OPINION
GUEST ESSAY
Éric Zemmour Is Opening a New Chapter in France’s
Long Racist History
Dec. 2,
2021, 1:00 a.m. ET
By Mitchell
Abidor and Miguel Lago
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/02/opinion/eric-zemmour-france-jews.html
Mr. Abidor
is the author of several books about French history and a contributing writer
at Jewish Currents. Mr. Lago is a political scientist who teaches at Sciences
Po Paris.
France is
the home of “Liberté, Égalité et Fraternité” and the birthplace of the Rights
of Man. But running simultaneously through the country’s political traditions
is a much darker strain of racism and antisemitism. It looks as if a new, more
virulent chapter in that history of French bigotry may now be opening — with a
seemingly unlikely champion.
Éric
Zemmour, a far-right polemicist who officially declared on Tuesday that he is
running in next April’s presidential election, is the loudest and most extreme
voice of French racism today. While his poll numbers have started to slide from
their highs earlier this fall, Mr. Zemmour’s divisive campaign has resonated
with a significant portion of voters and he is still among the leading
candidates. He is capturing national headlines and unleashing vicious bigotry
into the mainstream in a way unseen in years.
The great
irony is that Mr. Zemmour, twice convicted of inciting racial hatred and
discrimination, is a Jew — a member of the very community once targeted by the
racists whose traditions he inherits and invokes. He has updated France’s
oldest hatred for a new era.
The roots
of the current French far right can be understood only in the context of its
prehistory.
Religious
antisemitism was long a staple of reactionary thought in France. In the 19th
century, that turned into economic and political antisemitism, taking its
definitive form around the time of the Dreyfus Affair, the scandal involving
the Jewish military officer, Alfred Dreyfus, who was falsely accused and
convicted of passing secrets to Germany. The battle between Dreyfus’s
supporters and his accusers came to define French politics. The period brought
with it the appearance of antisemitic newspapers like “La Libre Parole,” whose
masthead featured the slogan “France for the French,” still a favorite of the
French right. This movement lived on well into the 20th century. Its final
chapter was the Nazi-aligned Vichy government and French participation in the
roundup of Jews for deportation and murder.
After the
Holocaust, antisemitism was no longer viable as a political movement — though
it was never entirely expunged from society. With the advent of mass
immigration from France’s former colonies, antisemitism was largely replaced by
anti-Black and, especially, anti-Arab racism. Since the 1970s, the political
voice of this racism has been the far-right National Front party, now rebranded
as the National Assembly as part of an attempt to enter the mainstream. This
party has twice reached the second round of the presidential elections, in 2002
and 2017. Mr. Zemmour is now outflanking it from the right.
It doesn’t
take much to see the roots of Mr. Zemmour’s ideology: his insistence that
France is engaged in a religious war with Islam and a race war with its Black
and Arab population; that entire neighborhoods of its major cities have been
“colonized” by Muslims; that Islam is a religion of terror; that French Muslims
must be made to choose between Islam and France (which he considers mutually
exclusive). All of it is an updating of the Jew-hatred of a century and a
quarter ago.
In the same
way that the antisemites of the past accused the omnipotent, maleficent Jews of
being guilty of crimes of all kinds, even of causing the flooding of the Seine,
for Mr. Zemmour there is no crime for which Muslims are not guilty. The cause
of exurbanization, with working people forced to drive to work from their
distant homes? The immigrant “occupation” of cities and their suburbs. The
spread of drugs? All immigrants’ unaccompanied minors are drug dealers. The
cause of resource shortages in hospitals? Immigrants’ abuse of a system to
which they don’t contribute.
His
solution to these problems — and every other — is simple. Like the antisemites
of France’s past, he wants to reduce the presence of immigrants in the
country’s life. Social housing should be available only to the French, by which
he means white French people. How he would exclude naturalized or French-born
Muslims is something he doesn’t explain, which isn’t the point. Racism is the
only point that matters.
Mr. Zemmour
is not blind to this historical legacy. He is not just a demagogue; he is also
a writer and a popular historian. He regularly quotes from reactionary
political figures, writers and thinkers from French history, particularly the
time of the Dreyfus Affair. Among his many revisions of French history, Mr.
Zemmour most famously continues to assert a claim he first made in 2014 that
Philippe Pétain, the leader of the French collaborationist government,
protected French Jews during World War II, only helping to deport foreign Jews.
He has also
revised the history of the Dreyfus Affair. Mr. Zemmour says that the French
General Staff, where Dreyfus was posted and from which he was supposed to have
stolen documents, was justified in suspecting Dreyfus of espionage because he
was a German. This is false. More outrageous, though, is his claim that both
sides in the Dreyfus Affair had “noble” motives. Never mind that Dreyfus was
exonerated. His accusers, Mr. Zemmour says, were driven by their concern for
“the nation.” The nobility of those who condemned Dreyfus has long been a
marginal opinion. No longer.
In expressing
these positions, Mr. Zemmour, an Algerian Jew, is demonstrating a perverted
version of Jewish assimilationism. The threat posed by French right-wing
antisemitism is long dead. The attacks on French Jews in recent years have been
the work of isolated individuals, mobs or terrorists. When the country’s Jews
were truly in danger, it was because the government was behind the threats.
This is not the case today. In Mr. Zemmour, the Jew, formerly the outsider, is
now an insider, and the Jewish insider defends France even when it has harmed
its Jews.
The Jewish
community, like all of France, is deeply split over Mr. Zemmour. There are Jews
on all sides of the campaign, from Mr. Zemmour and his closest assistant, Sarah
Knafo, to Mr. Zemmour’s principle intellectual foe, Bernard-Henri Lévy. Given
this split, among the many things the Zemmour campaign represents is the
assimilation of French Jewry.
As Mr.
Zemmour presents himself as the voice of France, as its “savior,” his
Jewishness serves him and the far right well. By defending Vichy, by defending
Pétain, by defending French colonialism and even its massacre of “Arabs and
certain Jews,” as he recently did, he, as a Jew, absolves the French right of
its worst stains and helps give it new life as it wages war against Muslims.
The Jew as
the stalking horse for anti-immigrant racism, as the voice of its normalization
in public discourse, is a new, frightening development. The results of this are
unforeseeable, but they bode no good.
Mitchell
Abidor is a translator, the author of several books about French history and a
contributing writer at Jewish Currents. Miguel Lago is the executive director
of the Institute for Health Policy Studies and teaches at Columbia University
and Sciences Po Paris.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário