Announced a few weeks ago, unfortunately delayed many times, Tahir de la Nive’s work: “The Crusaders of Uncle Sam” is finally published.
This two hundred page book – which I was honored to write the afterword for – has an immense interest, focusing on the rabid anti-Islamism that has developed over the last few years in the nationalist movement, which poorly conceals a return of the old demons: occidentalism, Americanophilia, and blissful admiration of the most extremist Zionism.
Behind the stuttering of history, there are two men who haven’t concealed their bonds of friendship: Alexandre del Valle and Guillaume Faye.
Tahir de la Nive, an old greater European nationalist, marked by the thought of Yockey and Thiriart, demonstrates the arguments of the two accomplices and their manipulations in his work.
The chapter where he shows how Faye “hacks up” the Koran in order to create quotes that aren’t there is particularly enlightening on a style of intellectual functioning.
The chapter were he mentions the favorable stance towards Islamism by the principal editor of “J’ai tout compris” in the past is also of great interest. Listen to the account of his encounter with Faye given by de la Nive’s friend: “It was in 1985, on the occasion of a colloquium held in Strasbourg by the staff of Eléments, that we made the acquaintance of Guillaume Faye. His statements then were, like those of the Nouvelle Droite, marked by Islamophilia, to which the presence of an Afghan in their group, Gulbudine Hekmatyar, representative of the Mujaheddin in France, also testified, or even Eléments magazine, more particularly issue 53, in which we can read in the editorial column: ‘The awakening of Islam is not a threat in our eyes, much much rather a hope,’ followed by an article of at least eight pages by Guillaume Faye entitled ‘For a Euro-Arab alliance,’ followed by others by Pierre Vial: ‘Cliches have a long life, try to end those indifferently targeting Arabs and Islam’, and Claudio Mutti: ‘Why I chose Islam.’”
Tahir de la Nive also recalls that Guillaume Faye, appeared besides Claudio Mutti – who he now denounces as a “folkloric little Nazi” – not only in the columns of Eléments, but also in a list of “Islamophile neo-Nazis” (yes you read that right, that’s how Guillaume Faye was classified in the 1980s) published on page 239 of the book “The Crescent and the Swastika” by Kauffer and Faligot.
So Tahir de la Nive justly poses the question of Faye’s sincerity (was he sincere then? Is he sincere now?) and the reasons that lead to his turn: “Reversals in politics are something common and, when they happen, the question to ask is not an indignant ‘How so?’, more exclamatory than interrogative, but ‘Why so?’ followed by others like ‘after what manipulations and infiltration, what blackmail or bargaining?’”
I only cite two of twelve chapters of the book, they are all worth reading and reflecting on.
Now it’s fashionable to recurrently denounce as pro-Islamists those who, like Tahir de la Nive or myself, refuse to yield to anti-Islamist obsessions that constitute a major preoccupation of a certain extreme right. It strangely resembles a period not so long ago where we were accused of being “communists” because we refused to yield to anti-Soviet obsessions.
It is very evident today as yesterday, “some people” want to designate for us the enemy that we must fight. An enemy that is doubtlessly theirs, but is not necessarily ours… For us, the principal enemy is not Islam, it’s not Islamism, is is rather, still and always, America-centered civilization, moronic modernity, the consumerist bourgeoisie, the diffusion of Yankee sub-culture in Europe, NATO, etc. Courage today is not putting oneself in the service of Washington or Tel Aviv – consciously or unconsciously, but showing lucid intelligence, and at this moment intelligence consists of facing America and its lackeys.