Archives de catégorie : Houria Bouteldja

I’d like to start by reminding the audience that French consciousness is strongly structured around the memory of the genocide of the Jews which is commonly referred to as the Shoah and that this consciousness is the backbone of French antiracism.

  At this point of my presentation, I’d like to mention what I call « state Freudian slips », which are akin to unconscious truths. I have numbered three of them: 

The first one was made by Raymond Barre, on October the third, 1980. A bomb killed three people in front of a synagogue located in Copernic Street in Paris. The Prime Minister (Raymond Barre) claimed it was «  a horrible attack which meant to hit Jewish people going to the synagogue and which hit innocent French people who were walking across the Copernic street ». Consequently, for the Prime Minister, Jewish people are not French since they are opposed to « innocent French people » here.
 
The second one comes from Jacques Chirac, President of the Republic, when he declared in his televised speech on the fourth of July in 2004: « We are facing a time when racist incidents (…) endanger the safety of our Jewish and Muslim compatriots or sometimes just French people… ». This time again, the Jews as well as the Muslims are discriminated from the French national body.

The third slip was expressed by François Hollande last week, a few days after a Jewish cemetery had been desecrated. In the speech he delivered during the gala dinner organized by the CRIF (Jewish institutions representative council in France), he claimed : «  I was in Sarre-Union last week, in the cemetery which was devastated by young high school students, who are French of old stock (« Français de souche »), as we say. ». When the President of the Republic uses this phrase « French of old stock », he exclusively refers to white Christians (and the ones who committed this crime were indeed white Christians) and excludes the Muslims as well as the Jews from the old stock.
 

L’atac contra Charlie Hebdo ha suscitat una legítima convulsió a tot el país. Res no justifica un crim com aquest; res no justifica emprendre-se-les contra una redacció; res no justifica que s’assassinin periodistes, policies, simples ciutadans, alguns pel fet de ser jueus. No sabem si hi haurà un “abans” i un “després” d’aquest 7 de gener, però és vital que s’obri un debat sobre el futur en comú que volem.

“We will have to put together the collabos’ dossiers, those of Charlie’s assassins. I will name them: they are the Indivisibles of Mrs Rokhaya Diallo who awarded the Y’a Bon Awards to Charlie Hebdo, I got it, Luc Ferry got it too, Christophe Barbier, many people, Finkielkraut, they are the Indigenous People of the Republic (PIR), there is the Nekfeu rapper who wanted to do a ‘burning by fire for these Charlie Hebdo sons of bitches,’ Guy Bedos, who we have known to be better inspired. It will require a systematic and historical report on all those who have ideologically justified the death of the twelve Charlie Hebdo journalists.” Pascal Bruckner, January 15, 2015 (28 minutes on Arte).

“What bothers us, it’s not to live with bodyguards and death threats,” it’s the other attacks, “from people who call you Islamophobic while you are anti-racist and you are fighting for freedom. The most painful are these pernicious attacks that can arm a Kalashnikov!” Caroline Fourest, January 8, 2015 (Special Envoy speaking on France 2).

« Il faudra faire le dossier des collabos, des assassins de Charlie. Je vais les nommer : il y a les Indivisibles de Mme Rokhaya Diallo qui a décerné à Charlie Hebdo le Y’a Bon Awards, je l’ai eu, Luc Ferry l’a eu aussi, Christophe Barbier, beaucoup de gens, Finkielkraut, il y a les Indigènes de la république, il y a le rappeur Nekfeu qui voulait faire « un autodafé pour ces chiens de Charlie Hebdo », Guy Bedos qu’on a connu mieux inspiré. Il faudra faire de manière systématique et historique le rapport de tous ceux qui ont justifié idéologiquement la mort des douze journalistes de Charlie Hebdo. » Pascal Bruckner, Le 15 janvier 2015 (28 minutes sur Arte).

« Ce qui nous embête, ce n’est pas de vivre avec des gardes du corps et les menaces de mort », ce sont les autres attaques, « des gens qui vous traitent d’islamophobes alors que vous êtes anti-racistes et que vous vous battez pour la liberté. Le plus pénible à vivre, c’est ces attaques pernicieuses qui peuvent armer une kalachnikov ! »». Caroline Fourest, le 8 janvier 2015 (Envoyé Spécial sur France 2).

O ataque contra Charlie Hebdo suscitou uma emoção legítima em todo o país. Nada justifica tal crime, nada justifica que pessoas ataquem uma redação, nada justifica que jornalistas sejam assassinados, policiais, simples cidadãos, alguns porque são judeus. Nós não sabemos se haverá um “antes” e um “depois” desse dia 7 de janeiro, mas é vital que um debate seja aberto sobre o futuro comum que desejamos.

Esse debate começou, mas tem seguido uma via perigosa que é a de acusar os críticos de Charlie Hebdo de serem, mais ou menos diretamente, responsáveis pelas mortes do dia 7 de janeiro. Escutemos Jeannette Bougrab, antiga Secretária de Estado durante a presidência de Nicolas Sarkozy: “De tanto apontar os dedos para eles, dizer que na Charlie Hebdo eles são islamofóbicos, que eles detestam o Islã (…). Estou pensando nos Y’a bon awards e nos Indígenas da República, claro que eles são culpados. Eu o digo e assumo meus comentários.”

Esse tipo de argumento é regularmente desenvolvido pela ensaísta Caroline Fourest. Ele foi retomado em uma tribuna do Monde (9 de janeiro) por Christophe Ramaux, que insiste sobre a responsabilidade dos organizadores e dos participantes – do Partido dos Indígenas da República ao Politis, passando por Edwy Plenel e Attac – de um colóquio, no dia 13 de dezembro de 2014, contra a Islamofobia (ao qual Ramaux visivelmente não compareceu).

L’attaque contre Charlie Hebdo a suscité une émotion légitime dans tout le pays. Rien ne justifie un tel crime ; rien ne justifie que l’on s’en prenne à une rédaction ; rien ne justifie que l’on assassine des journalistes, des policiers, de simples citoyens, certains parce qu’ils sont juifs. Nous ne savons pas s’il y aura un « avant » et un « après » ce 7 janvier, mais il est vital que s’ouvre un débat sur l’avenir commun que nous voulons.