France’s Dystopian Idea

Ban and punish all criticism of “the Republic”

Critics of France's politics have rightly alluded to this agile tendency of French politicians to employ the argument of the “values of the Republic” in defense of any criticism--but without ever explaining what these values are and what they actually mean. The MPs responsible for the bill made a (minimal) effort at the latter. They said:

“The French Republic is based on fundamental principles: liberty, equality, fraternity, secularism, sovereignty of the people, and the indivisibility of the nation. These values, guaranteed by the Constitution and consolidated by law, constitute the foundation of ‘vivre-ensemble’ [something purely French that can be roughly understood as ‘social harmony’].”

So, what would happen under this bill to someone who violates these principles? Incarceration of up to three years and a fine of €45,000 ($52,000).

On its face, it is vote-pandering from a right-wing party hoping to appeal to a constituency worried about the spread of Islam in France. But there is something profoundly dystopian about it as well. The listed “fundamental principles” are so vague that almost any speech can be construed as a violation of them.

France, which has specialized in devising abstruse theories since the Enlightenment, is based on the rather confusing triptych “liberty, equality, fraternity.” But can this triangle hold? “Liberty” and “equality” are in concert counterintuitive and “fraternity” is essentially a remnant of a distant Christian morality. The sacrosanct secularism must per force apply to everyone--except, of course, to the Jewish community. And this is something that tends to frustrate the burgeoning Muslim community while leaving predominantly atheistic French citizens, at least psychologically, in what demographer Emmanuel Todd called a kind of “zombie Catholicism.”

As to the “sovereignty of the people,” most understand that it is a veritable joke; politicians “wiped their feet” on the people’s “NO” during the referendum on the European Constitution in 2005.

French people seem to be struggling with the concept of “vivre-ensemble”

With regard to the “indivisibility of the nation,” this abstraction implies more than just territorial integrity; it embraces unity of the people and the law. This is odd as it would be difficult to explain the concept to the police and firefighters who no longer enter some areas of the “Republic--“No Go Zones.” France is on the verge of becoming a state divided over sectarian and secular issues. But of course, in this maelstrom of abstractions, the closing of the quote requires the most explication:

“These values [...] constitute the foundation of vivre-ensemble.”

This last month a just-opened water park had to close permanently, because it was invaded and trashed by what were termed--“just young people.” It seems that with the riots of summer 2023 (never described as “racial” by the French elite or press) and the chaos following PSG’s Champions League victory in 2025, the French people seem to be struggling with the concept of “vivre-ensemble.”

It has been said that the British have problems with ideas but not facts, whereas for the French it’s the reverse. This truism seems to be playing out in both countries. The French, especially the elites, live in an abstract mental space, and it has “colonized” the West--first through the philosophical movement Les Lumieres--then 200 years later through the “French Theory” which eventually led to the disastrous “woke psychosis” in America.

What the right-wing party advocating for this bill doesn’t seem to realize is that with such vague criteria, France could find itself with a judicial system that communist regimes experienced--where any statement could be construed to be contrary to “Marxist-Leninist” thought.  As the joke goes, during the Soviet era, it was possible to say anything (in your own kitchen!). In France, with such a law, you’ll need to choose your words carefully--at home--while enjoying your beef bourguignon.

French politicians should read Arthur Koestler’s Darkness at Noon

French politicians should read Arthur Koestler’s Darkness at Noon: the main character, a Soviet political commissar who has sent many to the Gulag, finds himself purged by the very system he contributed to.

Given that the country’s prisons are already “standing room only,” and the state in turmoil, these MPs have resorted to the ultimate repressive instrument of liberal democracies: assaulting the wallet. A fine of €45,000 for “anti-republican” remarks made in public will be increased to €75,000 if the remarks are made “in a meeting,” on a social network or by an individual holding a position of public authority or office. So, €75,000 for tweeting that there is a problem with uncontrolled immigration? Is calling a bust of ‘Marianne’ ugly (a symbol of the Republic) considered a crime? I wonder, does Brigitte Macron’s gender enter into the equation of republican values or her slapping the president of the Republic--her husband?

But beyond the excesses and abuses such a law could manifest, the Republicans’ approach indicates something much more invidious: the political regime is becoming increasingly repressive, because it fears losing control. (And this is actually occurring throughout the EU.) Mass immigration has induced such discontent and tumult--bordering on chaos--that it is no longer “manageable.” The working classes are struggling to keep a delusional social system afloat, and more than 50% of voters are now over 50 years of age. The political elite realize that the country’s populace no longer has confidence in them or the institutions, so they must be constrained--coerced into conformity. If this bill becomes law, “the Republic” will have become a "weapon," and as Macron would say, to be used “whatever the cost.”

Take heed Canada--remember the stifling of dissent and censorship by the government-compliant media during the COVID era? Mark Carney is using Justin Trudeau’s playbook regarding free speech that doesn’t comport with his agenda.