Notre Dame, Paris

(Anyone who answers “€œrighteous revenge”€ is hereby sentenced to reading about the battle of Tours till his eyes bleed. If you must distribute the guilt of the dead to the living, the French who once colonized North Africa are exactly as dead as Abdul Rahman al-Ghafiqi.)

But Zemmour’s answer isn”€™t a simple “€œracism against whites.”€ This doublethink is a necessity of globalist ideology, not of reason or even old-fashioned hatred. European colonialism preceded globalization and therefore can be called what it, in fact, was: an injustice of the past. Modern Islamic colonization is just as bad”€”but it provides a lever to break the spine of possible nationalist resistance to global oligarchy. So it must be recast as a positive: here come your new friends! Don”€™t be racist, don”€™t be protectionist, and never mind that their numbers will swing the labor market in favor of employers!

When Zemmour’s book isn”€™t being caricatured as an evil plot against the brown folk, it’s caricatured as a depressing, rambling litany of whiny-old-man complaints. But these threads add up to a bigger picture, which the likes of Caron either don”€™t understand or pretend they don”€™t understand, the better to ignore it (and come on; the prose is more than clear enough for me, though it hasn”€™t been translated into my native language yet, and I”€™m a confirmed idiot).

Zemmour doesn”€™t hate feminism because he hates women”€”he decries the dissolution of the family because it gave its members a foothold of defense against the economic predations which occur within the nation. He isn”€™t a defender of the French state because he hates all the rest of us; rather, the nation is in turn a collection of family defense cells, gathered into a larger defensive umbrella, and he dares you to come up with a better champion against the hyper-plutocratic, globalist whatever-it-is. The destruction of the nationalist bourgeoisies has cleared the path for billionaires who don”€™t care about anyone.

Zemmour’s is an imperfect critical system, but he’s honest about it. He is groping toward a new form of class criticism, one that is neither Marxist nor CultMarx: a traditionalist critique of the new elite.

And why not? Aside from the fact that field tests of socialist critique have indicated that it’s a bloody dead end, leftist journalists are currently content to sit on the license to speak truth to real power without bothering to use it.

The modern SJWs either belong to, aspire to belong to, or hallucinate that they belong to, the media elite. They define “€œruling class”€ as “€œstraight white male,”€ even if said fellow has lost his factory job to globalization and then his restaurant job to immigration. Any non-leftist who wants to protest shall be scripted into the role of raving mad racist.

But the likes of Zemmour refuse to stay in that box”€”and oddly enough, the fed-up, unemployed, estranged common people of France are having less and less trouble taking him and his ilk at their word. We Americans mock their example at our peril.

Please send materials for review to [email protected]



Columnists

Sign Up to Receive Our Latest Updates!

SIGN UP

Daily updates with TM’s latest