A stirred ideological debate on “Islamo-progressivism” is revived in France

PARIS.– The term is not new but, like a boomerang, it periodically returns to poison the French politico-ideological ground to the point of forcing the highest state authorities to intervene to limit the damage. This week, President Emmanuel Macron had to make serious efforts to calm the controversy sparked by one of his ministers, who announced that he had launched an investigation to eliminate the practices of “Islamo-leftism” (Islamo-leftism or maybe also Islamo-progressivism) at university.

The press release, made public during a televised interview by Fréderique Vidal, Minister of Higher Education and Research, did not only arouse the astonishment of members of the Conference of University Presidents, who immediately denounced the “caricatured representations” and “the arguments of the interviews by the coffee”.

On Tuesday, the same National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) – which according to Vidal should be in charge of research – criticized “the attempts to delegitimize different areas of research”.

For its part, the Élysée Palace was quick to clarify its position, reaffirming “President Macron’s absolute attachment to the independence of professors and researchers”. “This view is shared by the whole government and will continue to be defended,” said spokesperson Gabriel Attal.

At the top of the state, they claim that neither the president nor the prime minister, Jean Castex, were informed of the minister’s initiative, which, he explained, was aimed at “Distinguish between what responds to academic research and what is motivated by activism and opinion”.

“His departure was inappropriate at a time when, because of the pandemic, university students are going through dramatic moments,” said a government source.

But if Macron distanced himself, Vidal was nevertheless supported by political representatives of the far right and the right of the government majority. Among them, the Minister of the Interior, Gerald Darmanin, who described her as “courageous”, agrees with her.

But what is this famous Islamo-leftism that has agitated French intellectual circles for years? The phrase – the outlines of which are quite confusing – is frequently used to accuse people on the left of being blind to the danger of Islamist extremism and too preoccupied with issues of identity and racism.. Those who use it are the defenders of absolute secularism, who also claim a realistic attitude towards Islam and Islamism.

“The Islamo-leftists are infamous who accuse of Islamophobia those who have the courage to say ‘we want the laws of the republic to apply to everyone and, above all, to everyone'”, said famous philosopher Elisabeth Badinter , referring to the eternal debate over the Islamic veil for women.

“The expression designates those who, in the name of a community and North American vision of identity, fight universalist feminism and secularism,” explains French essayist Caroline Forest, who uses it commonly. For those who suffer from it, the term is only a weapon to disqualify a legitimate struggle: to make the voices of “racialized” and “discriminated” Muslims heard, they say.

Without any scientific justification, the term – which works very well in the media field – has become an attractive and effective montage to intervene in the increasingly difficult debate of French intellectuals. In this sense, even when it refers specifically to Islam, the term Islamo-leftist shares some similarities with “awakened” English, generally used as an insult by people on the right against the left.

At this very moment, France is the subject of a critical campaign against its secular secular and republican tradition by the English-speaking intellectual media which support the Woke movement. This new activism born in the United States, which places the injustices suffered by minorities at the center of all debates, counts prestigious English-speaking media among its most influential defenders.

In turn, victim of cultural tropism, the newspaper The New York Times recently published an article titled “The New Enemy of France: The American Left Woke Up and Its Universities”, where he claimed that “the French are not able to cope with their racial problems”, thus ignoring the refusal to divide society into races or communities is one of the foundations of the French republic, an essential difference with the social conception of countries like the United States or Great Britain where communitarianism is perfectly accepted.

In any case, the origin of the expression is as dark as its outlines. In France, it first appeared in 2002. In his book, The New Judeophobia, sociologist Pierre-André Taguieff uses it to describe the links between extreme left groups and members of the Muslim community. He was specifically referring to pro-Palestinian groups where neo-leftists (Trotskyists, anarchists and anti-globalization activists) were demonstrating alongside Islamists Hezbollah or Hamas, calling for the elimination of Israel.

According to Taguieff, since then the expression has come to be used “for all sauces”.

Another historical reference can be found in an article that Chris Hartman, leader of the British Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party (SWP), wrote in 1994. In a long reflection on the nature of Islamism and the state of social struggles of At the time, he said that the left made two mistakes: to have considered the Islamists as “fascists” and to have imagined them “progressive”. Consequently, the left had to come closer to those convinced of Islamism to send them back to their fold. Obviously, his position was more ambiguous than a simple call to ally with the Islamists. However, it is this interpretation that prevails.

Many intellectuals denounce these “expressions of baggage” which serve to stigmatize. In his book The falsifying intellectuals, geopolitical Pascal Boniface fiercely criticizes these concepts which are also empty and useless in their formulation.

“The originality of the concept could be an argument in its favor. But it really is insane, as Hitler’s or Judeo-Bolshevik expressions were in the past.“. They were also meant to be disqualifying and, as in this case, they were also based purely on ghosts.

More information