Pascal Bruckner: Fear of Islam is Legitimate, Because of the Terror Attacks

Pascal Bruckner is a French writer who was recently acquitted on charges of slander for remarks he made about the French Left, saying that they were ideological supporters of the Charlie Hebdo massacre. The video below is taken from a lengthy discussion with Mr. Bruckner on a French television program.

Notice that he promotes anti-“Islamophobic” attitudes as a preventive measure to help keep Marine Le Pen from gaining the presidency. If his attitude becomes widespread — “Resist Islamization to keep the Front National out of power!” — real change might actually come to France.

Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:


00:00   Good evening, Pascal Bruckner, please. You went on trial for slander
00:04   on the 30th of November after accusing two associations,
00:08   the Indivisibles and the Indigenous of the Republic, of ideologically justifying
00:12   the death of the Charlie Hebdo journalists. Those two associations
00:16   filed complaints against you and you were acquitted on January 17th.
00:20   What you write in this book is what was said in the hearing for your trial?
00:24   Yes, among other things, because the hearing took seven hours. It was very long,
00:28   and there were many witnesses. The problem
00:32   was censorship: do we have right to say everything we want to,
00:36   or — in the name of a legal “jihad”, fought by a number of organizations —
00:40   do we have to shut our mouth and bow
00:44   before the new powers? And there justice did
00:48   its job, the case was dismissed, we won.
00:52   So they might appeal, I don’t know, but in any case I believe that this is
00:56   a positive ruling, because now we can assert a number of things
01:00   without falling under the yoke of the new masters of censorship.
01:04   So it’s a debate that opposed you against those who are denouncing state racism,
01:08   and see in the Islamophobia a new tool to oppress the weakest and the most disadvantaged —
01:12   the Muslims? The terms of the debate are set. For you the criticism
01:16   of Islam, is it desirable, even beneficial…? —Yes.
01:20   And shouldn’t be stopped at any price. —Oh yes, it is beneficial, like the criticism of Christianity.
01:24   It saved the Church, from the Inquisition,
01:28   from the arbitrary, from cruelty. The word “Islamophobia”
01:32   is very embarrassing, because it is amalgamating, mixing up two senses:
01:36   the persecution of believers, which is obviously an offense, and the criticism
01:40   of a religion, which is a right in democratic and civilized societies.
01:44   However the word “Islamophobia”, since it was created in the eighties,
01:49   or re-created, because it was coined before, by English Muslims —
01:53   after the Rushdie case — makes every scrutiny of
01:57   the Quran, or of Islam as it is practiced, a crime
02:01   to be punished in court. And this is obviously unbearable
02:05   for those of us who are Voltaireans, and who gladly mock
02:09   religions, the pope, bishops,
02:13   God. —In our law blasphemy isn’t an offense. — The blasphemy law was abolished in
02:17   1712, re-established in 1816, but re-abolished in 1881.
02:21   So for us this makes no sense. —To be clear, you say that every aggression,
02:25   from insulting a veiled woman to ransacking a mosque, is spitting in the face
02:29   of the Republic and its citizens. Those attacks have to be punished without mercy.
02:33   Aren’t they Islamophobic? Yes, they are, all the same! —Yes, but
02:37   you saw. Yes, yes, those are indeed acts of
02:41   anti-religion, but if you saw statistics published this morning,
02:45   by the Interior Ministry and or the Collective Against Islamophobia,
02:49   anti-Muslim acts and anti-Jewish… —Those acts are
02:53   considerably diminished in 2016, while anti-Christian acts
02:57   exploded; but this means one thing, and it’s anyway
03:01   very important indeed for us French, that we reacted in a very
03:05   civilized way to the attacks, which could have, on the contrary,
03:09   incited a part of the population to attack mosques, to slit the throats of imams;
03:13   we didn’t do that; North Americans didn’t behave this well after 9/11.
03:17   We saw what happened a couple of days ago in a mosque in Quebec
03:21   because there is a violent tradition in North America that we don’t have,
03:25   and besides, it’s a good point for our society.
03:29   We cannot deny the distrust and tension; do you qualify… —Well, yes…
03:34   Yes of course, I totally agree. —You qualify “Islamophobia” as “imaginary racism”,
03:38   since Islam isn’t a race, obviously; but one can be a victim of hate, of rejection
03:42   by the fact the one is Muslim or from a Muslim culture? — Of course,
03:46   but which is… you are right that there’s a distrust of Islam, but
03:50   that is legitimate, because of the attacks
03:54   that have exploded all over the world since 2001; it’s normal — …towards Islam…
03:58   towards Islamism, it was contagious —Towards Islamism. There was a poll,
04:02   there was a CEVIPOF taken by Sciences PO [selective university in Paris]
04:06   and you can see that in fact 60% of French wonder about Islam.
04:10   So… —We know that fear causes hate. —Not always.
04:14   fear can paralyze, but it’s true that a phobia is
04:18   confusing two different things: hate and fear.
04:22   I think that fear is legitimate, but
04:26   it rarely degenerates into hate, and we need to know what qualifies as
04:30   an Islamophobic act in France. We end up noticing that, aside from insults thrown
04:34   at veiled women or pigs’ heads thrown into mosques,
04:38   you just said it in your presentation, the closure of a Salafist mosque
04:42   is considered by a number of groups as if it were
04:46   a racist act, the deportation of a radical imam…
04:50   In political circles there’s unanimity concerning closing the… —Not in the numbers that we just
04:54   saw on the screen. —If you watch, for example, the tales of CCIEF
04:58   [Comity Against Islamophobia in France], the searches conducted after
05:02   the attacks on Charlie and after November 13th, for them those are acts of
05:06   racism because the state is racist by nature.
05:10   Both laws concerning the veil are racist laws,
05:14   and as Tariq Ramadan said: “I am neither Charlie nor Paris, I am searchable.”
05:18   As if the simple fact of the French State for defending itself were already, in itself,
05:22   a stigmatisation of Muslims; and this is not acceptable [this point of view not the stigmatisation].
05:27   You’re accusing the anti-racists, the feminists, the Halal-Left
05:31   They are suspected by you of complicity with the Islamists, because in your opinion
05:35   they are inverting priorities, by wanting protect Muslims first of all? —No.
05:39   No, they don’t protect the Muslims, they protect the Islamists. That’s
05:43   where you find the problem. The Left, and the extreme
05:47   Left, is orphaned: they lost everything. They lost the working class
05:51   which became bourgeoisie or turned to the National Front, they lost the USSR
05:55   they lost the Third World, where the biggest dream is about
05:59   embracing capitalism and consumerism; and finally, for all that orphaned Left: what’s left?
06:04   The radical masses of fundamental Islam. And we see indeed an entire part of —
06:11   a small part of the feminists, a part of the left wing, and even a part
06:15   of the Socialist Party defending tooth and nail
06:19   the Islamist movement, the most questionable —
06:23   in my eyes — in the name of the anti-racism.
06:27   And it seems that anti-racism today is an obstacle.
06:31   For example, we saw it in the case of Cologne, Kamel Daoud:
06:35   this Algerian intellectual, threatened by a fatwa at home, dared to write
06:39   that there was indeed a problem with women in Arab-Muslim culture
06:43   and there people attacked him, French universities,
06:47   saying that it was enforcing the stereotypes and
06:51   Islamophobic and racist bias, even though he was only describing a situation.
06:55   So you see that the Left is in the process, in the name of anti-racism,
06:59   of trampling a number of its own values, by the way by defending veiled women.
07:04   You say “the Left”. Is Benoît Hamon the Halal-Left for you? — Benoît Hamon, I don’t
07:08   know, because he’s very new. He just appeared… —He just talked, he denounces
07:12   the “hysterisation” around of… —He denounces “hysterisation”, but I think that
07:16   what we call “hysterisation” is often a simple realization. The fact of talking about a problem
07:20   doesn’t mean that one is hysterical about this problem. It’s the fact of NOT talking about it
07:24   that is — on the contrary — a way to arouse among the population a mistrust
07:28   that, as we know, will push our people towards Marine Le Pen.
07:32   So it seems to me that if we keep quiet about this subject we are playing,
07:37   willingly or not, into the hands of the right wing —There’s no Halal-Right as a contrast?
07:40   There is! —Yes? —Listen, yesterday I stumbled by accident on
07:44   the talks of Jean-Marie Le Pen, well,
07:48   if there’s one who was truly complicit with Islamism, you remember
07:52   that he supported Saddam Hussein, and at the time of the election
07:56   in Algeria in 1991-92 he defended the FIS [Islamic Salvation Front], saying
08:00   I prefer an Algerian jellaba over a cosmopolite gene. If that’s not being
08:04   halal-right wing… It’s because there is indeed something similar
08:08   between the two totalitarian ideologies. —On Sunday François Fillon, in his speech at a meeting
08:12   of La Villette, said: “I’m glad that Pascal Bruckner won in court
08:16   against those who want to limit our free speech. I would be the defender of the right
08:20   of the French to express their Frenchness.” Do we criticize Islam in order to
08:24   better express one’s Frenchness? —No, but we criticize Islam. First it’s,
08:28   I was surprised by this —Yes, so were we… — this sentence,
08:32   but one doesn’t criticize Islam to express one’s Frenchness, one criticizes Islam because one wants,
08:36   one criticizes all religions when they seem to be invested
08:40   by the demons of fanaticism, which is definitely the case today,
08:44   not only in France, but in the entire world; there’s a major crisis
08:49   of the Islamic world that I didn’t invent, and in my opinion
08:53   it’s one of the biggest ideas in the book, I’m not saying that the West is
08:57   in total decadence; on the contrary, I am saying that’s it’s Islam that is
09:01   caught in a suicidal spiral; and this isn’t my idea, it was
09:05   defended by Muslim thinkers such Abdelwahab Meddeb and
09:09   also today by the great Syrian poet Adonis, and I think that
09:13   we are suffering the consequences of the illness of Islam that
09:17   is trying to spread into our societies, especially in France,
09:21   Where we have the largest Muslim community. — “Illness of Islam”. Islam isn’t an illness.
09:25   An illness of Islam, but which still at risk there
09:29   of prevailing in all levels of society, hence the importance of being very strict
09:33   concerning secularism. —Last November you were invited by Eric Zemmour
09:37   and Eric Naullau, and you said you were planning to vote for François Fillon
09:41   in the primaries. There’s why. — Come to think about it I would rather vote Fillon.
09:45   Simply because there’s at the same time fortitude and a certain form of dignity.
09:49   He isn’t compromised in business, he keeps a certain firmness,
09:53   he doesn’t squander himself with some slightly ridiculous proclamations.
09:57   Are you considering Plan B? —Listen,
10:01   I am not running, but obviously I find this,
10:05   I find those events very sad, now that the justice is taking its course. What I regret,
10:09   and indeed Fillon seemed to me one of the best bulwark against Marine Le Pen,
10:13   and his position on the religion
10:17   and secularism seemed to me also quite strict indeed.
10:21   Now we are going to see what the very near future has in store for us. —There are some who
10:25   are considering a Plan B.

15 thoughts on “Pascal Bruckner: Fear of Islam is Legitimate, Because of the Terror Attacks

  1. Seems to me this guy is hedging his bets against Le Front Nationale and would consider a gravy train rider (Fillon) over that of a French patriot. What is it with atheists who believe that a ‘superior’ intellect will beat hands down any religion that has millions of adherents worldwide?

    Where does morality go when God is forbidden to have His his say? Does this guy actually believe that morality is a natural human condition and that Islam truly does not pose a civilizational threat?

    Has even bothered to consider where France would be today, as would most of Europe be, if the Arabs had been left well alone as they should have been?

    • Nemesis…Is that ALL you can say about this interview in which Bruckner stands against the Islam Phobic Lie and does so constantly throughout the interview in the face of hostility to him from the woman interviewing. Now SHE is a supporter of surrendering our rights. Your response says more about you that him.

      • His problem Felix is in trying to equate Islam with all other belief systems. When one abandons God in their life then they become open to all kinds of stupidity, especially those who are termed, ‘intellectuals’.

    • This is what happens when an intellectual only has marginal connection with the real world. He probably lives just as comfortably like the rest of the elite in an all white neighborhood and he thinks he can argue Islam away in some philosophical debate.
      They still do not get it! France has its last chance with Le Pen. If they miss this, next cycle they will have an islamic party winning.

    • I learned morality from my parents, Nemesis, even if I wouldn’t now agree with all their views.

      • You miss the point Mark, morality has been given to us from above and does not come from Human conditioning – as an example of morality without the basic Ten Commandments take a look at how Islam turned out.

        • And yet, some of us who don’t believe in “above” manage to behave morally. A miracle!

  2. The more subtle and nuanced France, the more superior it becomes compared to the rest of us Neanderthals [They run the machinery of civilization with transmission gears that have ten thousand teeth. We have six.] Oh well, I’m glad they are sort of with us and it pains thinking they could become Islamified.

  3. Actually although he is correct, his reasoning is weaker than it should be. It is legitimate to fear Islam *because Islam wants us dead in its own words, in its own books (Quran and Hadith)*. If a person carries a manual with title “How to kill kafirs”, of course I am going to be scared since I am a Kafir. It is as simple as that. The Kuran contains numerous exhortations on muslims to kill me and people like me (presumably all the readers of this blog). That’s why I’m afraid.

  4. (most readers might know) I am a Hindu Indian. I have zero problems w/ anyone else. But Islam—now that’s a whole different story.

    • You may wish to look at who is actually enabling Islam in its drive to undermine us all, they are very bit as dangerous as the ‘religion of peace’ they champion.

  5. Fillon’s position about religion secularism doesn’t seems to be so strict (in opposition to what Bruckner says) : when he was prime Minister several years ago, he inaugurated a mosque ( an action which is a complete violation of the french law of 1905 which separates strictly cults and state ) and he dit it just near a little girl wearing an islamic hidjab.
    This complete violation of french law and customs created a little scandal when it was commited by Fillon.

    • I think you should appreciate that Fillon is just another Globalist puppet who is prepared to turn himself inside out and upside down just to remain on that gravy train.

Comments are closed.