We relay a text Nicolas Pasadena on Islamophobia and racism class. ---- Saturday, March
15, 2014, at the rally commemorating the 10th anniversary of the Act of March 15, 2004
called "ostentatious religious symbols on" (in effect a law against young girls wearing
the Islamic headscarf), the libertarian activists decided appear with a banner bearing the
slogan "Libertarians against Islamophobia." If we took this initiative is that it
sometimes happens that the libertarian rhetoric is used, including in our own movement to
justify an anti-Islam position. ---- For 10 years and the first anti-veil, spread on trays
and television in several press statements that offend the libertarian activists we are.
We libertarians against Islamophobia, are often committed es field of anti-racist
struggles, the struggles of working class neighborhoods, crimes against police brutality
and in solidarity with Palestine, or in the radical feminist struggle ...
Indeed, struggles directly concerning certainpopulations, the "wretched of the inside" in
the words of sociologist Mathieu Rigouste are too often underestimated. Fear of Islam, the
talk about the failures of integration, mobilizing the Islamophobic rhetoric has become
the ultimate weapon to justify xenophobic political repression, inequality and
discrimination or imperialist wars. In this offensive, we must oppose a total resistance
and do not cut us under first-es-es.
This is why libertarian activists, detached es prejudices that infect leftist circles and
conscious-es the central challenge of fighting against Islamophobia, decided in autumn
2012, following the Islamophobic Charlie Hebdo and the internal debates within the
anarchosph?re after heckling Carolina Fourest the Festival of Humanity, prepare an appeal:
"Libertarian and uncompromising against Islamophobia" (1). It is also in this spirit that
we have decided to appear on March 15 at the rally initiated by the Feminist Collective
for Equality. Beyond the need for a broad offensive in racist specifically targeting
Muslim-es opposition, the reasons for the appearance was clearly marked with two messages:
-A strong libertarian political speech against Islamophobia and to build a broad
anti-racist response, to unite all victims of state racism (undocumented immigrant-es,
French-es-s after the colonization, Roma, black-es, Arab, Muslim-es, Asian ...) without
leaving the side of the road!
- A refusal to use our libertarian arguments to legitimize Islamophobia, a way of saying:
No in our name!
Embedded in a pseudo-secular arguments, pseudo-feminist mess, put forward by the likes
Michel Onfray or team of Charlie Hebdo pseudo-progressives, also emerges sometimes their
speech self-affirmation of their libertarian sensibility in reality the use of a
libertarian lexicon claiming the anti-religious struggle anarchists, impertinence,
provocation, freedom of expression, etc. Whatever the form, the connection between
Islamophobia of these individuals and our libertarian beliefs is intolerable to us.
Especially since this trend also through our current policy.
Michel Onfray and Charlie Hebdo, avatars of colonial left
Much has already been said to denounce Onfray and Charlie Hebdo. But the mainstream media
do not mention the libertarian arguments that through their words, here's an update that
requires clear points.
The pages of Charlie Hebdo, regularly showing Muslims as backward, misogynistic, barbaric
or murderers, and Muslim women in burkas systematically contributed to the construction,
in the imagination of their readers-facilitators (often left-leaning) a perception of
Muslim-es which coincides with essentialist representations of Islam. Nothing to do with
the cartoons they can make followers of Catholicism or Judaism, where the distinction
between believers and clergy is obvious; this is never the case for their caricatures of
the Muslim-es, which do not distinguish between a simple believer, an imam, a "terrorist"
or jihadist between a woman wearing the hijab, the niqab or burka. However they evoke
terribly anti-Semitic caricatures prevalent in the press of the nineteenth century and in
the 30 years (2). Certainly Charlie Hebdo is not the only newspaper to use stigmatizing
representations, but the difference is that it is part of an iconoclast journalistic
tradition that draws its positions in an ideological current marked not libertarianism.
The newspaper as Michel Onfray assumes its hostility toward Muslim-es as a link between
so-called "Western values of modernity" and ideas, fighting or acquired societal
libertarians. Also note that when leaving his book The Order Libertarian, Onfray tried to
justify the anti-independence position and anti-FLN Albert Camus, to whom the book is
dedicated in the name of "values" libertarian (3). This type of argument involved the
construction of a colonial mental space and / or xenophobic to the "people of the left,"
and Michel Onfray is the custom avatar. His positions, he justified philosophically and
politically improbable by oxymorons, such as to define themselves as libertarian "Gaullist
left"; associated with values of the left supremacist Gaullist nationalism demonstrates
his belief in the idea of France, a European or a "West" seen as enlightened and advanced,
unlike the immigrant and Muslim-es-es, retarded-es and threatening our progressive
achievements) (4). To prove this quote: "Now Islam instead of corners in the old marble of
a Europe that no longer believes in it, in its values in its virtues and before final
destruction'"(5).
Faced with this offensive of media manipulation libertarian purposes Islamophobic ideas,
the whole anarchist movement is not quite vigorously mobilized.
us, libertarian activists, organized or not-es, es from different streams (Communist
libertarian, anarchist or synthesist reformist platform, anarcho-syndicalist, autonomous,
self-management, anti-authoritarian, etc), we are committed es politically, socially, on
the ground, in the struggles of the various self-management experiments like squats by
example, alternative artistic and journalistic activities in associations, unions, etc.
Yet we remain invisible and inaudible, exposed to the media blackout except when it comes
to designate us as ultra-left breaker, anarcho-autonomous or black block after a violent
demonstration. Or to call a hedonistic libertine-sixty-eighter folklore far from our
thoughts and fighting, mobilized for the purpose of Islamophobia or promotion of a
national identity (6).
Drift among some libertarians
But even if Michel Onfray is a Tartuffe of anarchism, the danger is that the credit
granted by sincere libertarians certain Islamophobic theses. For example, the publication
in 2010 editions of The Islamic World Libertarian Impasse, book also prefaced by Onfray,
in which the author develops an apology Hamid Zanas values of Western modernity. To
counter accusations of Islamophobia, publishers tried to launch with a subscription
libertarian organizations which fortunately received no support after reading the text.(7)
Another serious drift, platform offered in 2009 by Libertarian Radio Riposte Lay, who had
invited Anne and Pierre Cassen Selensky (8): it is little wonder we hear racist statements
from these two new thugs the far right, however it is appalling to hear the presenter
Philip Raulin, then Secretary Libertarian Radio mandated by the FA, abound in their
direction when they held about presenting Islam as "more sexist than the other religions
"and leading an" offensive against secularism "among other praises of Western
civilization. It took as Cassen and Zelensky appear next to Identitaires few months later
that racism of their remarks appear obvious to everyone. Sorry, but these comments were
racist when they were already uttered on R adio L ibertaire! And it was not the only time
that such statements had citizenship on the antenna. (9)
The opportunity for us to draw a parallel with the placements anarchists vis-a-vis
anti-Semitism during the Dreyfus Affair. The 19th century, anarchists and socialists had
little regard to the issue of anti-Semitism. Some even conveyed the worst stereotypes
about Jews and money. Again, it took the power and the extreme right of the time have
regained speech as clairvoyance wins and libertarian socialist labor movement (10). Today,
Islamophobia has been taken into account by the far left and from the time Le Pen and
Identitaires have decided to make their battle. Now, this was made possible because others
had begun to prepare the ground: Finkielkraut, Badinter, Ni whore or subject, Andr? Gerin
but Fourest Carolina, Charlie Hebdo and Michel Onfray. At the time, the ideological
boundaries and arguments were not the same, and our comrades have fallen into the trap.
The use of the same term Islamophobia is still debated among libertarians as to the
extreme left. Assertions claiming that the term was invented by Iranian mullah did a lot
of damage. It is now known that this word also admitted without problem in many Western
countries, existed from the beginning of the century (11). Despite this continues the
bizarre idea that it could be used to prevent criticism of religion, or even be a hidden
form of offense of blasphemy! How is it possible to give any value to these speculations,
while Islam remains a minority religion in France and the ratio of current socio-economic
and political strength is not in favor of the Muslims?
Any terminology is Recycling era for reactionary and the charge of "anti-Semitism"
brandished by Zionists to silence any criticism of the state of Israel. We therefore cease
to use the term "anti-Semitism" in our antifascist struggles? Not of course. It is very
sad that the focus is placed on a "risk" that is essentially a reactionary fantasy
conveyed by the right, while in the daily Muslim-es-es are stigmatized unapologetic. Those
discriminated against would they amount negligible compared to the supposed threat to the
right to eat of the imam?
No law or veil?
Today the issue of Islamophobia is always underestimated and the level of mobilization
remains low on the left and among libertarians. Fortunately, and this is the least we can
do for anti-statist organizations, none has stood up for the 2004 Act or for those that
followed, but most conspicuously lack of positions. As for those who have spoken out
against the law, it was in the manner of "no law or veil." Certainly the veil has a
patriarchal dimension, in that he never asked the men to hide, but it should be noted as
well as other markers of gendered patriarchal domination which are not submitted more men
like stilettos, miniskirts, makeup, the dictatorship of thinness, etc. The symbolic
meaning of a dress is never assignable from the outside, without consulting anyone and
without taking into account the context (12). In other cases, it would be rightly seen as
patronizing and sexist to judge women alienated by gasoline because of their choice of
clothing or lifestyle. But there is a presumption that the patriarchate of traditionalist,
religious and Puritan, would be worse than the modernist character, submit to the cult of
beauty or excessive eroticism, which is one of the dominant forms, accepted and insidious
contemporary sexism. To justify the choice of "Ni-Ni", sometimes referred us to the
political nature of the veil exploited by fundamentalists, the Muslim Brotherhood etc.
Without denying that this may be a reality especially in countries where Islam is
predominant, use of such an essentialist argument places an enormous burden on the
shoulders of women wearing headscarves, including high school girls, and causes dangerous
amalgam .
However, no comparison between the "Ni-Ni" and the silent complicity or approval of
Islamophobia in some far-left circles: in the latter case, these mistakes are inexcusable
for anti-racism and anti-authoritarian political movements, in the other, laws and stigma
are at least exposed and this is the point. "Neither law nor veil" The position is still
problematic, first because it refers back to back the law and the veil, as if wearing a
veil was identical to pass a law banning. In a particular ideological context it amounts
to half right reactionary arguments. More importantly, this position was also an excuse in
2004 not to join the group "A school for all-all" struggling and mobilizing the first
question against the adoption of this law. For if libertarian activists were able to
invest individually, no organization has engaged in advocacy. Internal discussions focused
on the veil before the law and that's what allowed the collective fantasy about a school
for tou-te-s, as well as charges of Islamic-leftist or "alliances questionable" . If one
understands the possibility of mobilization was so conditioned to these
Leftist-rationalist-who-ont- all-inclusive, a recognition by the veiled girls of their own
alienation or their exploitation by fundamentalists. Paternalism undeniable!
As if in 2003-2004, the progressive camp, the women's camp, the social movement ?taien t
unanimously raised in an egalitarian relationship in support of the veiled Muslim women,
we would not be where we are today, namely an ideological context in which the extreme
right of all stripes continue to progress and to hold the debate.
The post-colonial question
To enter the mistakes that traverse the far left, we must try to understand the
environment in which activists have evolved over several years and what has shaped their
judgment. The context for the older-es, is primarily that of a time when you were in
school history of colonization and decolonization. The ideology to legitimize the colonial
enterprise is not enough known or analyzed, yet it was often a progressive argument.
Number of libertarian activists have an important cultural and historical background on
the history of workers' struggles, but less knowledge of colonial history and decolonial.
If the postcolonial question was best addressed our comrades would probably have had the
balls to avoid the Orientalist and racist traps that many have fallen-es, which helped
strengthen the racist left in power today. We must assume reflect the contradictions of a
society that both right and left has always hidden its colonial history, because that's
what weighs on the positions and the perception that our comrades ambient Islamophobia.
Fortunately we are seeing a generational renewal. We are increasingly libertarian comrades
immune-es against these discourses. Because since 2004, many analyzes were produced,
progressive activists have not deserted the field of the fight against Islamophobia, and
this work has not been in vain. If some of our comrades, Muslim youth and veiled girls are
media constructions or figures sometimes caught in the urban landscape, for many of us,
they and they are or were our classmates, our neighbor- es, our friends are, and some
activists have also today our comrades in struggle. The look and the relationship evolved,
activist sensitivity to certain issues are related to the proximity and not ideological
abstraction when those affected by oppression and contempt are your relatives, perception
can not be the same . This is a positive move forward together despite the difficulties,
contradictions and oppositions.
The anti-religious struggle
When we express ourselves as activists committed libertarian-es against Islamophobia,
often we are referred to the saying "Neither God Nor Master", just as in the case Ilham
Moussaid where the political class has quick to remind the NPA phrase Marx "Religion is
the opium of the people". The anti-religious struggle of the libertarian is a fight
against the use by states and ruling classes of the religious purposes of domination
phenomena, exploitation, alienation and reaction to maintain the capitalist social order
and patriarchal but also racist and colonial. It is also a critique of institutions and
grant privileges to the clergy, including institutional and material composition as in
Alsace-Moselle or land assets that have the Catholic church and the Vatican, or even
public money allocated to private religious schools. Finally, we are opposed to the
theological arguments of all faiths, when they are used to justify unequal treatment:
outcry against gay marriage or alleged theory of genre recently as yesterday the
justification of slavery (controversy Valladolid). These arguments, we fight the same way
throughout history of the twentieth century pseudo-scientific arguments were used to
justify racial hierarchies, gender, etc (eg justification of homophobia in sometimes
relying on psychoanalytic theories of Freud). Justify unequal treatment, it is not the
exclusive domain of religion.
Also there was never a question for anarchists suppress believer es or limiting their
freedom of worship; anarchists instead have often fought against the persecution of
religious minorities, and sometimes even fought at the side of religious movements: the
liberation theologians in South America, Christian associations in support of the
struggles on housing for undocumented migrants, Roma, etc. Disagree and oppose religious
organizations, just to organizations of the left, is one thing, but refusing to campaign
with them simply because of their religious affiliation, moreover when they are
stigmatized and Victims of treatment clearly racist exception, this is not acceptable.
Anarchism is not, by nature or essence of religion hate. Anarchism asserts the superiority
of the scientific review process and seeks to dismantle the argument that the belief in a
heavenly authority and absolute top, legitimize authoritarianism and terrestrial
hierarchies. But anarchism and religious belief are not mutually exclusive for tou-te-s,
past and present, and we are seeing more and more frequently libertarian comrades and
believing-es-es including Muslim, practicing es AND even veiled!
Many of our comrades nevertheless displayed a hatred, or at least claimed hostility to
religion, reinforced-es in this by the speeches of Onfray, and other Fourest Charlie
Hebdo, which guided this rejection to Islam and our beautiful syncr?tisant ideas with the
old chauvinist franchouillard background, which endorsed some French "homegrown"
anti-clerical tradition. It is time to end these abuses ...
In conclusion
Like the rest of the left, the far left and social movements, some area of the libertarian
movement have been "contaminated" by some concept of this "colonial left." In other words:
how progressive arguments have been put at the service of xenophobia in the name of
"defending our societal achievements" against the invading alien immigrant "(13). We must
be able to recognize that sometimes a victim of exploitation, for a decision to undertake
the work necessary in order not to reproduce these exclusion logic.
Assaults against women wearing headscarves multiply, bills to ban employment veiled women,
exclusion of universities are under consideration, and they are still Islamophobic
arguments that are put forward to refuse the right to vote in local elections to
foreigners, with the menace of "communalism". (14) All this ideological and legislative
offensive require an uncompromising response e of the social movement and concrete
solidarity with the first-e-s are concerned, yet we are still far away ... This is because
we believe in our ideas and those who wear them that we will continue as libertarian
activists to mobilize against radical
(2) http://www.article11.info/?Charlie-Hebdo-pas-raciste-Si-vous
http://leplus.nouvelobs.com/contribution/628627-charlie-caricature-mahomet-pas-du-courage-mais-du-pur-opportunisme.html
(3) even though the FCL (Libertarian Communist Federation) at the time showed solidarity
with the Algerian independence and the FLN, the activists were carrying suitcases, some
even made the prison (see The Algerian insurrection and Libertarian Communists
"libertarian alternative edition)
(4) (13) Libertarian Alternative "the socialist-colonial racism or left) -The
government-http://www.alternativelibertaire.org/?Politique
(5) Editorial published in March 2006 on the personal site of Michel Onfray "Proposed
legislation to ban Michel Onfray throughout the public space" http://lmsi.net/Proposition
de law- for-the # nb17
(6) Anarchism and sometimes integrate the French national novel advantage as rebellious
behavior and romantic-cultural as a political project and practice. Alain Soral example,
in a video, claiming his provocative as a Franco-French heritage a little anarchist,
citing the figure of Professor Choron ... gasp!
(7) http://www.alternativelibertaire.org/?Confus-Zanaz-L-impasse-Islamic
(8) Islamophobic to the FA? "
(9) http://nantes.indymedia.org/articles/19165 "Libertarian Radio or" Radio French first "?"
(10)
http://boutique.alternativelibertaire.org/produit.php?ref=LIVRE_DREYFUS&id_rubrique=3&PHPSESSID=01f7e10f89352b7dc5564c9f2c0f68fb
"Les Libertarians in the Dreyfus affair "
(11) http://rue89.nouvelobs.com/2013/08/04/islamophobie-maintenance-marwan-mohammed-244734
(12) Pierre Tevanian, "the hijab to burqa" see this video which explains things well
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xmlzxd_interview Stonespire-tevanian_news
(14) On the evening of the first round of the 2012 presidential election in France,
Jean-Francois Cope, secretary general of the Union for a Popular Movement (UMP), denounced
the "right of foreigners to vote," promised Socialist candidate Francois Hollande, as a
"right of communal vote." A few weeks ago, the Interior Minister Claude Gueant (UMP) had
explained the link between voting and communalism citing risks to see if foreign election
in municipal councils, schools use the . halal children
One of the major tracts of incumbent President Nicolas Sarkozy also took up the theme: "A
strong France is a France says no to communalism: - Nicolas Sarkozy with we deny the right
to vote and be elected for non-EU foreigners proposed by Fran?ois Holland - give voting
rights to foreigners, is to risk subjecting mayors to community pressures: slots for women
in municipal pools, staff veiled in cr?ches. " http://lmsi.net/Qui-a-fear-of-communalism
Home »
» (en) Collective Alternative Libertaire Bruxelles - No Islamophobia on behalf of libertarian ideas! (fr)
(en) Collective Alternative Libertaire Bruxelles - No Islamophobia on behalf of libertarian ideas! (fr)
[machine translation]