“Islamism wants to destroy the individual freedoms at the heart of our Western modernity”

As painful as it is to write it, Salafist jihadism, the attacks we have experienced since 2012, are not the greatest imaginable danger to the health of our democracy. Our forces of order in general and our elite units in particular will always come to the end of one or more furious people who will get it into their heads to murder innocent people and attack Republican symbols. Faced with barbarism, the State still knows how to mobilize its operational resources. The first responders included are now trained in the rapid and relevant reaction to terrorist acts.

What threatens us much more seriously is the strategy of Islamist influence in neighborhoods that are already separatist enclaves, and beyond that the sword of Damocles that Salafists of all stripes are bringing to bear on public debate, in the media, in the world of culture and on social networks. The goal of Islamist ideologies is clear, explicitly developed in the texts of their leading theoreticians, starting with those from the contemporary Islamist matrix, namely the Muslim Brotherhood; it is a question of conquering the discourse, that is to say of making audible and acceptable what is inadmissible: criticizing diversity, criminalizing homosexuality, feeding anti-Semitism, spitting on democracy and republican values. In some neighborhoods, these postures are dominant. These words are spoken in an uninhibited way, which testifies to the silent and local victories of an “atmospheric jihadism” (cf. the work of Gilles Kepel and Bernard Rougier) which cannot be reduced, it must be said, spectacular and deadly waves of violence. The latter are, in fact, only the culmination of a long process of discreet conquest of minds.

Extension of the domain of self-censorship

This logic of taking power over ideas and behavior obviously includes an assumed part of dissimulation and manipulation. Preachers, like Hassan Iquioussen, only hold misogynistic and hateful speeches against the Jewish community in front of receptive audiences, even if it means multiplying pathetic acrobatics when their remarks create a scandal. Demonstration by example: when the anti-Semitic publications of the Moroccan imam (although known to experts and specialists) began to be talked about outside the circles already committed to his cause, Hassan Iquioussen took care to disseminate a video condemning hostility against Jews, February 19, 2015, on his Youtube channel. Of course, we must not be fooled by this little sleight of hand.

“Western liberal democracies have very short memories! »

The real objective of these Islamists therefore consists in seeing their ideological convictions progress in such a way as to muzzle the public debate and eventually make themselves masters of it in their wildest hopes. Otherwise, why seek to increase their influence through mass distribution channels? The propagation of discourses must lead to progressive self-censorship in ever-wider spaces: they aim strictly at the same thing as what we observe in certain circles, for example in schools where teachers refrain, for fear, from developing entire sections of the national school curriculum, even more visibly since the specter of Samuel Paty’s throat hovers above education.

READ ALSO: Jeannette Bougrab: “After Salman Rushdie, we must lead the battle against Islamism”

Self-censorship arises from a double movement, for Islamism as for any other ideology: it is caused by the active propagation of its doctrine which conquers mentalities on the one hand, and by the fear of violent action instilled by on the other hand, that which is spectacular, which draws blood and aims to silence people by force. Even recently, the attempted assassination of Salman Rushdie reminded us of this obvious permanent offensive by political Islam activists. This grand plan to silence their adversaries is absolutely nothing new: it is at the very heart of their totalitarian doctrine. But now, Western liberal democracies have very short memories! They thought that thirty years had erased Khomeini’s fatwa and that it no longer exerted any influence on the Shiite jihadists. A huge error which perfectly demonstrates once again that we have decidedly misunderstood the grammar, the doctrinal mechanics and the collective psychology of green totalitarianism.

stop thinking

For them, it is a question of terrorizing, of staggering people’s minds, starting with those of all Muslims who reject ideological or political Islam, who refuse an anti-democratic society regulated by a “religious” intellectual matrix covering a banally totalitarian, holistic, anti-individualistic and warmongering. It is first of all an Islam of the Enlightenment that they frantically want to prevent from being born. And to achieve this objective, they must absolutely nip in the bud any distancing from dogma, their dogma, that is to say their fascistic interpretation of the Islamic spiritual tradition.

“Islamist ‘soft power’ primarily targets our ability to say the extermination of freedom of conscience and speech, as well as that of creation. »

In turn, they try to shape the intellectual and media scene in Europe, especially in France. Any expression of decryption and questioning, of denunciation of their program of political, mental and existential enslavement, is the object of the assaults of a rather sophisticated ideological and even sometimes judicial guerrilla device based on the denunciation of a imaginary islamophobia making it possible to federate all the useful idiots or the partisans of a manipulative leftism tinged with vindictive and hateful decolonialism.

READ ALSO: From “taqiya” to “Muslim brothers”, researcher Amélie Chelly dissects the words of Islamists

Many writers, journalists or essayists have suffered the effects for the past ten years. The members of Charlie hebdo even paid for their freedom of tone and spirit with their lives. Therefore, what progresses quietly has a name: self-censorship. More and more women and men whose mission turns out to be explanation, study or artistic production no longer allow themselves certain thoughts or words in a press article, in a book, on the airwaves. on the radio, on television sets, in a post on Facebook or in a tweet. Orwell’s words in 1984 were never as exact as they are today in understanding what is stirring under the heads of the Islamists: “We cannot tolerate any deviance, even at the moment of death. Add a little Newspeak to that (the wokes are hell-bent on it) and we will soon lack the instruments of language necessary to think, describe and reject oppression. Islamist “soft power” primarily targets our ability to say the extermination of freedom of conscience and speech, as well as that of creation. It is the pursuit of this goal which is at the origin of the persecution of the author of the satanic verses.

The first fight in which to engage is therefore cultural resistance, an uncompromising promotion of republican values ​​and a reaffirmation of our relationship to democracy to silence those who want to undermine pluralism. It must be repeated again and again: the project of all Islamism consists in the fabrication of a totalitarianism which is based both on a refusal of the diversity of opinions and on a relentless desire to dissolve the boundary between the private sphere and the public sphere, that is to say to annihilate the individual freedoms that gave birth to our Western modernity.

“Islamism wants to destroy the individual freedoms at the heart of our Western modernity”