French Pres. Hollande: Anti-Muslimism is as bad as Antisemitism: Muslims Must be Protected

By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment)

French President Francois Hollande addressed the Institute of the Arab World on Friday, in a bid to reassure French Muslims, who fear being the victims of a collective guilt campaign or reprisals after the attack of radicals on Charlie Hebdo.

Hollande said:

“It is the Muslims who are the first victims of fanaticism, fundamentalism and intolerance…

We must remember that . . . Islam is compatible with democracy, and that we must reject lumping everyone together or mixing them up with one another, and must have in France French of Muslim faith who have the same rights and the same duties as all citizens.

They must be protected. Secularism helps in this regard since it respects all religions… Anti-Muslim actions, like Antisemitism, must be denounced and severely punished…

France was formed by movements of population and the flux of immigration. It is constituted by the diversity of what is in France. A number of my compatriots have attachments in the ARab world, coming from North Africa or the Near East. They might be Jews, Muslims, Christians, they might be believers or no. But they have a link to the Arab world and they have contributed, generation after generation, to the history of France.

In contrast to the racist discourse of the National Front, which paints Muslims as alien and dangerous and non-Muslim French as monochrome, Hollande adopted an almost American diction of celebration of immigrant communities.

He made the argument that it isn’t importing religion into government (as many states in the Middle East unfortunately do) that guarantees minority rights but rather secular government, which tolerates all religions equally. He is being a little idealistic about actual French secularism as it is enshrined in law and practice, but the general principle is correct. Secular government can neutralize religious competition for the state of the sort we have seen in post-Bush Iraq, with all its disasters.

Hollande surely made waves when he put anti-Muslimism on exactly the same level as Antisemitism, and pledged to be as vigorous in combating the one as the other. I haven’t heard any other Western leader go so far as to equate these two.

Otherwise, his acceptance of the Muslim French as full French citizens is extremely important in the hothouse atmosphere of European politics today, where many right wing parties determinedly “other” the European Muslims.

Hollande underlined that France has always received immigrants (otherwise the French would be speaking Celtic languages like Breton (which some 200,000 still do in Brittany in the north). The country is named for a German tribe that immigrated in amongst the Celts, and it speaks an imported language descended from the Latin of Roman conquerors and settlers. It is made up of distinct culture regions, not only Britanny but also Provencale, the Basque country and Alsace-Lorraine. For all residents of France to speak French was an accomplishment of the Bourbons and then the Republic during the past two and a half centuries.

Modern France has actually seen many waves of labor migration– Italians in the nineteenth century, Poles in the early twentieth, North Africans after WW II. Its modern history in this regard has been much more like that of the United States than is commonly relized. In the nineteenth century, France was an early industrializer but underwent a demographic transition so that it had relatively low population growth. Focus-Migration France writes,

In order to alleviate this, France concluded labour recruitment agreements with Italy (1904, 1906, 1919), Belgium (1906), Poland (1906) and Czechoslovakia (1920). At the beginning of the 1930s, France was the second most important country in the world for immigration after the USA by absolute numbers. At that time there were about 2.7 million immigrants living in France (6.6% of the total population).

After the Second World War and during the economic upturn of the 1950s and 1960s, France once again recruited (predominantly male) workers from Italy, Portugal, Spain, Belgium, Germany, Poland and Russia. At the same time, immigration from the former colonies increased due to wars of liberation and the process of decolonisation. As a result of the Algerian War (1954–62) and the subsequent independence of Algeria in 1962, a large number of French settlers and pro-French Algerians moved to France.

In saying that “France was formed by movements of population and the flux of immigration. It is constituted by the diversity of what is in France…” Hollande is presenting an image of France as diverse and dynamic because of its diversity, rather than as closed, racial or culturally exclusive (and thus stagnant). It is a hard case to make given the current atmosphere, and it may well lose the next election. But it is the only healthy way forward. Narrow ethnic nationalism, aside from being built on falsehoods, is a recipe for exclusion and discrimination and vast social pathologies.

related video:

AJ+ “French Muslims Respond To Paris Attack”

14 Responses

  1. With the French 10-year bond yield at 0.64% (relative to the current U.S. 10-year treasury yield of 1.83%) and in light of the prolonged European economic torpor, it would seem that the failure of European countries to embrace Mr. Keynes can lead to the alienation of the French of any religious faith, which of course can foster anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim violence and politics over there. Popular extremist ideologies clearly do not help the situation.

    • France can’t follow Keynesian policies because the Eurozone’s rules forbid it – François Hollande is hamstrung, just as Ramsay MacDonald in Depression-era Britain was hamstrung by the gold standard.

      I suspect that this realisation is as much behind the surge in Front National support as racism is.

      • W/r/t Merkel-led austerity and Eurozone rules, that’s exactly the problem. It’s ironic that German policies may be indirectly accelerating the pace of Jews leaving Europe.

        • Merkel is far from being the sole responsible, and while the EU’s byzantine organization has been exploited by the austerity fetichists to obtain a quasi de facto veto over economic policies, austerity wouldn’t have been imposed without a substantial fraction of member states’ political classes favoring supply-sides policies presented under the guise of budgetary discipline.

          Ironically, the people who have done the most to fight against the dishonest fetichizing of austerity are none other than Europe’s demagogues favorite bogeymen: european technocrats.

  2. If you took anti-Semitism to mean racism (as best known from Nazi Germany) and didn’t include opposition to Israel’s policy towards Palestine (which is often labelled anti-Semitism), I venture to suggest that anti-Muslim feeling in Europe and France would far exceed anti-Jewish feeling. There are quite a few articles on the rise of anti-Semitism, but none take the trouble to factor out those whose only objection to anything Jewish is Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.

    • You got the Hobby Lobby decision saying some Christian businessmen can discriminate in any matter against other citizens due to their self-serving religious dogmas. Let’s see what happens when a Moslem or Hindu businessman tries to do the same thing. Oh, and atheists and agnostics can’t discriminate based on their beliefs at all. Don’t you hate that?

  3. Considering that most Muslims are not Arabs and most Arabs are in fact Semites, I will replace Muslims with Arabs in his speech in an Arab center. Let’s try that whenever we hear Muslims, there! All is fixed and everything is clearer now, even Charlie’s old cartons.

  4. At the end of the day, our nightmare is that there is no such thing as a natural state of justice or equality that we will somehow gravitate towards and then remain in safely for eternity. (The “Star Trek” vision.) Instead, we will all keep using ever more advanced sophistry enforced by ever more powerful media and mind-control technology to rape and pillage our fellow citizens in ever more grotesque ways. What if there is nothing but power, and we are really in a Hobbesian war of all against all?

  5. “Secular government can neutralize religious competition for the state of the sort we have seen in post-Bush Iraq, with all its disasters.”… A very concise and vitally important statement Professor.

    Secular government is THE only way to ensure that people of different religions don’t simply slaughter each other over..well.. religion. That’s why any government that says we are an “Islamic government” or we are “Jewish state,” etc. is doomed over the long term. “Secularism” should be preached to the ends of the earth and religion kept in private where it belongs.

Comments are closed.