Does France Have an Anti-Semitism Problem?

Yes, and it runs deeper than outside observers imagine. Or so says Rachel Levy, who in an article at Slate  offers reflections on the state of French public life and whether it’s possible to be both a committed believer and a committed patriot in that country (she has Jews in mind, given the recent tragedy, but also touches on those who take Islam or Christianity seriously enough to put their faith before their civic pride). Her piece is rather remarkable for several reasons, the first of which is the historical background it provides readers unfamiliar with the intricacies of postwar French religious relations. To take one rather stunning example Levy provides:

U.S. media noted this week that the  Jewish   school   shooting   in Toulouse was the worst violent anti-Semitic attack in France “in decades.” They were referring to the 1980 rue Copernic synagogue bombing, which rose to further infamy after then Prime Minister Raymond Barre characterized the attack as “a heinous act against Jews in a synagogue that struck four innocent Frenchmen crossing the street”—again reinforcing the idea that one couldn’t be French and Jewish.

[Furuthermore], the claim that Monday’s shooting was the worst violent attack in “decades” is somewhat misleading, since it glances over the fact that there have been scores of violent anti-Semitic acts in recent years—yes, perhaps not reported by the international press, but certainly on par in horridness.

From this, Levy looks back to what has been the  untouchable assumption of French public life:

. . . after those four years living among the French, I concluded that the country’s nearly religious devotion to secularism is at least a partial explanation for the country’s latent racism and anti-Semitism. It also fosters an ignorance that likely contributed to the perverted mindset of the suspected Toulouse gunman.  Mohammed   Merah  might have been a radical Islamist of Algerian background, but he’s also a French national who grew up in Toulouse.

That’s quite a charge—and, in my opinion, too brash in drawing a direct causal line. But is Levy completely wrong? Is there a sense in which the environment that birthed and sustains laicite—a plain contempt of religious faith and drive to marginalize it at all costs—the same disposition from which other, more sinister prejudices and (ultimately) actions can take as their starting point?

Dear Reader,

Can I be direct with you?

War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.

First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.

But we can’t do it without readers like you.

Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.


Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.

Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.

GIVE NOW

If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.

Next
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

The Church in the Age of Therapy

Matthew Loftus

In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…

Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot

Anna Farrow

On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…

The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen

Mike Aquilina

Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…