Court Proceedings against Michel Houellebecq: An Attack on Freedom of Thought

The following text originally appeared in Le Figaro on December 30, 2022, and is published here in English translation with permission of the author. Translated by Russell A. Berman, whose comments are here.

In 1793, the great German philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte discovered what the rector of the Great Mosque of Paris does not know today, if one can judge by the complaint that he filed against the author Michel Houellebecq, i.e., that freedom of thought is divine. Let us listen to Fichte: “It is both a human and divine truth that man has inalienable rights and that freedom of thought is one of these rights.” What does that mean? It means that denouncing and opposing freedom of thought is blasphemous; that this sort of anger simultaneously offends the divine part of humanity and, indirectly, God himself; and that this sort of attack is dehumanizing because it attempts to tear out of the human conscience what God himself gave it.

Through its legal action, the Grand Mosque of Paris poses two risks, for the writer and our country: the risk of forcing the writer, a candidate for the Nobel Prize, to live under close police protection or, in other words, to become a sort of prisoner of conscience in his own country, and the risk of inciting a fanatic ready to spill the blood of the man targeted as an “Islamophobe.” Let us recall that since Islam is not the state religion of France, one has the right to speculate, perhaps erroneously, that it is wrong and alien to the soul of French civilization. One similarly has the right to discuss this idea, as long as one stays at the level of general ideas and refrains from defamations or direct calls for violence.

Continue reading →

Telos 200 (Fall 2022): The Place of Truth at the University

Telos 200 (Fall 2022): The Place of Truth at the University is now available for purchase in our store. Individual subscriptions to Telos are also available in both print and online formats.

The place of truth at the university has always been elsewhere. Scientific conclusions are after all hypotheses, subject to continuing examination and critique in a process that forever defers the arrival at a final truth. In addition to this unbridgeable temporal distance from truth, there is a spatial distance to the extent that the university is subject to a larger purposive context that stands outside of scientific activity itself. A researcher can be objective by being non-prejudicial in collecting facts and weighing arguments but can never be neutral in terms of the goals of the research, which must always be established before the research begins and from outside of the research project itself.[1] Research cannot begin until an interest in some question has been expressed, and such an interest has generally not been up to the researcher to decide. Whether the goal of medical research will be to protect humans from a virus or attack humans with a virus will be determined by the sponsor of the research rather than the researcher, who at best may decline to take part in some forms of research. If the determiners of the goals of the university are not the professors themselves but the society that sponsors their work, it is within this external values framework that the truth of the university must be found.

Continue reading →

Reports from the Telos Student Seminars in Irvine and Nanjing

The Telos Student Seminars provide a forum for students around the world to engage with critical theory by discussing a common set of paired texts from Telos—one current essay and one pertinent essay from our archives. The following reports from our first Telos Student Seminars at Concordia University in Irvine, California, and the Hopkins-Nanjing Center in Nanjing, China, compare Paul Kahn’s “Law and Representation: Observations from an American Constitutionalist” (Telos 195, Summer 2021) and Paul Piccone’s “The Crisis of Liberalism and the Emergence of Federal Populism” (Telos 89, Fall 1991). The Irvine seminar advocates addressing the political challenges highlighted by Kahn and Piccone through a new American civil religion “built on mysticism,” while the Nanjing group took the seminar as an occasion for a wide-ranging, cross-cultural discussion about society and politics. Telos Student Seminars participants across the globe will gather virtually for a discussion with Paul Kahn at the end of this month. For more details about the Telos Student Seminars, including summaries of the two essays under discussion, click here.

Read the reports here.

Continue reading →

Hans-Georg Maaßen's Defense of Liberal Democracy

The following commentary is based on a text that appeared originally in German in Junge Freiheit. An English translation of the interview with Hans-Georg Maaßen in Die Weltwoche has been posted separately today in TelosScope, here.

The interview with Hans-Georg Maaßen documents his reactions toward the charge of anti-Semitism against him by several German media outlets in the last few weeks since he announced his candidacy for the German Bundestag. The controversy has revealed more about the deterioration of the German media landscape than about Maaßen’s own views and character. Spurred on by a charge against him of racism and anti-Semitism by climate activist Luisa Neubauer on ARD’s political talk show Anna Will, media outlets scoured Maaßen’s writings with the hope of giving their accusations some substance. The dearth of the evidence against him led them in the end to an article that he published with Johannes Eisleben in English in TelosScope. But rather than engaging with the specific arguments of the article, the commentators have engaged in a kind of witch hunt.

Continue reading →

“State-sponsored cowardice”: Interview with Hans-Georg Maaßen

The following interview appeared originally in German in Die Weltwoche on June 18, 2021. Translated into English by Xuxu Song. A separate commentary by David Pan appears here.

Hans-Georg Maaßen, President of Germany’s Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution from 2012 to 2018, is accused of spreading anti-Semitic ideas. The accusation comes from the milieu of the “Fridays for Future” movement. The timing, Maaßen suspects, is no coincidence and has nothing to do with the political climate. Rather, they want to prevent his election as a member of the Bundestag.

Continue reading →

A Trap for Modern Social Democracy

The following blog post originally appeared at Blog politische Ökonomie. Peter Brandt is commenting on the controversy surrounding an essay by Wolfgang Thierse, translated here. See the related position paper here and a separate article by Brandt here. Translated by Russell A. Berman, with comments here.

During the past few weeks the debate over identity politics and viewpoint diversity in Germany has been unfolding. The starting point was an article in the Frankfurter Allgemeine by Wolfgang Thierse, not known for eccentric positions, concerning the conduct of the debate around the themes of racism, postcolonialism, and gender.

In his opinion piece, Thierse criticizes the claim by sexual and other minorities to define their own collective identity (hence “identity politics”), and what is right and tolerable or intolerable for them, rather than engaging in an open and controversial debate. The accusation that something is hurtful therefore, Thierse argues, often displaces an argumentative response.

Continue reading →