𝑳𝒂 𝒔𝒆𝒖𝒍𝒆 𝒆𝒙𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒕𝒖𝒅𝒆 by Alain Finkielkraut, French-Jewish author and philosopher, is a splendid set of reflections on what I suppose the author's considered the most noteworthy national and global issues since 2013. Finkielkraut covers a wide range of topics from the papacy to educational reform and gay marriage; to laicity and Islamic extremism. France's distinguished public intellectual provides insight and a sense of foreboding at the same time. And in each instance he's clearly identified a problem.
Each chapter does not so much draw his reader in as challenge them with commentary that's both incisive and insightful. The focus is on a sort of anticipation of how the present may be a harbinger of evils to come (“la pire”) if we're inattentive. He's developing through his commentary on the present a view of history he's established early in the text as a chronicle of both particulars and the more general categories of “Temps”, “Humanité”, “Processus” under which they unfold. The particulars, unless we read them with understanding, may come concealed in fake universal dress. It's wise to see things as they are. Again, Finkielkraut cautions vigilance : "Notre présent n'est pas davantage la répétition du monde d'hier que l'annonce de la convergence à venir. Aucune connaissance ne saurait bien sûr être négligeé, mais l'élucidation de la conjuncture doit désormais se faire sans garde-fou." Each of his topics is a case of a “sole accuracy” that, unless regarded reasonably and with care, may devolve into a worsening future scenario.
Of Benedict's retirement from the papacy, for example, Finkielkraut says, with devastating irony:"Par cette décision, en outre, Benoît XVI, prend le contre-pied de Jean-Paul II.Il ne rééditera pas cette folle imitation de l'agonie du Christ que fut le long calvaire en direct de son prédécesseur. La société du spectacle fut, jusqu'à son dernier souffle, la patrie du pape polonais." Benedict did not "walk the talk" as the Polish Pontiff had done; didn't have the guts to play out this papacy "spectacle" til the very end. The august, severe Benedict hearkens back to a time of church and state collusion (“pouvoir souverain”) where a pontiff's single careless statement can lead (as has already happened after the pope's statements about Islamic extremism) to church bombings. The rather cynical conclusion Finkielkraut and I'll draw is that Benedict's legacy has fallen victim as all things have to the "société du spectacle", diluted or pulverized almost to the point of a nonevent. That is Benedict's "sole accuracy".
Finkielkraut subjects topics of religious minority rights or the laïcité debate, educational reform & civil unrest, even the contemporary 'genre' debate to this same sort of tough-minded scrutiny that I greatly admire. The 'veil' controversy is more a matter of "subjective preference"(“droit subjectifs”), in line with the narcissism of the Internet age, for both those who choose to wear the veil and their supporters: "I know what I want and I want it now"; the denigration of literary culture in the school systems is, for all of its talk of promoting "les techniques d'argomentation", really another form of cultural intolerance; and in the face of growing unrest among young activists who find self-serving excuses for their problems, the lesson to be learnt is rather that true autonomy does not rest on self-gratification but rather on self-responsibility: "Être autonome, ce n'est pas faire ce qui nous plaît, c'est répondre de ce qu'on fait"; and Finkielkraut reserves subtle contempt--but contempt nonetheless-- for the new "theoreticians of genre" according to whom "tout doit pouvoir être déconstruit et remodelé selon nos désirs".
At times the French public intellectual makes forays (without the spur of current affairs) into purely philosophical themes: such as the question of the antisemitism of the very influential Martin Heidegger. Fienkielkraut's a thinker qualified enough to handle a question this sensitive, very well versed as he is in the history of philosophy. With the discovery of Heidegger's early notebooks (“Cahiers noirs”) it's no longer possible--certainly not with its references there to “métaphysique du judaïsme”--to square the early Nazi supporter with the great author of Sein und Zeit. The damage to Heideggerian metaphysics has been done and the only remedy is to extol a metaphysics of responsibility not towards race and nation but the “other”.
Towards that end Fienkielkraut enlists the aid of Levinas' “responsabilité pour autrui” as counterweight to Heidegger's ponderous “le berger de l'être”. In place of Heidegger's extreme "worldliness" (“l'être”) there is Levinas' saving "otherworldliness" (“l'Autre”). And from Heidegger and Levinas Fienkielkraut can very adroitly pass on to the immigration problem, a move consistent always with a view of the "spectacle society" that, among other things, applies the cold "administrative" calculus of losses and gains to what are purely human issues. Just when Levinas showed us the way to the plight of migrant masses, the world's lately returned to Heidegger. And a return to Heidegger means the ontological justification of the “l'âge technique”. Fienkielkraut, though finding Levinas's “l'Autre” the more attractive option, doesn't seem to be particularly pleased with either Levinas or Heidegger. It seems the age of the Internet, like everything else under its purview, has made even Jewish identity and its privileging of 'place' (“Lieu”) fall victim to the general dullness of our times.
I think it's fair to say that Fienkielkraut's treatment of most topics in his 𝑳𝒂 𝒔𝒆𝒖𝒍𝒆 𝒆𝒙𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒕𝒖𝒅𝒆 --and I've only mentioned a few-- are generally of a piece with the Debordian "society of spectacle" critique. His commentaries on world events are always incisive, thoughtful and, at the same time, premonitory.