Question
First, thank you for your previous answer.
"Some of what he says is sensible and even interesting." Could you specify which part? Opinions on the matter are divergent, to say the least...
"The notions of right and left no longer mean anything today (...)
They belong to the past." (...)
"I think this, yet I am not right-wing" (...)
"One might think that Le Pen supporters and people on the far right"
I know the Way is beyond dualities (and the principle of noncontradiction?), but still...
More generally, I think considering this divide obsolete is a very serious mistake. You yourself cannot make this position anything more than an unsupported assertion: you identify very clearly as "left-wing," just as you certainly identify right-wing people as such. I think it is dangerous to confuse the psychological exhaustion of certain representations with the reality of the social, ideological, and more broadly cultural power relationships that underpinned and continue to underpin them. While aspiring to transcend this divide is legitimate, I think that among left-wing people it primarily reflects a desire for renewal and a wish to rebuild their own political camp (self-dissolved through compromise in the case of the parliamentary left, largely simply annihilated in the case of the more radical left) on foundations that are indeed different in certain respects. But this must not make us forget another recurring discourse: precisely that of the far right, which has always claimed to stand beyond these oppositions and has always known how to exploit this desire to transcend them—even within the left itself. In this respect, Soral's slogan "right-wing values, left-wing labor" speaks volumes about ideological confusion. It is striking how many people, reasonably tired of this increasingly sterile, eternal opposition, applaud the formula, while the most virulent Holocaust deniers and explicit supporters of the Third Reich—such as a certain Reynouard—see in it, no less legitimately, a clear wink at a designation constructed in exactly the same way that has already "proved itself," if I may say so: namely, of course, National Socialism...
In short, it still seems to me—without entering into more technical considerations that would undoubtedly require considerable work—that NOTHING justifies claiming we have now entered an era beyond this divide (apart, then, from the left's decay and a psychological need for renewal born of weariness). Capital versus labor, social criticism versus rejection of all social criticism, a vertical and authoritarian view of society versus egalitarianism, etc., still structure this opposition just as strongly. It is precisely this structure that identifies Soralism as belonging to the purest populist and far-right tradition. And precisely because such a structure inevitably reminds this far right of its own historical record and the legacy of those who fought it, it must now do everything to deny that structure any credibility—a sinister game Soral has mastered, one that above all lets him shift certain historical and political dividing lines to enable the spread of themes formerly quite exclusive to the most brainless far right, such as antisemitic conspiracy theories, among young people otherwise connected to a left-wing heritage—a heritage they understand increasingly poorly and that Soralism finishes emptying of all content and meaning.
Furthermore, on a subject I unfortunately know much less about: do you really think leaving Europe is a viable alternative today to the ravages of globalization?
Thank you for taking the time to read me (and perhaps answer).
Very sincerely.
kachou007
Answer from Master Kosen
On the France 2 set on Monday, February 3, Mr. Moscovici and Ms. Le Pen both engaged in the role-play so desired by pro-European leaders, equating rejection of the euro with the far right.
A willing scarecrow of this pro-European system, Ms. Le Pen naturally refrained from calling for France to leave the European Union by invoking Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, the only legal way to leave the euro.
Mr. Moscovici, for his part, did not hesitate to drag a renowned economist, EHESS research director Jacques Sapir, through the mud by associating him with the far right, to discredit his work with another economist, Philippe Murer, a professor at the Sorbonne. Let us recall that their work, based on nine alternative scenarios, consistently demonstrates the immense benefits France would derive from leaving the euro, particularly in economic growth (gains of 8 to 21% over four years), employment (one to two million fewer unemployed people), public debt reduction (a rapid decline of around ten percentage points of GDP), and reindustrialization.
This tactic of casting disgrace to evade substantive debate is all the more scandalous because Mr. Sapir was not present on the set to defend his honor and present reasoned arguments for his findings.
For good measure, on the same day Jean-Marie Colombani, former editor of Le Monde, published in DirectMatin an opinion piece equating critics of the euro with the Vichy regime.
The coordinated conflation practiced by Messrs. Moscovici and Colombani appears particularly repugnant when we recall, for example:
- That the Swedish people rejected the euro by referendum on September 14, 2003, with a clear 57% majority and massive 83% turnout. Since then, Sweden has led EU member states in growth and employment rates.
Are we to believe Messrs. Moscovici and Colombani that the Swedish people are a far-right people?
- That the major British transport union RMT (Rail, Maritime and Transport), with 80,000 members, calls for the United Kingdom to leave the EU (under the slogan "No to the EU, yes to democracy") and therefore rejects all the more strongly the idea that Britain might ever adopt the euro.
Are we to believe Messrs. Moscovici and Colombani that this major, firmly left-wing union is a far-right union?
- That two ministers in the current British government, Philip Hammond (Defense) and Michael Gove (Education), publicly called on May 13, 2013, for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. They did so without being disavowed by the prime minister, who instead decided to hold a referendum on the question.
Are we to believe Messrs. Moscovici and Colombani that the British government, which François Hollande recently visited in London, is a far-right government?
- That Hans-Olaf Henkel, former president of the Federation of German Industries, the equivalent of France's MEDEF, is heading the national list of Germany's anti-euro Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party in the 2014 European elections.
Are we to believe Messrs. Moscovici and Colombani that someone who was Laurence Parisot's counterpart just a few years ago is a far-right man?
- That five Nobel laureates in economics—James Mirrlees, Paul Krugman, Joseph Stiglitz, Christopher Pissarides, and Thomas Sargent—solemnly and publicly urged Spain to leave the euro in its own interests, in a May 2013 article in the Spanish magazine Expansión.com.
Are we to believe Messrs. Moscovici and Colombani that these five Nobel economics laureates (three Americans, one Briton, and one Cypriot) are also far-right?
These many foreign examples reveal the extent to which the converging attacks by Messrs. Moscovici and Colombani, who seek to portray opponents of the euro as nostalgic for fascism, are slanders that insult the intelligence of the French.
Kosen