It all started in 1990 with the Gayssot act, which penalizes any narrative contradicting the official account of the Holocaust (*). For the first time, history was no longer a subject of debate and controversy : the entire French nation was told what to believe, and non-believers or skeptics who dared voice their doubts publicly would soon expose themselves to prosecution.
9/11 was the next marker : any Frenchman publicly contradicting the US government’s version of the events leading up to the massacre based on its inconsistencies (the Third-Tower mystery, for instance) and its unlikeliness (intact foreign passports left in the vicinity of Ground Zero like Easter eggs for the FBI to find) was swiftly portrayed as mentally unstable and unworthy of attention.
But it was probably the Charlie-Hebdo tragedy and the ensuing events that allowed all those within the French political and media establishment who were eager to once and for all curtail free speech in a way that would serve their interests to deploy their full-pravda dominance. Indeed, under the guise of fighting apology for terrorism, the powers that be designated, among others, philosophy teachers who had the nerve to examine said events critically by looking at the big picture as fair game to their hierarchy, and even to the judicial system.
This proclivity towards censorship symbolically culminated during the latest French presidential election, when a fringe candidate was accused by the mainstream media of being a conspiracy theorist… merely for quoting press snippets from the past which were no longer in line with the current state of mind of the so-called elites.
All while feeding a new McCarthyism that is a conspiracy theory in and of itself, the oh so enlightened new French aristocracy, boosted by the 2016 glitch in the matrix overseas, is now totally unhinged in its attempt to suppress any dissent : French subsidized daily Le Monde, for instance, has become so arrogant it now assesses the credibility of its alternative competitors, and a new law should soon allow Versailles to resort to interlocutory proceedings to instantly muzzle any whistleblower labeled a bearer of “fake news”.
In the country of Descartes, methodical doubt has become a heresy. In the country of the Enlightenment, obscurantism is praised again : seeking the truth is suspicious, thinking critically nearly criminal. In the country of secularism, you’d better be a good believer…
Assad is a monster. Anyone who would still doubt that by now wouldn’t be in his right mind. The butcher of Damas might indeed be the instigator of last Saturday’s alleged events in Douma (also known as the lower house). But that’s not the topic of this article…
What we are required to believe is. It was a month ago…
“Based on the positive identification of this chemical agent […], our knowledge that Russia has previously produced this agent and would still be capable of doing so, […] the Government has concluded that it is highly likely that Russia was responsible for the act against Sergei and Julia Skripal.”
Theresa May, March 12, 2018
It hasn’t changed…
“The British Cabinet met recently and they concluded that the Assad regime has a track record of the use of chemical weapons and that it is highly likely the regime is responsible for Saturday’s attack.”
Karen Pierce, British ambassador to the UN, April 13, 2018
So, we shouldn’t enquire about the date of production of the unverified images which briefly dominated this week’s news cycle. We should question neither their source, nor the plausibility of the claim. The development of private armies without congressional oversight shouldn’t alert us. The quickness with which some people reacted shouldn’t surprise us either. For such a solid claim to be derived exclusively from circumstantial evidence is itself circumstantial. The past twenty years – hell, history as a whole ! – have demonstrated our leaders never lie. Therefore, we shouldn’t demand to see the evidence they claim they possess. We should just trust them. For we should not question the existence of God. Should we, we would be conspiracy theorists, would we not ?…
« Face à ceux qui veulent créer la confusion, allant jusqu’à accuser les populations syriennes de s’être gazées elles-mêmes, face à ceux qui suggèrent un complot, […] nous devons revenir à des faits simples. »
François Delattre, ambassadeur de France à l’ONU, 13 avril 2018
Tenebras vincere populace…
(*) Said act pertains to crimes against Humanity in general, but at the time only the Jewish ethnocide perpetrated by the nazis was concerned.
The Gayssot bill was adopted in 1990, not in 1976, as initially stated. The correction was made on April 16, 2016.
The same day, the tweet grossly minimizing the importance of the Holocaust dated April 15 was added for illustration purposes only.