The Culture of Violence, 1

The Culture of Violence, 1
The Culture of Violence, 1

Here we fight against him, for many with all our might. We hope to win but we also measure, in this way, how much courage we gain. We hope to win but it will be narrow. And minds will be more marked. Our first idea was to explain. Of course this vote is a bad choice. This party which presents itself as the defender of the people only proposes or applies proposals which serve the greatest number. I once met a former Ras l’front volunteer. In this group, they had gone, at one time, to neighborhoods where the FN vote was significant. They explained to residents how Jean-Marie Le Pen’s program would benefit them. He said it changed opinions. Ras l’front, created in 1990, died at the end of the same decade. In 2002, for the first time, Jean-Marie Le Pen reached the second round of the presidential elections.
This shortcut is undoubtedly condescending. Undoubtedly Ras l’front saved us from much worse. It has certainly slowed the rise of the far-right. However, today, caught in the turmoil of a campaign lasting less than three weeks, we cannot rely on this tactic alone. Perhaps the voters of the National Rally do not want our explanations, at least not now, in the midst of their triumph, just after the European victory. Maybe we don’t vote for completely logical reasons, maybe it’s about almost emotional choices, in any case about belonging. And perhaps even the voters of the National Rally know how to think, in their own way, without being taught to do so. Perhaps our enlightenment should have been used, all these years, to concern ourselves with something other than ourselves, that would make us more apt for dialogue.

But shouldn’t we go back to basics? Is the National Rally not, first of all, defined by its racism? Isn’t that prohibitive? But for whom? Is it for us to call on abstentionists or centrists to block racism; or to confront racists with their errors, to push them to return to the fraternity which appears in the motto of our Republic? But who claims to be racist? To talk about this subject is to confront an elusive statement, like the famous opening statement: “I’m not racist but…” Doesn’t this reflect a certain bad faith? How to discuss, then? Besides, isn’t this bad faith also, to some extent, ours?
Racism concerns parties other than the RN. So what is the difference between him and the others? Are they more or less compromised, with a right increasingly complacent to these ideas, with a center more and more decentered towards the right, a center always more complacent, too, without forgetting a communist party which “tends the hand” to franchouillardise? Let us not forget the existence of an anti-Semitic culture specific to the left, which Illana Weizman has documented. However, recent condemnations are fueled by confusion between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism which it seems impossible to clarify, whereas they appear paradoxical, when it concerns a political identity which was constructed from anti-racism (which Caroline de Haas recently recalled, with the constitutive role of the Dreyfus affair). Our society as a whole is riddled with racism, in all its forms.
A scarecrow, agitated for too long, undoubtedly loses its effectiveness, as does the racist scarecrow, once it is little more than a scarecrow. Recent reports evoke the weariness of neighborhood residents faced with the carelessness of left-wing parties, who have failed, for decades, to implement consistent anti-racist policies when they were in power. And who have not sufficiently countered the ultra-liberal economy, when they have not supported it. Once political parties have forgotten the working classes too much when they were in power, it is difficult for them to rely on them by considering them as their electorate. Shortly after the dissolution of the National Assembly, Fatima Ouassak wrote on Instagram: “Before calling for the parties making up the “New Popular Front” with our eyes closed, we must give voice to an anti-racist demand, whether in the programs or regarding candidates. You have to take the time. This requirement expresses our desire not to be reduced again to electoral cards on legs, or to touts. It also makes it possible to strengthen the anti-racist parties, currents and personalities present in the very broad “New Popular Front”.” Fatima Ouassak calls for opposing the National Rally at the polls and, in any case, for “structuring a powerful autonomous anti-racist front”.

The National Rally is also lgbtphobic, as the elements gathered by the Instagram account @lecoindeslgbt clearly show. The RN’s vote, in assemblies – whether municipal, departmental, regional, national or European – has consistently opposed queer rights: it opposes subsidies for LGBT associations, ban on “conversion therapy”, the proclamation of the European Union as a zone of LGBTQIA+ freedom, the European recognition of marriage for all. Jordan Bardella did not condemn the Ugandan bill persecuting homosexuals (which nevertheless includes the death penalty). “In 2023, the RN launched a parliamentary association to combat inclusive writing, “LGBT propaganda” at school and the “transgender threat” to women’s sport. » (@lecoindeslgbt, 06/12/2024). Consequently, in 2024 the RN is relaunching a sterile debate on the transitions of trans minors by proposing a law banning them.
Marine Le Pen’s statements are also scandalous. She thus defended the Hungarian law prohibiting any mention of LGBTQIA+, she refused equal marriage, the generalization of PMA and the legalization of GPA. In 2013, she even mentioned an “LGBT micro-lobby”. As for Marion Maréchal Le Pen, she is the subject of a complaint for her recent transphobic comments. To end with a more concrete perspective, during the last Pride in Tours, a far-right rally marched against what they describe as a “counter-society project”.

And of course, the National Rally offers a sexist worldview, its actions being consistent with this ideology. The RN threatens women’s rights, as notably recalled by the Instagram account @preparez_vous_pour_la_bagarre in a post subtitled “The underside of a scam”. This is observed in the European Parliament, for example when the National Rally did not vote for equal pay between women and men. He opposed a resolution regarding the near total restriction of access to abortion in Poland. In France, RN deputies opposed the full reimbursement of emergency contraception. They refused to allocate a billion to fight against violence against women. They did not, for the most part, vote for the inclusion of abortion in the constitution (even if Marine Le Pen did. And with regard to its inclusion in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union European Parliament, the European deputies did not defend it.) Despite its femonationalist and pronatalist discourse, the RN does not even defend the rights of children, abstaining on the European Child Guarantee.
Last Thursday June 20, invited to the TF1 news, Jordan Bardella proposed to lead the country like a “good father”. The expression is significant, the strategic nature of which Rose Lamy (@preparez_vous_pour_la_bagarre) showed in her recent work, precisely entitled En bonne pères de famille (Lattès). The rise of the far right is linked to the importance taken by the mascus, in particular on the networks, even if the two movements are not institutionally linked, especially since the mascus form a nebula rather than a constituted group as such.

-

-

PREV “7×7 choreographic salon” a dizzying mix of dance writings
NEXT “It is France, the Republic that has been struck,” reacts Najim Maecha, the President of the Comorians, after the deadly fire at the Moulins in Nice.