the question "UIs a French person of Jewish origin as French as any other Frenchman?Only 65% of those surveyed and answered respond positively. In a 1978 survey, 5% of those surveyed declared themselves openly anti-Semitic, and 4% described themselves as antipathetic towards Jews. In the same year, 24% of French and French respondents acknowledged that they would be reluctant to vote for a Jewish candidate in the presidential election. In short: the student he was mistaken.
Many were like him, believing Europe came out of violence, the Enlightenment Enlightenment. The world was still charged with mass crimes, and from Cambodia to Rwanda, from Yugoslavia to Syria, it never stopped being bloodied.
It is perhaps this difficulty in understanding that violence and hatred are part of historical norms that explains the zeal of those who rediscover it to say that they are alone in being finally lucid.
Twenty years ago, a film character played by Woody Allen explained to his son the extermination of the Jews of Europe and let loose that the problem was that records were made to be beaten. To think that the world was done with antisemitic violence was a nice but profound naivety.
So those who have been anesthetized have become aware, at the mercy of the shocks of September 11 or November 13, that the wheel of history has not stopped, seem to imagine themselves on a mission to awaken others , shout that they and they are "in denial". They had imagined that we were living in an ahistorical time and, after their shock, shouted out to say that they were the lucid ones, without thinking that others thought simply as the character of Woody Allen rather than Pierre Jourde.
This biased relationship to history is seen in the chapter of the book written by Daniel Sibony. The latter insists on passages from the Old Testament opposing the Hebrews and their Arab neighbors, to show a rejection of the Jews by the Arabs even before Islam, which was then magnified by the Koran. He laughs at this pre-Koranic animosity.
Rather than seeing there an inexplicable opposition since the dawn of time, would it not be reasonable not to be astonished that over the centuries, war was waged above all between neighbors? France has fought well with England, Spain, Germany or Italy. Not that we are Europhobic, but these countries were our neighbors.
That the Arabs and the Hebrews wiped themselves centuries before Islam is a behavior quite "normal" with regard to the history of societies. Perhaps it is this difficulty in understanding that violence and hate are part of historical norms, which in itself is a rather nice mistake of perspective, which explains the zeal of those who rediscover it to say to be finally lucid.
Redistribution of alterophobia maps
This comprehensive approach is not enough, however. Some last worries remain. One of the collective texts responding to the manifesto led to the formation of a group "Fighting anti-Semitism, defending our values", Continuing to deconstruct him.
On the SOS Racisme website, the collective reacted to a video capture of a conference-debate made by several contributors and contributors of the book. Pointed at Viktor Orbán's defense, the reference to Charles Maurras and attacks againstJews from aboveUttered by two of the speakers.
The video comes from a far-right YouTube channel specializing in the denunciation of Muslim anti-Semitism, which until then had mainly broadcast videos of two personalities unknown to the general public but famous in far-right radical circles: Guillaume Faye and Yann-Ber Tillenon.
They do not have a very active past in the fight against anti-Semitism. They were animators of the ethnicist current of the New Right and worked to integrate his views into the Breton movement. They are found around an ultra-radical-quality journal, despite its nods to the various radical German nationalisms-Zionism"As the main enemy, because supposed to be the engine of racial globalization globalist.
They took the vow of an international ethno-regionalist who led them to the apologia for the unification of the White World -no without interest today the alt right American. Faye and Tillenon separated from Research and Studies Group for European Civilization (Greece) in the spring of 1987.
Guillaume Faye becomes the apostle of the racial war and the reconquest of Europe against the Arabo-Moslems - with a violence so much condemned by the courts as by Alain de Benoist or Alain Sora's websitel.
After the participation of the two men in 2006 in the International Conference on "The Future of the White World" organized in Moscow, the break is with the nazifying media.
The following year, Guillaume Faye proposes indeed a deep strategic reversal in the name of the designation of the main enemy: the radical extreme right international should seal an alliance with the Jews against Arab-Moslems. That explains how we find it today on pro-Israel far-right media.
It has been seen on social networks that the YouTube channel is pro-Israel, so it was anti-anti-Semitic. Is this enough to make Faye and Tillenon allies of those who say to themselvesantiracist"?
The authors and others of the book are certainly not beholden of this political field, and there is no capillarity present between them and these followers of the "Indo-European revolution". But the care that is taken to reject any amalgam is not a "denial of the realAs the story of this video highlights how cards of alterophobia have redistributed.
READ ALSO Rivarol, anti-Semitism as a fixed idea
For the return of reason
It is often said that anti-racism is in crisis, divided into two radicalized camps, between the one supporting initiatives such as racial processions and the one who poured into Occidentalism.
Should we be so sure? Of the republican march from January 11, 2015 to the second electoral rounds where the far right is present, we continue to see anti-racist consensus in the French society, mobilizing citizens of many political nuances.
We do not fight anti-Semitism with Islamophobia, as we do not fight Islamophobia with anti-Semitism.
What is in crisis is militant anti-racism - like all militants. People who insult themselves by calling themselves Islamophobes or indigenists are not so much a break between them as the same ethnicization of social issues, all perceived through the ethno-cultural prism. Their visibility is reinforced by a media machinery that needs "for" and "against" to feed trays and columns.
The question is not to choose between the excesses of some and those of others. We do not fight anti-Semitism with Islamophobia, as we do not fight Islamophobia with anti-Semitism.
The central problem is to bring the reason back into inflammatory public debates, so that the people who get away from it are seized by the calm and the resilience capacity which a large part of the French people shows. It would be such a customary society of appeasement that 300 honorable personalities would not agree to sign the promotional text of a book without claiming to read the book previously.