An interview with Alain de Benoist -- Confronting globalization -- Nazism and communism : evil twins -- What is sovereignty? -- The first federalist : Johannes Althusius -- On politics -- On the French right-new and old : an interview with Alain de Benoist -- On identity -- On the French referendum -- Our American friend Paul Piccone was a free spirit and a loud talker -- The current crisis of democracy -- Dismantling the left-right divide -- What (...) is populism? (shrink)

The publication of this Black Book by a group of historians to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the October Revolution has opened a heated debate, first in France and then abroad. Edited by Stéphane Courtois, who also wrote the preface (instead of François Furet, who died a few months before its publication), this work attempts to provide an accurate account of the human cost of communism in view of the documentary evidence available today. The estimate is around 100 million dead—four (...) times the body-count of Nazism. These figures are not really a revelation. From Boris Souvarine to Robert Conquest and…. (shrink)

Les auteurs présentés attestent que le travail de la pensée a joué un rôle décisif dans l'histoire, entraînant des mutations bien différentes des révolutions bruyantes, des grandes explosions restées sans lendemain. De Heidegger à A. Koestler, de Goethe à G. Sorel, de Nietzsche à Montherlant, de Leo Strauss à Jean Baudrillard, diverses façons de voir et comprendre le monde et d'agir sur lui.

In his “Liberality versus Liberalism,” John Milbank certainly begins with good intentions, but the article is open to ambiguous understandings.1 Personally I have no difficulties agreeing with parts of his criticism. Like Milbank, I believe that since the collapse of “really existing socialism,” which the soviet systems claimed to represent, “liberalism” is without a doubt the contemporary “bearer of modernity” and “progress.” In addition, globalization is primarily a “liberal” phenomenon: the transformation of the planet into an immense single market. Milbank (...) is equally correct when he evokes the “vicious global spiral” that tends to transform today's liberal democracies into societies…. (shrink)

IntroductionThe French New Right was born in 1968. It is not a political movement, but a think-tank and school of thought. For more than thirty years—in books and journals, colloquia and conferences, seminars and summer schools, etc.—it has attempted to formulate a metapolitical perspective. Metapolitics is not politics by other means. It is neither a “strategy” to impose intellectual hegemony, nor an attempt to discredit other possible attitudes or agendas. It rests solely on the premise that ideas play a fundamental (...) role in collective consciousness and, more generally, in human history. Through their works, Heraclitus, Aristotle, St. Augustine, St.…. (shrink)

ExcerptDemocracy of opinion? Television democracy? Market democracy? Whether one studies them in the context of the crisis or evaluates them in relation to the dynamic of postmodernism, the pathologies affecting contemporary democracies are attracting more and more attention. The general opinion is that these pathologies, far from being inherent to democracy itself, are the result of a corruption of its principles. The most superficial observers attribute this corruption to external factors or phenomena (hence the ritualistic denunciations of fundamentalism, populism, communitarianism, (...) globalization, etc.), which amounts to questioning solely the changes in morals and the transformation of society. Yet this confuses…. (shrink)

Fighting racism requires knowing what it is—not an easy task. Today the word “racism” has so many contradictory meanings that it takes on the aura of a myth and is, therefore, difficult to define. The following will attempt to define racist ideology, independently of any sociological considerations. The first difficulty arises from the fact that racism is a Schimpfwort: a term with pejorative connotations, whose very use inevitably tends to be more instrumental than descriptive. Deploying the adjective “racist” involves using (...) a powerful epithet. It can be a smear designed to disqualify those at whom the term is addressed.…. (shrink)

The concept of sovereignty is one of the most complex in political science, with many definitions, some totally contradictory.1 Usually, sovereignty is defined in one of two ways. The first definition applies to supreme public power, which has the right and, in theory, the capacity to impose its authority in the last instance. The second definition refers to the holder of legitimate power, who is recognized to have authority. When national sovereignty is discussed, the first definition applies, and it refers (...) in particular to independence, understood as the freedom of a collective entity to act. When popular sovereignty is discussed,…. (shrink)

The idea of a Europe of its peoples, or a post-nation-state ‘regionalist Europe’, is largely applauded by radical democratic and post-colonial theorists who considered this development an antidote to nationalism. What is hardly heeded by liberal as well as left-wing intellectuals, however, is that several fascist and neo-fascist intellectuals during the inter-war and the post-war eras have also been attracted by the idea of a post-nation-state, ‘Europe des peoples’. By analyzing the complementary ideologies of two French intellectuals associated with fascism (...) and post-war neo-fascism – Pierre Drieu La Rochelle and Alain de Benoist – this article traces the attempts to shed new light onto some of the shortcomings embedded in the concept of the ‘Europe des peoples’. Building upon Drieu and de Benoist’s ideas on the future of Europe as a post-national exclusionist ‘Europe of the peoples’, this article sets an alert that a new type of ethnic exclusionism may be strengthened precisely with the end of old states nationalism. (shrink)

The paper studies the significance of Martin Heidegger's philosophy of history for two key thinkers of contemporary radical conservatism and the Identitarian movement, Alain de Benoist and Aleksandr Dugin. Heidegger's often-overlooked affinities with the German “conservative revolution” of the Weimar period have in recent years been emphasized by an emerging radical-conservative “right-Heideggerian” orientation. I first discuss the later Heidegger's “being-historical” narrative of the culmination and end of the metaphysical foundations of Western modernity in the contemporary Nietzschean era of nihilism (...) and of an emerging postmodern “other beginning” of Western thinking, focused on historical and cultural relativism and particularism. In Heidegger's work of the 1930s and 1940s, we find attempts to apply this historical narrative to interpreting contemporary geopolitical and ideological phenomena in ways that connect Heidegger to certain central ideas and concerns of the conservative revolutionaries, especially Carl Schmitt's geopolitical particularism. De Benoist, the key name of the French Nouvelle Droite and a founding figure of contemporary Identitarianism, is particularly inspired by Heidegger's reading of Nietzsche as the culmination of the “metaphysics of subjectivity” dominating Western modernity. For de Benoist, this modern metaphysics is the root of the “ideology of the Same” underlying the liberal universalism and individualism that he opposes in the name of a cultural ethnopluralism. De Benoist's Russian disciple Dugin bases the pluralistic geopolitics of his radical-conservative “fourth political theory” on the legacy of the conservative revolution, the key intellectual model of which Dugin discovers in Heidegger's notion of the “other beginning”. (shrink)

Le renouvellement des notions d’historicité et de spatialité est au cœur des préoccupations de la philosophie contemporaine. De l’appel nietzschéen à cultiver la faculté de l’oubli pour mieux affronter un présent sans contexte jusqu’à la critique radicale de la dialectique historique par les philosophies de l’événement, en passant par la durée chez Bergson et par les développements de la phénoménologie relatifs à l’espace et au temps vécus opposés à l’espace tridimensionnel et au temps chronologique, dans tous ces cas il s’agit (...) de redéfinir la tâche de la pensée en découvrant de nouvelles potentialités au temps et à l’espace et en accordant un statut nouveau à l’historicité et à la spatialité. En situant ces notions au centre du débat contemporain, J. Benoist et F. Merlini prolongent un travail déjà amorcé avec Après la fin de l’histoire. Temps, monde, historicité. Cette fois, l’heure est moins au constat de la fin du modèle de l’Histoire, qu’à une interrogation en direction d’une nouvelle forme de pensée dominée par le paradigme géographique. Plus précisément, et tel que l’indique son sous-titre, ce recueil de textes analyse la thèse singulière, propre à une partie de la philosophie contemporaine, d’un renversement du rapport de subordination entre l’histoire et la géographie. L’exergue tiré d’un texte de Foucault donne déjà le ton au livre: «L’époque actuelle serait peut-être plutôt celle de l’espace». Les auteurs interrogent donc les sources et les ressources d’une pensée qui a rompu avec la fétichisation de l’histoire, dans sa version dialectique ou ontologique. L’une des grandes originalités du livre dirigé par Jocelyn Benoist et Fabio Merlini consiste à placer sous une même enseigne des penseurs provenant d’horizons aussi lointains que l’architecture, l’urbanisme, le structuralisme et la sociologie, pour en faire à chaque fois les représentants de la «crise de l’historicité» et du «déclin de l’histoire et de la tradition spéculative». Les auteurs espèrent ainsi contribuer au développement d’un modèle géographique ou cartographique de la pensée à caractère non plus spéculatif, mais descriptif du réel. L’ancien impératif platonicien «Nul n’entre ici s’il n’est géomètre» cède en quelque sorte sa place à un nouvel adage: «Nul n’entre ici s’il n’est géographe»! (shrink)