Nanterre, May 68

This will be my final post on May 68. It is not of any great importance, but I wanted to do it before May 2008 vanished forever. (As I post it is 11:57 on the East Coast). For a long time I kept an old copy of Paris-Match; then I clipped out this letter to the editor and threw the magazine away, failing to note the date of the publication. Very late 60's or early 70's most likely.

Pierre Grappin was a professor of German who fought in the French Resistance during WWII, where his language skills were valuable. Later, he was one of the promoters of the new University in Nanterre, outside of Paris. He became dean of the Faculté des Lettres of Nanterre (similar to our liberal arts college) in 1964 and held the post until 1994. But for a while in the middle of the student uproar he resigned rather than yield to the demands of the rioters. On May 3 he closed his Faculté, forcing the rioters to move their operations to the Sorbonne in the center of Paris. For this the former resistance fighter was labeled "Nazi" and "SS". Decades later Dany Cohn-Bendit was asked to apologize to Grappin, but refused.

In this letter he explains his commitment to Nanterre, and why he chose to resign rather than capitulate to demagogues:

For me, when the Liberal Arts College of Nanterre was founded in 1964, it was not a question of creating an "anti-Oxfordian university in the middle of a working-class neighborhood". More simply, on the site that had been granted to us and despite its defects, we wanted a new school, the first of a series of schools for students of the Parisian region. My ambition was, in the liberal tradition of French universities, but without fear of pedagogical innovations, to offer to all students, be they recipients of grants or children of wealthy families, the culture and the qualifications that higher education worthy of the name can bestow. I believe I have succeeded.

At the same time, French universities have constituted for 80 years the training grounds for the intellectual elite and for social advancement through culture; particularly in the liberal arts colleges. But it is no longer a question of social advancement when, as is the trend today, diplomas which tomorrow will have no value are handed out no matter what the cost. To do this would be deceitful. It would only benefit the mediocre and those who seek to level by the lowest common denominator: that is the opposite of the universities' mission.

If, in September 1968, I abandoned my functions as dean, it was in order not to lend myself to this type of demagoguery and to the compromises that the situation of the previous summer made inevitable. After three years that had been for all of us a great success, I decided, freely, to withdraw. Without being forced into it by failure, as you seem to imply, I refused to continue to head an institution where pressure groups and commandoes of henchmen threatened - and still threaten - the freedom to teach. The methods they use are, I'm sorry to say, exactly those I saw employed in Germany by Hitler's youth in the years preceding his rise to power in 1933. Again just last week, a professor, who is also a member of the parity council, was attacked while giving class, mocked, mistreated, insulted, threatened, called an undesirable, and forbidden to speak. To teach in such conditions, in devastated and filthy rooms, is implicitly to accept a moral degradation that leads the way to mental servitude and totalitarianism.

Pierre Grappin, former dean
Faculté of Nanterre

Note: Since his biography states he was dean from 1964 to 1994, we can only assume that his resignation was temporary. A Google search on him turned up very little, but there are books by him (mainly on German language and culture) available at Amazon.

The "parity council" mentioned above isn't clarified, but could refer to a council where both students and teachers have representation.

Notice how important the liberal arts were forty years ago. Literature and language formed the basis of the education of most people who were not specifically going to become doctors or scientists, but even doctors had to know Latin (sometimes German), as did scientists. Today literature has been downgraded to include popular and easy works, often of a political nature, and the popularity of liberal arts has been supplanted by the social sciences, psychology and economics, marketing, and management courses.

There is a photo of Grappin here.

The University of Nanterre, inaugurated in 1964, to relieve the overpopulation of the Sorbonne, has grown to become a huge campus for 2000 faculty members and more than 33,000 students. Nanterre was the center of the March and May 68 riots and has always been a hotbed of extreme left-wing activity. Highly unionized and politicized, the University counts many current ministers and Sarkozy appointees among the alumni, including Sarkozy himself who attended the law school in 1978, Christine Lagarde, Minister of Finance, and Brice Hortefeux, Minister of Immigration. Interestingly, included among the alumni are also several important founders of the Front National: Jean-Pierre Stirbois, one of the earliest FN leaders who was killed in an automobile accident, thus opening the way for Jean-Marie Le Pen, Marie-France Stirbois, his wife, and Bruno Gollnisch, a friend of Le Pen and potential rival of Marine Le Pen for leadership of the party.

Note: I am not trying to make a connection between the University itself and the people who attend or who have attended. A University can offer quality courses in certain fields, law for example, and still be a focal point for insurrection. Our UC Berkeley is similar example.

The photo above, from Gerard-Aimé, shows the occupation by students of the Faculté of Nanterre on March 22, 1968. This event is considered the start of the general insurrection. If I understand correctly, Grappin suspended classes during this March rebellion, then reopened them, but he had to confront the same students in May.

Update: June 18, 2010 - The above link to the photos by Gerard-Aimé no longer works.

Plastered

This story, posted at Libération, created much merriment recently, and spread like wildfire around the web. Apparently Nicolas Sarkozy will believe anything:

During his trip to the department of Loiret, on Tuesday, Nicolas Sarkozy explained to the employees of a local business the advantages of his new proposal on job-seekers who "refuse two job offers" that match their qualifications. He backed up his explanation with a story he picked up at the ANPE Employment Agency of Melun during a recent stopover in that city:

"An agent told me he was looking for plasterers. He had proposed to a job-seeker qualified in this skill 63 offers in the past year. The job-seeker turned them all down."

Contacted by Libération, the administration of ANPE denied the story: "The person who said that is mentally unbalanced and never should have been there that day. The president should have understood that he was in the presence of a seriously disturbed person." ANPE did not understand the Sarkozy logic: "63 offers in one year for a plasterer in Melun...how could he believe such a thing? Why didn't he check this information before using it to his own advantage?"

French readers can read this article in Le Parisien, dated May 17, the day of his visit to ANPE in Melun (photo). In the article he mentions the story of the agent in need of plasterers, but here the number of jobs refused is 67!

The French refer to this as "storytelling". They took our word to designate the practice by politicians of telling some kind of instructive anecdote or narration in order to win over the public. The narration may be true or false, and often the storyteller confuses fact and fiction.

Furthermore, this story about a job-seeker turning down 63 offers made no waves at all in the media, though it had been reported, until it was learned that Sarkozy had made an error. In other words, nobody picked up the improbability of the agent's claim until Sarko put his foot in it.

Sarkozy has said he would refuse further assistance to any job-seeker who turns down two offers of employment.

But I would like to know what a mentally unbalanced person is doing working in a major employment agency!

The Internet - An Ideal Culprit

According to this article in 01 Net dated May 27, and quoted by Le Salon Beige, Nicolas Sarkozy does not like the Internet:

During his radio address on RTL the president made a rather unexpected attack on the Internet and the wantonness ("gratuité") of its content. Having announced his desire to hold an Estates General of the the press, a sector that is now experiencing difficulties, Nicolas Sarkozy immediately found the ideal culprit: the online press.

Note: An Estates General would be a convention of leaders in a certain field, in this case the press, for the purpose of discussing and resolving specific problems.

For the Chief Executive, the cause of the problem goes back to 1995, with the opening of the Internet to a wide public. "The problem with the Internet is a big one, because how can you expect people to buy their paper at the news stands if they can get it free on the Internet?" If his argument bears truth, it's also a bit short-sighted. For in fact today many news media, if not all, provide online versions of their publications and earn advertising revenue from them. Moreover, we are witnessing today the emergence of an economic model still in its infancy - that of news websites that charge a fee (Arrêt sur Images, Mediapart, etc...)

Note: Some sections of the above-named websites are free.

Finally, to designate the free online press as one of the great plagues of our time for the so-called traditional press, is to forget rather quickly the success of another phenomenon whose impact on sales at news stands is even greater: that of the free newspaper... Such as 20 Minutes, Metro, or Direct Soir and Direct Matin (owned by businessman Vincent Bolloré, well-known to the president.

Note: It was on Bolloré's yacht that Sarkozy vacationed immediately after winning the presidential election.

Le Salon Beige and its readers are not too sorry or surprised that Sarko does not like them. One reader says:

- Sarkozy forgot one important factor, besides the Internet, of the financial crisis that the French daily press is experiencing: the Arab telephone. We should tax the Arab telephone in order to collect funds for State aid to the press in time of crisis. Enough is enough.

This comment threw me. I had no idea what was meant by "Arab telephone." A google search indicated that it is similar to the game we used to play as children (some adults still play it as a parlor game) where you whisper something in someone's ear who in turn whispers it in someone else's ear, and so forth, until the last person in the line (or circle) says it out loud. The final distortion is often comical, but as in all parlor games (which I hate), there is an element of cruelty as people come face to face with their own errors, and the tricks that have been played on them.

Why "Arab" telephone? According to Wikipedia whispering is supposed to be a common form of communication in the Arab world.

What did we call it? Just "telephone" I think, but Wiki also offers "Chinese whispers".

It looks like a clear case of racism against both Arabs and Chinese to me.

Anti-Discrimination Madness Goes on...

This communiqué from Jean-Marie Le Pen summarizes another directive from the European Union on "multiple discrimination". This post can be added to my two recent posts on anti-discrimination measures taken by the EU: Anti-Discrimination Madness and Politics of Appearances 2:

Scarcely had the French Parliament transposed (into the French Constitution) three directives from the EU on the fight against discrimination, than the European Parliament adopted a resolution calling on the European Commission to decree a new directive, this one against all discrimination, direct and indirect, and adding to its catalogue the designation of "multiple discrimination."

But at the same time it justifies the discrimination known as "affirmative action", disguised as "positive action", and insists that it be put into general use.

This totalitarian document, that defies the most elementary distinctions, requires a special legislation, multiplies the potential for punishment and lawsuits, and gives an exorbitant role to the anti-racist and ethnic lobbies.

It goes so far as to claim that different treatment based on nationality or language can constitute indirect racial or ethnic discrimination.

The French citizens must know the extent of anti-discrimination madness, conceived as an instrument for the destruction of nations and of the most legitimate differences. They will have an opportunity to express their refusal of this intolerable dictatorship during the next European elections.

French readers can turn to Yves Daoudal for extended excerpts of the new directive.

English-language readers suffering from profound insomnia can read the whole thing here. Here are a few excerpts to whet your appetite:

16. Urges the Member States to promote more effectively the application of the rights of EU citizens under Directives 2000/43/EC and 2000/78/EC, and urges the Commission, the Member States, trade unions, employers, as well as governmental and non-governmental stakeholders to do all in their power to improve awareness of rights under those Directives and to ensure that victims of discrimination have access to a range of advocacy support to enable them effective to exercise their rights thereunder; notes that the burden is often on the victim to challenge the alleged perpetrator of the discrimination, frequently with neither support from any public authority nor access to legal aid; urges Member States to empower concerned independent bodies to provide effective help to victims of discrimination;

17. Is concerned about the low level of awareness of anti-discrimination legislation among citizens in the Member States and calls on the Commission, the Member States, trade unions and employers to step up their efforts to raise that level of awareness; recalls that the Directives impose an obligation on Member States to disseminate information to the public on the relevant provisions of the Directives by all appropriate means;

18. Recommends that Member States undertake independent reviews of preventive and restitutive anti-discriminatory measures and the effectiveness of protection against victimisation and ensure that statutory and non-statutory bodies that participate in the prevention of discrimination and that support the victims of discrimination are adequately resourced; recommends also that the Commission include peer reviews in its ongoing monitoring exercise;

22. Stresses that in any event Member States should ensure that victims of discrimination are automatically assisted in legal proceedings, if necessary by public funding through legal aid schemes;

23. Calls upon the Commission practically and effectively to support the adoption of measures by Member States through the Progress programme and the European Social Fund in order to support programmes promoting equal opportunities and the eradication of discrimination;

24. Recommends that, in order to provide a more effective level of protection, Member States should empower associations, organisations and other legal entities to engage in legal proceedings, including on behalf or in support of any victim;

30. Welcomes the Commission's interest in multiple discrimination, including its launch of a study on this subject; calls on the Commission to adopt a balanced broad concept of multiple discrimination and for the Commission to examine and supply data on multiple discrimination and hate crimes; calls on the Commission to include provisions explicitly designed to combat multiple discrimination in any future legislation adopted under Article 13 of the EC Treaty, which can be invoked on either one or a combination of more than one of the grounds;

31. Stresses the importance of networking between groups active in combating discrimination at European, national, regional and local level;

34. Stresses that the Commission must produce a common, EU-wide definition of, or at least work towards a consensus about, the meaning of positive action, thereby dispelling the myths surrounding its meaning and its application in some Member States, particularly given its effectiveness for successfully tackling discrimination and producing equality of outcomes in some Member States;

Note: "Positive action" is what we call "affirmative action". Note also the term "equality of outcomes", a notion we have grappled with in the public schools. A totally fallacious and evil attempt to make everyone "equal".

36. Awaits with interest the development of the Community definition of disability which will allow disabled people from all over the European Union to enjoy the same rights wherever they are situated within the European Union;

39. Is firmly convinced that in combating discrimination, a holistic approach to raising public awareness must be developed, beginning with school programmes;

41. Takes the view that differences in treatment based on nationality or language, which are neither objectively and reasonably justified by a legitimate aim nor achieved by appropriate and necessary means, may constitute indirect discrimination on the grounds of racial or ethnic origin contrary to Directive 2000/43/EC;

42. Considers that discrimination must also be seen as interfering with the four fundamental freedoms - particularly the freedom of movement for persons - and as such constitutes an obstacle to the functioning of the internal market; calls on the Commission to encourage the Member States to review their transitional provisions regulating access to their labour markets in order to eliminate differentiation between European citizens in this respect;

43. Considers that minority communities, and in particular the Roma community, need specific social protection, since their problems of exploitation, discrimination and exclusion have become even more acute in the areas of education, health, housing, employment and women's rights following recent enlargements of the European Union;

And it goes on and on and on....

The Gates of Europe

This article was posted by Yves Daoudal two weeks ago.

Ten persons were arrested yesterday (May 16) in France, Germany and the Netherlands during a coordinated operation launched at the request of French justice, against an international network suspected of financing Islamist terrorism in Central Asia.

Eight of them, all of "Turkish origin" were arrested in France, in the suburbs of Mulhouse and in the department of the Rhône. One was quickly released, the others were detained for questioning by the DST.

Note: DST is similar to our FBI.

The article says that hand guns, large sums of money, hard drives and many documents were found in their homes.

These persons, peaceful merchants, are suspected of having participated in the financing of the MIO (Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan), linked to the taliban. Formed in 1998, the MIO, that aims to restore the caliphate, is the most formidable of fundamentalist organizations in Central Asia, where it has made a name for itself through hostage-taking and armed operations.

Here "we are connected to the Pakistan-Afghan zone," say the investigators. Since 2001, and the death of its leader Djouma Namagani in an American bombing in Afghanistan, the MIO is especially active in this zone.

This is also the heart of the problem with Turkey's membership in the European Union. Any Uzbek national, like all Turkish-speaking peoples of Central Asia, can obtain Turkish nationality on demand. The persons arrested were members of the MIO. They are Uzbeks, not Turks. But they are also Turks.

The addition of Turkey to the European Union extends Europe as far as the Pakistan-Afghan border. Which, in a manner of speaking, has already occurred, as we see with these arrests.

The French websites have spoken of this problem, and the potential for increased terrorism, many times over the past years, but I don't know if it is ever mentioned in the English-language press. There are several Turkish-speaking (or Turkic-speaking) countries which (theoretically) could become virtual extensions of Europe, even though, geographically, they are far across the Caspian. Among them are Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, and Azerbaijan. When one considers this, it becomes harder and harder to imagine that they will actually go through with Turkey's accession to the EU. Even more mind-boggling that the US is backing the whole thing.

The map from Wikipedia shows the presumed Altaic groups of languages in green. Japan and Korea are included, but this is still controversial. Note that the question of Turkish nationality in this article revolves around the countries of Central Asia, not of Siberia or the far East.

A Concrete Project

This article also appears at Joachim Véliocras' website Islamisation. His source is Web-Télé Libre:

For those who still believe that the plan to bring Turkey into the European Union is one possibility among others, and that its purpose is just to flatter Turkey without any real desire to follow through, a perusal of the internal journal of the European Commission puts things into the light of day. In an editorial signed by its editor-in-chief, the journal underscores, in an inimitable style (except for Cuba or China), the very concrete nature of the project which is indeed slated to materialize:

"The European Union is the best answer for the citizen facing the challenges of the 21st century, such as globalization, climate change, security and terrorism. It is a successful example of democratic governance (SIC!) within the globalization framework. Five waves of expansion have maintained the relevance of the EU and have made it more influential. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, the perspective of membership in the European Union has been the motivating force for the spectacular transformation of Central and Eastern Europe. In 50 years of European construction, the institutional and political experience that we have acquired has allowed us to enlarge our Union to 27 members. This process goes on. Today, Turkey is an integral part of our agenda on expansion. Our common shared objective (SIC!) is for Turkey to become a full member of the European Union. Many people, both in the member States of the EU and in Turkey, are pessimists and worry about what does not work well in our relationship and what short-term obstacles and difficulties will be encountered. In the European Union they can say that Turkey is not ready for membership; while in Turkey, some do not want membership. To all these people, I say that our present and our future are tightly joined," declared the President of the European Commission, José-Manuel Barroso.

Note: It isn't clear from this article (or from its source) if Barroso is the editor-in-chief of the journal, or if he is being quoted by the editor. Furthermore, a quick google did not lead to more details on this internal journal that is named "Commission en Direct." If anyone has a link to more information, pass it on.

The image is of the promotional poster for Turkey in the EU, printed in Istanbul.

A Mosque for Gien

There are several articles relevant to Turkey. This one from Joachim Véliocras announces the grand opening of the mosque of Gien, financed by the Turkish population of the city:

Sunday May 25, after three years of construction, the Turkish Cultural and Religious Association Gien-Briare inaugurated its mosque amidst great pomp. Besides the mayors of the surrounding cities, the sub-prefect of Montargis, Madame Martinez-Pommier, along with representatives of the Turkish consulate in France attended the event. In order to make their dream a reality, each Turkish colonist contributed 1800 euros, making possible the importation from Turkey of a mosaic façade and a large prayer rug. The regional daily paper République du Centre, adds that besides classes in sharia law, Turkish-language classes will be programmed for children every week, since the mosque, "over and beyond its religious aspect is a true cultural center."

The event did not go unnoticed in Gien, where posters cover the walls of all the neighborhoods announcing the opening, that culminated in a party in a hall belonging to the city, with songs, dances and Turkish culinary specialties, and of course the inevitable whirling dervishes. The president of the mosque's association, Adem Cift, with a straight face declared to the press: "What is not well known is that the Turkish people are very open and love to share. This gives them a chance to show it."

Some examples of Turkey's openness:

- Barring Catholics from any legal statute that would allow them to organize into an association to collect money for the construction or restoration of a church.

- Barring all foreign religious persons from obtaining a visa, no matter how short-term.

- Seizure of the property of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul.

- On-going ban on talking about the two remaining centuries-old monasteries of Tur Abdin that have been closed since 1979.

- The Orthodox seminary of Halki, the main center of theological training of the Greek Orthodox world, has been closed since 1974, and is forbidden by the Islamist government from re-opening.

- The northern part of Cyprus, occupied by Turkey, has experienced a total religious cleansing: 82 churches were at one time present on this territory. Today not one is a place of worship: 68 have been transformed into mosques, 5 into stables, 4 into museums, 3 into army barracks, 2 into residences. On August 27, 2004, a bomb exploded in front of one of them... Etienne Leroy, a research analyst specializing in Turkey, says ironically of the Turkish system of "laïcité": "It is difficult to be reassured about the tolerance of a 'laïc State' that indicates religion on the ID's of its citizens, that refuses to authorize the restoration of the oldest church in Christendom (in Ourfa, formerly Edessa), and that uses abandoned Armenian churches as targets for artillery exercises on the Anatolian plateau. No one should be fooled by Turkish "laïcité."

The photo from Ramayana shows the rather lonely-looking but still beautiful Armenian church of the Holy Cross, on Akdamar Island, Lake Van. The church dates from 921.

The coat of arms belongs to Gien.

Constitutional Reforms

This article from Yahoo, on a major reform bill being debated by the National Assembly, gives some insights into the French system of government:

On Monday, after a stormy debate and despite the opposition of the entire Left and a part of the UMP, the National Assembly, continuing its study of institutional reforms, gave the green light to the President of the Republic to address the two chambers of Parliament scheduled to meet in Congress at Versailles on July 7.

Note: The word "Congress" ("Congrès") is used in French to designate specifically a meeting of Parliament in Versailles for the purpose of reforming the Constitution. Normally the two chambers meet separately, the National Assembly at the Palais Bourbon and the Senate at the Palais du Luxembourg.

Since 1875, following the confrontations between an Assembly that was still in the majority monarchist and President Adolphe Thiers, the amphitheaters of the two houses are forbidden to the president who is only permitted to send them a message - to be read but not debated.

During the presidential campaign, and after his election, Nicolas Sarkozy expressed the wish that "the president might speak at least once a year before Parliament to explain his actions and to give an account of the results." Mr. Sarkozy saw in this "a strong commitment and way of bringing into play a form of intellectual and moral responsibility."

Citing the separation of powers, the Left has turned this issue into a political weapon, but the idea does not go down well with many on the Right either, especially the Gaullists, who see in it an attempt to reduce the power of the Prime Minister.

While the original draft of the bill provided for the right to speak before Parliament or before each of the two chambers, the Commission on Laws, confronted with an uproar, finally limited the the president to an appearance before the Congress in Versailles, with no provision for a permanent timetable.

Both Left and Right are rather skeptical, or even completely opposed to this "Versailles compromise."

"Restricting the appearances of the president is obsolete," according to Minister of Justice Rachida Dati. But Bernard Debré (UMP) sees no reason for the reform since "the president can address the nation on television and everybody gets to see him."

"Before Congress he will deliver a speech about general politics, there will be no voting. It isn't like the speech delivered by the Queen of England because even she reads the speech of the Prime Minister."

Hervé de Charette (UMP) also deemed that the "president, by coming before the Parliament, will be playing the role of head of government. That will change the nature of things."

Note: In France the head of government is always the prime minister. The president is the head of State, or chief of State, similar to our term "Chief Executive".

For André Vallini (Socialist Party) this reform will "infantilize and domesticate Parliament. We cannot accept it." (...)

Another Yahoo article discusses some of the institutional reforms that have been at the center of debate for several days. In working out a final version of the reform bill, the deputies adopted a measure providing for a popular referendum that would be initiated by one fifth of the members of Parliament plus one tenth of the registered voters; they adopted as well a measure that prevents the President of the Republic from serving more than two terms, and they defeated, by a large majority, a measure proposed by Elysée, to establish a maximum number of ministers. On the other hand, they added a measure giving the members of Parliament the right to veto the most important appointments made by the president.

Also, according to Yves Daoudal, at the last minute the deputies added an amendment to the reform bill making a referendum on any major new membership in the EU OBLIGATORY. This is the very referendum that Sarkozy had removed from the Constitution. As Daoudal says:

Abolishing the referendum on Turkey's membership stuck in their throats.

Note: By "major" is meant any country whose population is at least 5% of the population of the EU. This is a roundabout way of designating Turkey. According to Le Figaro this language may have to be altered since it points the finger directly at Turkey.

Jean-François Copé, the majority leader of the National Assembly has called on UMP deputies to vote for the reforms, even though some of them say they will not vote:

With this constitutional reform package, we have the unique opportunity to balance our institutions and to give more responsibility to Parliament. To better serve the French people, you must seize this opportunity. I say this in good conscience and with seriousness: such an opportunity will never happen again. (...) a deputy can very well oppose one measure or one amendment, but that should not lead him to reject the ensemble of the bill, and the progress it represents. (...)

Note: There are 35 measures in all in the reform bill. The most important one, as far as it is possible to determine at this time, is the obligatory referendum on Turkey. Since it is part of the total package, to reject the bill is to reject the referendum.

But Le Salon Beige has the last word:

You can revise the 1958 Constitution all you want, write into it anything and everything, what does it matter? The essential powers today are in the hands of the European Commission. (...)

Readers of French can find a plethora of articles on the reform bill in Le Figaro's special section devoted to the debates, opinions, and prognosis surrounding this 24th modification of the Constitution of the 5th Republic..

Christians On Trial - Update

Here is an interesting follow-up to my recent article on Christians in Algeria, and the specific case of Habiba Kouider, prosecuted for carrying Bibles in her handbag. The news of her trial has received world-wide attention, since the US State Department has mentioned it in its on-line report on Algeria. Not surprisingly the French authorities are also well aware of the event. Secretary of State for Human Rights, Rama Yade (photo), has made some comments on the case as reported by La Croix:

"It's sad, it's shocking, first because it contravenes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights," that proclaims, in Article 18, freedom of thought, of conscience and of religion, declared Madame Yade.

"In accordance with Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and in accordance with Algeria's tradition of hospitality, I believe that an act of clemency would be appropriate," she added.

The prosecutor of Tiaret, in western Algeria, asked for a sentence of three years without parole for Habiba Kouider, 37, a convert to Christianity on trial for illegally practicing a non-Muslim faith, by virtue of a law passed in 2006. The verdict is expected on Tuesday, according to the Protestant Church of Algeria.

Note: This would seem to indicate that she converted to Protestantism - probably of the Evangelical sort. The actual denomination has not been mentioned.

"Christianity does not threaten Islam in Algeria," Madame Yade feels. "The Christians in Algeria are 1% of the population, that is, about 11,500 persons. There are 32 churches compared with 32,000 mosques, so I don't think there is a religious threat."

The secretary of State for Human Rights revealed that it was "not the first case of this type," pointing to that of the French Catholic priest, Pierre Wallez, who was given a two-month suspended sentence in April for proselytizing by the appeals court of Tlemcen in western Algeria.

"I have confidence in the tolerance of the Algerian people," Madame Yade repeated.

Note: Her remarks aroused anger at Le Salon Beige and raised some questions. If you look carefully at what she said, it is a bit ambiguous. Christianity as a threat to Islam is not the issue, the issue is that Christianity itself is threatened. She says: "Christianity does not threaten Islam in Algeria," implying that if it did, then she would condemn the Christians. But there is no way that could happen in the current situation with the current religious demographics. LSB notes:

Why add this additional point? In what way could Christianity be a threat? In the name of what "laïcité" is a minister authorized to judge whether or not one religion is a threat to another? And finally, can we know at what percentage point a religion becomes a threat?

Note: I'm not sure his remarks are much help because they indicate that a minister would not have the right to judge Islam as a threat. But as far as percentage points are concerned, he is right to accuse her lack of preciseness. She says that 1% is not enough to constitute a threat but does not say what does constitute a threat. As one LSB reader points out:

Following her reasoning can we conclude that Islam is a threat to France?

Another reader takes her side on the assumption that when she says "threat" she is referring, not to Catholics, but to the Evangelical movement that is regarded by the Algerian authorities as an American plot to destroy Algerian identity. Which brings us right back to the issue of identity: if Algeria can act to protect its own identity from a few Evangelical Protestants, why can France not protect herself from the millions of Muslims, and their mosques?

Parc Monceau Vandalized

Paris has several large gardens for nature-lovers, strollers, students of sculpture, and those who, for some reason, enjoy reading a book on a bench in the open air, sometimes even in the sun. I cannot stand reading in the sun; I must be in artificial light, without a view of nature, except perhaps for a noisy street. But I used to spend a great deal of time just walking through the Paris gardens and watching the swans, if they made an appearance.

Now the Parc Monceau on the Right Bank has been vandalized, its historic sculptures destroyed, possibly irretrievably. Le Conservateur has the bad news (and more photos):

A few days ago most of the monuments, both old and recent, in the Parc Monceau, were damaged by imbeciles whom we cannot identify with greater precision in the absence of information. The monument to the composer Gounod, covered with graffiti, is probably not restorable since marble soaks up any ink, rust or paint.

This is beyond commentary, but calls for a few observations. This destruction raises the question of the future of cultural urban property that is damaged with regularity, either from vice or from ignorance. How many times have I seen children, or those less young, in sneakers, climb up on statues or monuments? The municipal workers will murder you if you dare take a few petals from a faded flower, but display an almost total passiveness towards behavior that endangers our monuments, as I have often observed in the Tuileries Gardens.

A comment on graffiti cannot be avoided, and I will try not to fall into a facile ideological rejection, but it is not the graffiti in itself that is harmful, but the exercise of this "pictorial technique" on the property of others, or on public property. A whole microcosm of art gallery owners and officials advocate the freedom to "invade" any available surface. In the minds of idiots, what is the meaning of this message, if not a green light to commit vandalism? For modern relativistic man, a wall in a vacant lot or a marble statue - what's the difference?

Finally we note that the media, even the local media, made no mention of these acts of vandalism. In a sense, it's just as well: all we need is for the vandals to gloat over their acts.

As for Parc Monceau, it's not what it once was. It has become a den for scumbags who come to chase after an easy white girl, and for dealers of all sorts. Casting pearls to swine, as we used to say.

It looks like the cultural relativism we see at the Louvre has spilled out into the gardens of Paris. (Or maybe it spilled into the Louvre from the street?)

Charles Gounod (1818-1893) composed religious music and several operas. He is known for Faust, one of the world's most popular operas, based on Goethe's poem, and for Roméo et Juliette, after Shakespeare. But even if you don't know his operas you surely know his exquisite rendition of the Ave Maria set to the first prelude of Bach's Well-Tempered Clavier. You hear it all the time around the holidays. He also composed the hymn O Divine Redeemer.

Obsessive Sarkosis

Everybody must read this entertaining article about the Sarkozy-obsessed French, from the New York Times of May 24. And thanks to Lawrence Auster for sending it. Here are the opening paragraphs:

Serge Hefez, a practicing psychiatrist, has identified a new mental illness among the French: obsessive Sarkosis, an unhealthy fascination with the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy.

“As I listened to my patients during consultations, many of them mentioned Sarkozy by name,” Dr. Hefez said. “He’s penetrated some of their deepest fantasies. I noticed all this passion in people speaking of him, and I thought there is something particular about this man — he’s like a reflection of us in the mirror.”

The French project themselves onto Mr. Sarkozy, too, Dr. Hefez said.

“He’s the incarnation of the postmodern man, obsessed with himself, turned toward pleasure, autonomous and narcissistic,” the psychiatrist said. “And he exhibits his joys and sorrows, all his private life, his sentimental doubts and pleasures. He represents the individualism of the society to the extreme, that it’s the individual who counts, not the society.”

A year after taking office, Mr. Sarkozy can appear to be everywhere, at least in the world of television and print. The daily newspaper Le Figaro counts at least 100 books devoted to the French president, his life and loves, with more than a million sold, for $25.1 million.

Read more, and enjoy the photos! Registration may be required.

The photo above is from Flickr.

Losing the Mind

Gérard Pince, one of my favorite commentators, reflects on the intellectual level of the French. You may not like or agree with everything he says, but the ideas he deals with are worth debating:

The more I observe French society, the more I think about the book by professors Lynn and Vanhanen, published in 2002, and devoted to the study of the average intelligence quotients in 81 countries. France arrives in the 21st position in this world sampling and in 10th place in Western Europe, with an average IQ of 98 (107 in Hong Kong and 102 in Germany). Immigration is not going to improve this situation since the 16 African countries cited in the study are at the bottom of the world classification with IQ's ranging from 59 to 77.

Note: The book in question is IQ and the Wealth of Nations. See Wikipedia.

These data can be confirmed by the level of our teaching. The 2008 ratings by the University of Shanghai have just been released and the results are painful. Out of the 500 top universities in the world, 308 are American, 50 British, and only 9 French. That symbol of republican elitism, the Ecole Normale Supérieur, only placed in the 39th position in the list of 100 top institutions specializing in natural sciences and mathematics. Even though France trains each year as many psychologists and sociologists as the ensemble of the European Union, no French institution figures in the list of the top 100 universities specializing in the social sciences. These results demonstrate the inadequacy of the mini-reforms now in progress. Instead of throwing money away for nothing, it would be wiser to grant scholarships to meritorious students for serious studies in the United Kingdom or the United States.

The hoopla surrounding the name of Lévi-Strauss is another indicator of the weakened intellectual level. Open his minor work entitled Race and History considered as the Bible of cultural relativism. In it we find that the East has a thousand-year advance on the West in the knowledge of the human body (he cites in particular the case of yoga). In other words, all the advances of Western science in biology, genetics, or medicine count for peanuts compared with the wondrous practices of the fakirs! And yet in terms of brain-washing, knowledge of Lévi-Strauss is the "open sesame" for anyone who wants to pass the course work in the human sciences.

Finally, if the French people were voting in the American election, they would choose Barack Hussein Obama by a crushing majority. And yet they know nothing about his policies. But it's enough that he is black to satisfy a morbid penchant for universal repentance. Do not, therefore, be surprised by all the idiocies that you are reading or hearing at this time. They merely reflect the intellectual situation in our unfortunate country.

Note: Yoga has little to do with the fakirs, having been in use for hundreds of years before the Moguls. Appearances to the contrary, Gérard Pince is not making a direct connection between the two.

I am not familiar with the writings of Lévi-Strauss, though I hear a lot of talk about him. I think the problem is, as Pince points out, in over-estimating his theories to the detriment of all others. This type of intellectual dishonesty has always been very common in our universities: a cult builds up around the theories of so-and-so, and is used as a weapon in determining who shall teach, who shall be fired, who shall be admitted or expelled. John Dewey and Karl Marx are two other revered experts whose theories have nearly destroyed the world.

French readers may enjoy the comments. One reader questions the statistics on grounds that the best French schools - the so-called Grandes Ecoles - are not included in the survey, but Gérard Pince disagrees, and questions, in turn, the excellence of the Grandes Ecoles.

Les Grandes Ecoles are advanced schools specializing in one or more branches of technology. We might call them technical schools or engineering and business schools, or specialty schools. Originally they had been created as an alternative to the universities that were regarded as being under the thumb of the Church.

Two years preparation is required (after high-school) for admission to a Grande Ecole. Wikipedia has an English-language article on the schools that may be of interest.

Finally if you go to the Wikipedia link to the book by Lynn and Vanhanen you'll see that the United States and France both have an average IQ of 98, and that we rank 23rd, after several Western European and Asian countries and Japan. The enemies we conquered in 1945 are now smarter than we are with average IQ's of 102 (Germany) and 105 (Japan).

Passing the Torch

Arnaud Folch, editor of the Blog of Valeurs Actuelles, deplores the fact the young leaders of Jeunes UMP (that is, the branch of Sarkozy's UMP party for young persons who aspire to political prominence) are hardly conservative:

Four candidates for the leadership of Jeunes UMP: four similar profiles, all favorable to voting rights for immigrants and all favorable to gay adoption! In the name of the fight against "official thinking"! I hesitated, this week, in deciding on the tone of my article: should I write about these candidates by pointing out the (rare) differences between them, or on the contrary, should I highlight their similarities? I chose the second option. For this I received furious phone calls from certain interested parties. But I'm the one who's furious, and that's only the beginning. If that is what they call the new generation of the Right, then we might as well vote directly for the Left! But at 44, I am probably an old reactionary in their eyes. Dare I admit that I already was one at 20...

I like some of the readers' comments:

- Your mistake comes from the fact that you place the UMP party on the Right!

- There are in France two great parties on the Left. One of them is called the Right, the problem is we don't know which one!

Christians On Trial

This story from Le Figaro, about an event in Algeria, is making the rounds of many French websites:

The criminal court of Tiaret was the scene of a surreal trial on Tuesday. Habiba Kouider, a Christian woman, 37 years old, a teacher in a day-care center, was before the judge for having religious books in her possession, a crime that has been punishable by a prison term since the adoption, in February 2006, of the law governing "non-Muslim religions". On March 29, 2008, in a bus bringing her back from Oran where she attends Bible school, to her residence in Tiaret, she was arrested by the gendarmes. In her handbag they found the evidence: Bibles and Gospels. She was arrested and taken to the police station, where several officers took turns subjecting the "miscreant" to a humiliating interrogation. The next day the prosecutor proposed a curious trade: "If you return to Islam, I will throw the case out; if you persist in your sin, you will suffer the wrath of justice!" Reserved, almost timid, Habiba Kouider was afraid, but refused to renounce her faith.

On Tuesday she responded with dignity to the ironic questions of the judge. "What is your religion?" "I am Christian. I converted in 2004 at the church of Oran" she answered almost inaudibly. With a disdainful smile, the judge said: "The priests made you drink their holy water that leads to Paradise." She did not respond.

When he noticed the presence of reporters in the room, the judge called out: "Do you have an authorization to take notes?" Defense attorney Khelloudja Khalfoun spoke up: "This is a public trial, journalists have the right to be there." (...) The judge lost his temper and threatened to "take measures", before confiscating the journalists' notes!

Under the eye of the press, the judges contained their arrogance. Without conviction the prosecutor repeated that "Islam is the State religion" and asked for a sentence of 3 years without parole, to which Attorney Khalfoun pleaded for the "freedom of conscience guaranteed by the Constitution" and asked that her client be acquitted. In a nutshell, two antagonistic visions within Algerian society confront one another. The verdict will be rendered on May 27. The same day, before the same court, six more Christians appeared for "distributing tracts that aim to break the faith of the Muslims."

Since January 2008, trials for the "crime of Christianity" have multiplied in Western Algeria, notably Oran, Mascara and Bel-Abbès. Since they are in opposition to the dictatorship of the one party, the newly converted are forced to worship secretly. Keeping a straight face, the Algerian minister of religious affairs reassures: "The Christian community enjoys all rights; but we are fighting against sects!"

I probably would not have posted this article, except that yesterday I received this message in the comment section of an older post:

this is very important

i am writing this comment to ask for help.
there are many people in algeria who are judged because of their choice " christianism" and no one is there to help them or to protect their Fundamental rights.

they are fired from their places of work. the lawyers do not agree to take their files and defend their rights because they pretend being muslims.
please if there is an international institution or association who can save these christians and thier families, i would be greatful if you send me their adress to my email:

amazigh1-80@hotmail.com

I don't know exactly how to help this person. But there are some organizations dedicated to helping Christians in danger in various parts of the world.

The Collectif Algerie is one.

Also this web page from the Journal Chretien has information and links that may be useful:

If you know of any other specific organizations please send them to this person.

Recent statistics show that out of 33 million inhabitants in Algeria, only 11,500 are Christians, 10,000 of those are Protestant, 1500 are Catholic.

Victory for Philippe Karsenty

There's much rejoicing at numerous websites over the victory for Philippe Karsenty in his suit against France 2 journalist Charles Enderlin, accused of falsifying footage of a film in order to blame Israel for the death of a young boy, Muhammed al-Dura. This passage from an article by Ed Lasky posted at American Thinker reviews the event that is causing so much jubilation:

The Palestinian version was that Israeli troops had killed a young boy, Muhammad al-Dura who was seen on the film crouching behind his father. There was a break in the film and then an image of the boy slumped over was seen. Palestinians and their supporters claimed that the Israeli troops had killed al-Dura; the cause became a cause celebre in the Arab world and played a role in stoking terrorism against Israel. In the heat of the events, the Israeli government accepted responsibility. However, after more investigation of the matter-looking at the placement of the Israeli and Palestinians, it became clear that the Israelis were too quick in accepting blame. Extended analysis made it clearer that the young boy was most probably killed by the Palestinians during the battle.

Karsenty had claimed that Enderlin and the Palestinian cameraman had faked the footage to place the blame on Israel. There were gaps in the film that was broadcast throughout the world, missing film that had been edited. Enderlin sued for libel and in the first round in France won. Karsenty appealed that verdict. The issue received a far more intensive analysis during the appeal. Today, that libel verdict was overturned.

At Covenant Zone, Truepeers offers a substantial analysis.

Augean Stables, a determined supporter of Karsenty throughout the trial, also provides numerous links both in French and English.

For background information from a February, 2005 International Herald Tribune article, click here.

Bruno Mégret Leaves Politics

Two posts down I spoke of trouble in the ranks of the Nouvelle Droite Populaire, with Bruno Mégret refusing to support the movement other than marginally. Thanks to a tip from a reader I see now that Mégret is pulling out of politics altogether. Here is the first part of a Yahoo article:

The leader of the National Republican Movement (MNR), Bruno Mégret, announced on Tuesday his "withdrawal from political life", a little less than ten years after his spectacular departure from the Front National where he was the nº 2 man. (...)

"I'm going to work abroad for a large company. I am stepping aside from politics after having tried everything to make a true Right emerge in the political landscape," he indicated to AFP, without giving details.

"This will not be a six-month trip," he stated when asked if his "withdrawal" was temporary or definitive.

The former lieutenant of Jean-Marie Le Pen at the Front National, Mégret, efficient and ambitious, had tried to seize power in 1998, before splitting with several party leaders and founding his MNR.

But despite his efforts, the MNR never succeeded in rivaling the FN and slowly faded away. At the last legislative elections, the MNR won only 0.4% of the votes, losing the right to public funding.

During the 2007 presidential election, Jean-Marie Le Pen and Bruno Mégret, accompanied by their wives, had sealed their reconciliation before members of the press. But Mégret who hoped to be a part of Le Pen's campaign team ran up against the determined hostility of Marine Le Pen and Louis Aliot, general secretary of the party.

In the end he was kept on the sidelines, and only allowed to appear without speaking at Le Pen's rally in Lyons.

Lately, Mégret had given his support to the efforts of several extreme right-wing groups attempting to unite in a federation that would rival the FN, notably the efforts of former FN member Jean-François Touzé. But several leaders of the MNR, including general secretary Nicolas Bay, disagreed with this initiative, preferring instead a rapprochement with the FN, which has become more conciliatory after its poor showing in the elections.

The rest of the article is a bio of Mégret and his rise to prominence in the world of French politics, reaching his most powerful position in the Front National in the 1990's.

Now a slightly different interpretation of the events emerges. It was not that Mégret wanted power in the Nouvelle Droite Populaire and was denied it, rather he was willing to support the new movement, but his own party members in the MNR were not. Since Mégret wants nothing to do with Le Pen, he had no viable choice but to leave.

Nationalist movements seem to have much more trouble finding common ground and uniting for their cause than left-wing parties. The factions of the Left, like the factions of Islam, may fight one another, but they will, in a crisis, unite against the Right, just as the various Islamic factions will always unite against the infidel. The conservatives can never get their act together. Not sure why this is so.

Vancouver Thursday

I found this photo of a Vancouver intersection posted, along with 23 others, at Urban Photo. I hope it inspires all serious-minded Vancouverites (is that the correct term?), as well as a few who are not too serious, to head for the public library today, Thursday, for the weekly discussions that sustain you throughout the rest of the week. You are fortunate to have enough motivation and interest to keep up this weekly gathering, and to have forged new friendships that, I hope, will last forever.

And I want to say another "grand merci" to the fine people of Vancouver who have remained interested in my humble website for over two years. Canada was the first country to send comments to GalliaWatch and I remain committed to informing you about the state of traditional France, for as long as possible.

From the 24 photos I gather there is no paucity of Starbucks in Vancouver!

Those interested can see a spectacular view of the Vancouver skyline here.

Bonne réunion!

Trouble Already

No sooner was it announced, amidst much hope and optimism, that a new nationalist, patriotic movement (Nouvelle Droite Populaire) had been formed, without the participation of the Front National, but WITH the MNR (National Republican Movement) and its leader Bruno Mégret as a major participant, than a communiqué from the MNR announces that its support is limited and conditional. Le Salon Beige reprints the communiqué:

1.Regarding the initiative called Nouvelle Droite Populaire (NPD), the MNR had agreed to give its support so long as it was simply an organization for the gathering-together of interested persons. Insofar as this organization is systematically presented as a political party, the MNR is not favorable and withdraws its support.

2. Regarding its relationship with the Front National, the MNR repeats that there is no possibility of an agreement with this party nor of support for any member of the FN.

3. However, contacts will be maintained with all the participants in the national Right, whoever they may be, and common actions can be decided upon as the occasions arise.

Bruno Mégret's objections are not clear. Didn't he know it was to be a new political party? Didn't he know that was the ultimate goal? Does he think his own MNR can go it alone? His support was vital. Now there is no FN or MNR - just a bunch of disgruntled nationalists at sea, without a party. As a Salon Beige reader says:

- Alone, we will never succeed. But we are alone and alone we will stay!

Even Mégret has left us. The boat is sinking, the passengers are concerned, and already the captain is no longer on board!

Just speculating, but it sounds as if some members of the new movement began the process of forming a party without consulting Mégret. A story to follow... provided there is a future for this movement.

Desacralizing the Louvre

A long article at Liberté Politique delves into the reasons why the Louvre Museum has poured so much time and energy into initiating, publicizing and justifying the Jan Fabre exhibition. (You can review my recent article on this subject.)

The first part of the article by Aude de Kerros deals with the American connection to the current trend to democratize, standardize, and trivialize all art to the point where great works cannot be distinguished from trash by a brain-dead public. This American connection can be traced back to the 1969 when, in an attempt to pacify the bloody riots in the black ghettoes and win over the minorities, the Metropolitan Museum in New York under the leadership of Thomas Hoving opened the exhibition entitled Harlem on My Mind. This ground-breaking expo purported to raise to the level of great art the graffiti, political posters, demonstrations, Church music, dances, and jazz bands of the famous black quarter of New York. Crowds from Harlem flooded into the museum. Ten paintings were scribbled with an "H" for Harlem, including one Rembrandt.

Hoving had created the idea of a "blockbuster" expo that rapidly earned approval and worked against traditional Europe, lowering in value the appealing and prestigious image of its great art.

And while lucre was one motivation for the so-called "blockbuster" events that now take place in museums around the world, it was only one, and not the most lethal one. The slow-acting poison of indoctrination by the media, the academy, and the globalist levelers who are flourishing in politics, business, research, and the management of the national heritages of Western countries has largely succeeded in anesthetizing the discriminatory faculties of the populations. Once the populations cannot distinguish gold from excrement the levelers have it made. The universe belongs to them. But we aren't quite at that point yet.

In France it was the unfortunate fate of the Louvre, under the leadership of Henri Loyrette, to become one of the targets of the voracious appetite of these levelers and nation-destroyers, the same Loyrette who spearheaded the policy of sending large collections of great works from the Louvre to other countries for long periods of time:

Henri Loyrette set two new goals for the Louvre: to legitimize and consecrate Contemporary Art, goals he justifies by pointing to the necessary "democratization" of the museum through the conquest of a public turned off by "great art", but obliged to visit museums out of a concern for republican egalitarianism.

It means "establishing a dialogue between the artists of the past and contemporary artists." The official brochure handed out to visitors notes: "Jan Fabre, whose multidisciplinary works violate categories and boundaries, is particularly well-suited to the needs of the museum." Thus "violation through dialogue" becomes a new formula for violation adapted to great museums.

In order to demonstrate the relevance of this audacious concept, the prospectus makes use of syllogisms such as: Jan Fabre is comparable to the Flemish painters because he is Flemish, because he uses blood and bones in his constructions, while the painters used them in their pigments. They deal with the same themes! Life, death, etc... While Rubens paints a crucifixion, Fabre makes a tombstone, Q.E.D. These playful semantics and figures of rhetoric had had an immense success at the Salon of Incoherent Art, between 1882 and 1896. The Dada movement followed. The Louvre is turning it into a sententious and serious document that expresses the new dogma of museums. The "Incoherents" had not imagined that in their zaniest fantasies!

Note: The "Incoherents" were a group of literary and theater people who boasted about the fact that they had no idea how to draw, but whose sense of humor led them to create "art" exhibits that were parodies of the official salons. What an intelligent society once laughed at today's dumbed-down imbeciles take seriously.

The loss of humor, of self-deprecating humor, of parody and satire can also be attributed to May 68, in addition to everything else.

The Dada eruption, centered more or less in Zurich, was an anti-war, anti-art, anti-bourgeois coming together of diverse personalities whose goal essentially was to protest World War I.

Finally, the last goal: to consecrate, using a Duchamp-style declaration, the value and high-ranking of Contemporary Art, in the event, that of Jan Fabre. In the official text, Fabre is presented as a "total artist": a great draftsman (with a Bic pen!), an installer, author, editor, sculptor, performer, choreographer, stage director... A "total artist", worthy of the images from the totalitarian world of Ionesco. The superlatives rain down (...)

Note: In 1917 Marcel Duchamp exhibited a photograph of a urinal and declared it "art."

Beyond the mercantile mechanisms of speculation, obscure by definition, the long term strategy of this blockbuster exhibit is to alter the mental attitudes of the public with regard to the national patrimony. By desacralizing the Louvre, by relativizing the museum, they are getting the public accustomed to the idea of moving, renting, and sending out of the country the Louvre's collections and exhibiting something else in their place, something readily available like AC ("art contemporain") (1) Henri Loyrette, curator though he be, rallied to the idea of reaping a profit from the "immaterial goods" that the collections represent, as if they were merchandise, an idea that is currently uppermost in the minds of many well-placed functionaries, graduates of the ENA (National School of Administrators), who, more and more, are running our museums instead of curators.

Henri Loyrette works to maintain the high salaries of the Louvre and for the magnificence that money bestows on an institution that is always in financial need. Such is his combat. But he is encountering resistance on the part of many curators who have the merit of being informed and of understanding the issues. Therefore, he must turn public opinion against them by staging theatrics - a quarrel. Thanks to the positions taken by the big-time media, the recalcitrant experts are treated as "reactionaries" or worse. They will no longer be considered as knowledgeable references but as "dangerous hypochondriacs."

On the Internet, opinion is resisting, and the experts as well as mere mortals are asking: besides the essential question of the material safety of the collections, which is not guaranteed, is it in the Louvre's best interests to follow in the footsteps of the Metropolitan Museum in 1969, and desacralize its works of art, especially now, at the hour of globalization?

America had acted in its own interests in 1969 when it devalued "great European art". Ought we not, on the contrary, in a long-range perspective and in our own interest, magnify our heritage, give it sanctuary so that when people come here from all over, they know that the works are there, in their proper context, there and not somewhere else? The context is not to be taken lightly - it allows us to see. Jan Fabre knows this well, that is why he is in the Louvre.

(1) The acronym AC for "art contemporain" was used by Christine Sourgins as a convenient designation of a practice that is not just art, but the expression of a particular ideology.

The painting by Rubens is of the Apotheosis of Henri IV. This explanation of the complex work is from the Louvre's website:

Henry is being borne heavenwards. The writhing snake pierced by an arrow is an allusion to his assassin, Ravaillac. He is being carried away by Jupiter, king of the gods, supported by his eagle, and by Saturn, whose sickle shows that Time will remember Henry's reign. Hercules awaits him on Mount Olympus, sitting next to Mercury. Hercules was a demi-god who won his immortality through his exploits, and his image had been used by the Bourbons; Rubens is therefore playing on a flattering comparison for Henry IV, likening him to a kind of Gallic Hercules on his way to the heroes' pantheon. Marie de Médicis is surrounded by mythological figures auguring the justice of her reign. Divine Providence is handing her the helm, symbolizing a just and straight course. The queen is being advised by, on her left, Minerva, the wise warrior goddess, and on her right, Prudence, who is presenting France to her. The allegory of France, helmeted, is kneeling on one knee to offer her the globe of government, which is accepted by the gathering of the kingdom's great and good swearing allegiance to her. The reference to antiquity is manifest in this political glorification: the queen is sitting in state in front of an antique triumphal arch, Henry IV is dressed as a Roman emperor and Bellona, the winged goddess of War, is holding a trophy directly inspired by antiquity.

Obviously, much knowledge is required to appreciate such a work. Or a willingness to learn. Art always makes enormous demands on the viewer, reader or listener. Not surprising therefore that a poorly educated public would shun such treasures, and even resent them for being difficult.

H/T: Le Conservateur