A Quick Debate

Note: This post was begun before the debate took place, and completed on April 6.

In a recent post I questioned the validity of discussions where ideas are manipulated and where those who contravene official thought are silenced or ridiculed. A new national debate is scheduled to begin on April 5 on the subject of laïcité and the place of Islam in French society. I suggested in my post that this new enterprise would be as futile as the last one on national identity, since Islam does not lend itself to criticism or questioning and the same repressive forces would be at work as have been in the past. However, I could be wrong. Catholic writer Bernard Antony believes there is much to be gained by this new debate. The following are excerpts from a much longer text:

For the debate on Islam is a good thing and cannot in any way contravene the respect due to Muslims as to all men. But it is essential to the very principle of freedom to affirm that Islam, like any other religion, ideology, culture, political, social and juridical system (and Islam is all of that since it rejects the evangelical distinction between the spiritual and the temporal) must be able to be analyzed, criticized , refuted.

The risk of criticism that is accepted in Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Free Masonry, Socialism, liberalism, Islam must accept it too. In those places where it is in power, the slightest critique, the expression of the slightest doubt are called blasphemy and incur the worst punishments if not death. In those areas where society has not yet submitted itself, from the first expression of any refusal of its model and its mores, Islam's leaders cry "Islamophobia", which pseudo-antiracism must then repress.

This is not acceptable.

He describes the obscene pornographic abominations against Christianity, against women, against human dignity, and how these complaints are thrown out of court by judges who remind him that the right of blasphemy is the basis of laïcité. He says that he would denounce such acts if they were directed against Mohammed, but he adds that no one dares do such things.

But it is essential to the freedom of our civilization to be able to criticize Islam, to be able to refute it, to be able to refuse its repressive totalitarian system, more long lasting even than Communism. Unfortunately, this is what religious spokesmen and even uncultured and frightened political leaders of all stripes, cannot seem to understand. And yet, as we know, to be able to criticize Islam freely is what millions of Muslims in the lands of Islam aspire to. And it is what thousands of our Arab and Berber compatriots are doing here. This must be thrown into the debate.

At stake is liberty!

I wonder what the reaction of the French people is to the Terry Jones story making headlines in America. The pastor in Florida burned a copy of the Koran, setting off an outpouring of sanctimonious reproof and outrage from both political parties and from the media.

French readers can read at least one positive reaction to this daring and courageous act at Français de France.

And an American businesswoman named Ann Barnhardt has reacted with rip-roaring approval for the pastor in two videos posted at Gates of Vienna:

Now, back to the debate on laïcité in France. It took place yesterday (April 5). What happened? Did it determine once and for all that Islam must be criticized like any other religion? Bernard Antony has a follow-up to his previous article, entitled "Copé's debate cut off and buried"!

(Reminder: Jean-François Copé is chairman of the UMP party):

Despite the fright of both civil and religious hierarchies, the guardians of reserved and monitored democracy, we were hoping that this national debate on laïcité and Islam by the UMP would really take place. We were expecting it to be organized on a great scale throughout society to allow for judicious analysis and reflection, and for the expression of the expectations of the French people.

The long and short of it is that it was wrapped up in less than three hours, during which not a single definition or fundamental thought on laïcité was produced. Once again they were very careful not to speak, be it ever so slightly, of what Islam really is, beyond the simple concept of religion.

Let us grant to Minister of the Interior Claude Guéant (1) that he timidly, therefore awkwardly, skimmed over the subject of the number of Muslims. He either spoke too much or too little, for he unleashed the thunderous disapproval of the Left. He should have asked the following question: "What will happen to non-Muslims when Islam is in the majority?"

We are convinced that it would have aroused much uneasiness and less of an uproar. But it is no doubt unfair to be too accusatory towards the ruling class for its collective denial of reality, when one considers the attitude of the spokesmen of religions who remain bound in their common precinct of trans-ecumenical representation.

Not to anger Islam even a little bit is now, from the evidence, their major concern, and especially that of the French bishops.

A left-wing French website called Politis has a humorous summary of the event and some photos. Here is the last paragraph. I don't know all of the people named, but it doesn't matter:

Luc Chatel didn't fool around: "We must not compromise with laïcité". Gosh. When Gilles Bernheim, grand rabbi of France who attended "on principle" expressed reservations on this debate, the atmosphere cooled slightly. When he said "our position is moral and cannot be political" he generated very restrained, even polite applause. But let's move on… with Gérard Longuet, for whom a weak government "would open the way to all kinds of extremism". Now there's a man who speaks as a connoisseur. We'll pass rapidly over the inspired remark of Farid Hannache "Republicans have a duty to debate" and the conditional warning of Laurent Wauquiez - "It is not religions that undermine society, it is potentially the fanatical elements". And after two hours of debate, Christophe Barbier is "reassured" to see that there is "no problem in defining laïcité. Only the concrete problems remain."

And that is the beauty of being with one's own: everybody agrees.

So much for the "debate", which took place in the Pullman Hotel in Montparnasse.

(1) I failed to do a post on the new Interior Minister Claude Guéant. He replaced Brice Hortefeux at the end of February. It happened so quickly I didn't realize there had been a change until several weeks later. I will do a post soon, but I don't see that it makes a great deal of difference at this point. The Sarkozy regime has gone from worse to worse. Its inability to confront the issues and its fear of not being in tune with the decadent times is paving the way for the Front National or... the Socialists.