The new face that the extreme right is trying to give itself in France is misleading: everywhere when it is in power, as it is or has been in certain states of the world, it discriminates, bruised and impoverished.
The extreme right has progressed in France since 2002 and the republican front which prevented him from accessing power slowly crumbled. Moral dikes have jumped, even though many executives FN became Rn have been the subject of convictions for racism or anti -Semitism and that a large number of sympathizers adopt the most xenophobic stereotypes.
The dediabolization campaign orchestrated by the party and amply relayed by certain affidated media have deceived part of the electorate, seduced by this appearance of respectability. But the French extreme right did not break with a dark story it continues, openly or half-words, to claim, as evidenced among other things the jokes of bad taste on the figure of Jean Moulin, mocked by the party leader. The polite image that his leaders like to present should not conceal ideological invariants around which this current is structured: the cult of the nation conceived as an ethnicity, the rejection of otherness and universalism, revolutionary rhetoric put in the service of a fight against humanism, the detestation of intellectuals often assimilated to enemies of the interior, the contempt for science and free information. The national preference policies that the extreme right intends to lead form the heart of a program which, on many other points, practices duplicity and ambiguity. This is evidenced by his speech on ecological questions, which, under the guise of a defense of localism, only renews the productivist system and fossil fuels. This is also evidenced by the vagueness which it maintains on its international policy (vis-à-vis the support of Ukraine, European integration, or even on participation in multi-party organizations), which is strongly tinged with authoritarian illustitization. This is also evidenced by the economic program, whose social dimension (support for purchasing power, repeal of pension reform, etc.) is gradually overshadowed by measures typical of a supply policy, favorable to the easier companies and classes (reduction in business contributions, and taxes on inheritances and donations for example).
Observing states which, in recent years, have applied a nationalist policy to measure the effects of the ideology that inspires it. Historical situations differ but convergences are strong: in the United States the Trumpism stigmatizes communities LGBTIslam, Hispanics and blacks ; In India Modi and his supporters discriminate Muslims who have become second -class citizens. Authoritarianism, in a double movement, targets democratic institutions and reinterprets history: Bolsanaro, which despises all the counterpowers, minimized the dictatorial past of Brazil, the wisdom in Poland has worked to establish a centralized and released state of constitutional controls, and applied itself to revise the founding myths of the nation, as well as Putin in Russia The history of the country and imposes a national story by censoring independent research.
Speeches play on fears and hatreds, and endeavor to maintain and feed them. Everywhere in Europe, far -right parties deploy an identity rhetoric, sometimes under the guise of a social discourse, denouncing “ migratory flow Fantasized, making people believe that immigrants constitute a cost more than an asset and regularly mobilizing, as in Spain or in the United States, religious dogmas. Moral conservatism advocated by the extreme right is often very heterogeneous, mixing Christian identity and anti-modernity, and instructing false trials to a “ wokism »He hardly cares for to demonstrate existence.
The texts here gathered contribute, each in their own way, to denounce the pretenses of identity discourse and to show that the seduction which he exerts is based on largely false foundations. They also demonstrate that the far right in power weakens democracy, divides civil society and instrumentalizes the State.