French hypocrisy and puritanism strike again

Brigitte Bardot and her publisher have been fined 5,000 Euros each for being on the wrong side of current social issues. The immediate basis of the fines was publication of a book some people found objectionable on acccount of its comments on immigrants, in-your-face homosexuals, and whatnot. Judging by excerpts, the book was no less thoughtful in content or more abusive in language than things Christopher Hitchens gets praised for saying. It said the wrong things though—its tendency was bad—so Bardot and her publisher had to be shut up. The moral: those who have nothing to assert respond to disagreement with physical force. Since we are governed by nothingness pretending to be something, self-righteous hypocrisy is now a normal part of government.

5 thoughts on “French hypocrisy and puritanism strike again”

  1. A few interesting readers’ comments on this at VFR
    In a VFR thread on this topic ( ) there are interesting readers’ comments:

    “Joshua writes, ‘The court appearently believes that if large numbers of Frenchmen became convinced of the rightness of Bardot’s argument […], they would beat or kill any Muslims they see rather than agitate for their deportation.’ Joshua, that isn’t what the court believes. (As a matter of fact, this court believes in very little, apart from the inevitability … of France’s dhimmization.) The possibility of Frenchmen going beyond mere ‘agitation for the deportation of Muslims’ to actual deportation is almost inconceivable, given the all-pervasive … multiculturalism. Still, it is much more plausible than that the French would spill into the streets and ‘beat or kill any Muslims they see.’ This court is not afraid of that at all. Actually, it would welcome a few sporadic outbursts of anti-Muslim violence. That would provide it with a pretext for imposing stricter ‘anti-racist’ legislation-from-the-bench and cracking down on those who … believe the process of Europe’s Islamization can be halted. Such a development — the halting of Europe’s Islamization — would entail bringing to justice the current ruling élites of government, the media, the academy, and of course the courts. THAT is what this court is afraid of.

    “Posted by Tadeusz Hanski…”
    “[O]ur civilization is now acting out the Tower of Babel story. I am not terribly fond of quoting predictions but André Malreaux’s forecast that ‘the 21st century will either be religious or not at all’ cannot be entirely dismissed, considering the past few decades’ Left-promoted, ever-accelerating erosion of Western Civilization’s spiritual foundation. We will never understand — and can never hope to stop — this Left-inspired process of dismantling our civilization if we believe the Left’s goal is only nihilism, i.e., destruction for its own sake. The deepest and therefore least discernible drive which moves the Left is war on God, and the Left’s ‘eschatological’ goal is a vision of a man-made Paradise from which God is banished. Both Nazism and Communism were instruments the Left used in the past in its hope to create its Godless Paradise. Today it is Multiculturalism. However […], man’s choice is not really between God and atheism but between God and idols. The more man liberates himself from God, the more is he trapped by idols. While it’s true idols are man-made, not ‘real,’ the offering they demand is man’s soul, the most real thing about man. In Western Europe many are quite bothered — perhaps subconsciously — by the vision of the soulless society. While diluted, insipid, apologetic and politically correct Christianity doesn’t seem to offer any real alternative […], assertive, vocal, vigorous Islam does. Hence its increasing popularity expressed in the growing number of converts to Islam (at least in Western Europe). So, perhaps the first part of Malreaux’s prediction is not so unlikely.

    “Posted by Tadeusz Hanski…”


    “Something perhaps unprecedented in the history of the world has happened in recent decades: large-scale fast-moving declines in the quality of populations, by means of immigration. There scarcely exists a vocabulary to respond to the enormity of this change, or to measure it. California schools went from the top ten percent to the bottom percentiles of state school systems in about thirty years. California is a jurisdiction of tens of millions, and long has been one. Officials try to censor the response to these debacles… .

    “Posted by John S. Bolton…”

    • Thank you for the favorable q
      Thank you for the favorable quotation. This case is another nightmare of tyranny trying to enforce an injurious tolerance; as if everyone were the same, and no distinction of good and evil could be drawn. That the immoral politician can be shielded by such an attitude, is what hopefully everyone will notice. This liberal and Marcusian tolerance must mean tolerance of enemies, of aggression and of anything destructive. It can also be deduced that that this is so, since the good does not need tolerance from us. JSBolton

      • Liberal Tolerance is selective
        “This liberal and Marcusian tolerance must mean tolerance of enemies, of aggression and of anything destructive. It can also be deduced that that this is so, since the good does not need tolerance from us” – John S. Bolton

        This liberal tolerance holds true only for those enemies who share the objective of liberalism – the complete destruction of Christianity, the civilization that grew therefrom, and the ethnic groups that made up the flesh and blood of that civilzation. Any declared enemy of liberalism from within this target is attacked by any and all means.

        • Selectivity of Tolerance
          Indeed liberal tolerance is selective, as you say, and so is its enmity. I alluded to the Marcusian associations of this sort of tolerance, and Marcuses’s essay “Repressive Tolerance” would be the archetype of such attitudes. The tolerance that is treated as a value, necessarily becomes selective and in only one direction; away from good and towards evil. Since the left has long since narrowed down the scope of its tolerance, it would seem to be no time for the right to cry for a degree of tolerance that no one can literally want to practice. As far as ad hominem attacks from the left and the perfidious elements on the right are involved; hopefully more people will keep clear their values, and not get intimidated. Civilization is a value; avoidance of being called a Nazi or a racist or a piker, by those who have no other way to support their positions, is not a value at all. Further, it will happen regardless of your causes or loyalties. JSBolton

          • State-Religion of Anti-Caucasianism
            To have only anti-caucasianism in the place where a higher spirit should inform our civilization, demonstrates that the government schools are on their very last legs. It is not the people, but the government professoriate, which soon will be cast out into the abyss. The schools’ materialism and nihilism, and their doctrines of diversity-value, in which value is said to arise by difference from the majority, or the dominant, signifies the doom of the government schools. Hopefully others are preparing in confidence that institutions given over for reorganization, may have a better spirit to reorder them.

Leave a Comment