Faurisson affair
|
|
Faurisson.jpg
The Faurisson affair is a term given to a major academic scandal in wake of a book by Robert Faurisson, a Holocaust denier. The scandal largely dealt with the inclusion (without permission) of an essay by Noam Chomsky Some Elementary Comments on the Rights of Freedom of Expression [1] (http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/articles/8010-free-expression.html) as an introduction to Faurisson's book. Responding to a request for comment in a climate of attacks on Faurisson, Chomsky defended Faurisson's previous writing (though not his claims) on free speech grounds. His defense was the target of subsequent accusations by various pro-Israeli academics and groups that sought to discredit Chomsky by claiming a deeper philosophical and political association between him and Faurisson.
Critics charged that Chomsky's defense of Faurisson, at best went too far: As John Goldsmith writes, "Unsympathetic critics used it as an opportunity to brand Chomsky with anti-Semitic labels, but even critics potentially sympathetic to Chomsky's political views felt his remarks showed lack of judgment." [2] (http://humanities.uchicago.edu/faculty/goldsmith/barsky.htm) Chomsky was pressured to defend himself, in an essay called His Right to Say It[3] (http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/articles/8102-right-to-say.html), in which he explained his defense of Faurisson, distanced himself from Faurissons written claims, and denounced the spectacle given to the lacking scholarship of Faurisson, while showing a similar lack of scholarship in their attacks.
| Contents |
Faurisson's letters to Le Monde
In December 1978 and January 1979, Robert Faurisson, a French professor of literature at the University of Lyon, published two letters in Le Monde claiming that the gas chambers used by the Nazis to exterminate the Jews did not exist. [4] (http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n3p40_Faurisson.html)
Subsequently, Faurisson was assaulted by Jewish students ("lightly molested", according to Nadine Fresco [5] (http://www.anti-rev.org/textes/Fresco81a)). His classes were suspended on the grounds that the university could not guarantee his safety. In 1989, long after the affair died down, Faurisson was beaten much more badly, suffering a broken jaw, broken ribs, and head injuries.
Petition signed by Chomsky
In the fall of 1979, Chomsky's friend Serge Thion asked him to sign a petition in defense of Faurisson's freedom of speech:
- Dr. Robert Faurisson has served as a respected professor of twentieth-century French literature and document criticism for over four years at the University of Lyon-2 in France. Since 1974 he has been conducting extensive historical research into the "Holocaust" question.
- Since he began making his findings public, Professor Faurisson has been subject to a vicious campaign of harassment, intimidation, slander and physical violence in a crude attempt to silence him. Fearful officials have even tried to stop him from further research by denying him access to public libraries and archives.
- We strongly protest these efforts to deprive Professor Faurisson of his freedom of speech and expression, and we condemn the shameful campaign to silence him.
- We strongly support Professor Faurisson's just right of academic freedom and we demand that university and government officials do everything possible to ensure his safety and the free exercise of his legal rights.
The petition was signed by 500 people, Chomsky included.
A number of French intellectuals criticized Chomsky's signing of the petition, describing the extent of Faurisson's Holocaust denial and his ties to neo-Nazi groups [6] (http://www.anti-rev.org/textes/Fresco81a). In particular, Pierre Vidal-Naquet criticized the wording of the petition as "scandalous", saying that it implied Faurisson was a serious researcher rather than a propagandist [7] (http://www.anti-rev.org/textes/VidalNaquet92a/).
Preface to Memoire et defense
Chomsky subsequently wrote an essay entitled Some Elementary Comments on the Rights of Freedom of Expression (http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/articles/8010-free-expression.html), in which he attacked his critics for failing to respect the principle of freedom of speech, and defended Faurisson himself against charges that he was an anti-Semite or a neo-Nazi.
Chomsky wrote:
- Faurisson's conclusions are diametrically opposed to views I hold and have frequently expressed in print (for example, in my book Peace in the Middle East, where I describe the Holocaust as "the most fantastic outburst of collective insanity in human history"). But it is elementary that freedom of expression (including academic freedom) is not to be restricted to views of which one approves, and that it is precisely in the case of views that are almost universally despised and condemned that this right must be most vigorously defended. It is easy enough to defend those who need no defense or to join in unanimous (and often justified) condemnation of a violation of civil rights by some official enemy. [8] (http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/articles/8102-right-to-say.html)
In defense of Faurisson himself, he wrote:
- Let me add a final remark about Faurisson's alleged "anti-Semitism." Note first that even if Faurisson were to be a rabid anti-Semite and fanatic pro-Nazi -- such charges have been presented to me in private correspondence that it would be improper to cite in detail here -- this would have no bearing whatsoever on the legitimacy of the defense of his civil rights. On the contrary, it would make it all the more imperative to defend them since, once again, it has been a truism for years, indeed centuries, that it is precisely in the case of horrendous ideas that the right of free expression must be most vigorously defended; it is easy enough to defend free expression for those who require no such defense. Putting this central issue aside, is it true that Faurisson is an anti-Semite or a neo-Nazi? As noted earlier, I do not know his work very well. But from what I have read -- largely as a result of the nature of the attacks on him -- I find no evidence to support either conclusion. Nor do I find credible evidence in the material that I have read concerning him, either in the public record or in private correspondence. As far as I can determine, he is a relatively apolitical liberal of some sort. [9] (http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/articles/8102-right-to-say.html)
Chomsky granted permission for the essay to be used for any purpose. Serge Thion then used it as a preface when publishing a book by Faurisson, without Chomsky's knowledge. Later Chomsky requested that the essay not be used in this manner, since he believed the French intellectual community was so incapable of understanding freedom of speech that it would only confuse them further, but his request came too late for the book to be changed. Chomsky subsequently said that asking for the preface to be removed is his one regret in the matter.
Chomsky's essay sparked an even greater controversy. Critics such as Pierre Vidal-Naquet attacked him not for defending the principle of freedom of speech, but for defending Faurisson personally against charges of anti-Semitism. [10] (http://www.anti-rev.org/textes/VidalNaquet81b/)
Other critics held that Faurisson's statements were the archetype of anti-Semitism, and that the logical conclusion of Chomsky's statement would be that Nazism was not anti-Semitic. The main argument for this is that Holocaust deniers are not interested in truth, but "motivated by racism, extremism, and virulent anti-Semitism" ([11] (http://www.adl.org/braun/dim_14_1_deniers.asp) Deborah Lipstadt, in Dimensions, the journal of the ADL).
Chomsky's response
Subsequently, Chomsky argued that there was a difference between the acceptance of historical facts (in this case, the existence of gas chambers, denied by Faurisson) and the attitude towards certain people (hatred of the Jews, anti-Semitism, perhaps also held by Faurisson):
- "I see no anti-Semitic implications in denial of the existence of gas chambers or even denial of the Holocaust. Nor would there be anti-Semitic implications, per se, in the claim that the Holocaust (whether one believes it took place or not) is being exploited, viciously so, by apologists for Israeli repression and violence. I see no hint of anti-Semitic implications in Faurisson's work." (quoted in Noam Chomsky's Search for the Truth)
He later elaborated:
- "In that context, I made a further point: even denial of the Holocaust would not prove that a person is an anti-Semite. I presume that that point too is not subject to contention. Thus if a person ignorant of modern history were told of the Holocaust and refused to believe that humans are capable of such monstrous acts, we would not conclude that he is an anti-Semite. That suffices to establish the point at issue." [12] (http://chomsky.info/letters/1989----.htm)
Final thoughts
In His Right to Say It (http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/articles/8102-right-to-say.html), published in The Nation, Chomsky states: "It seems to me something of a scandal that it is even necessary to debate these issues two centuries after Voltaire defended the right of free expression for views he detested. It is a poor service to the memory of the victims of the Holocaust to adopt a central doctrine of their murderers." His argument stressed the conceptual distinction between endorsing someone's view and defending his right to say it. Insofar as the latter does not imply the former, condemning censorship should not be read as espousing the censored view.
See also
External links
- Faurisson's Three Letters to Le Monde (http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n3p40_Faurisson.html) — Robert Faurisson, December 1978, January 1979, February 1979
- Hidden Alliances (http://ftp.nizkor.org/ftp.py?people/c/cohn.werner/partners-in-hate//hidden-alliances.02) — Werner Cohn (includes the text of the petition signed by Chomsky in the fall of 1979)
- The Denial of the Dead (http://www.anti-rev.org/textes/Fresco81a) — Nadine Fresco, Les Temps Modernes, June 1980 (revised 1981)
- A Paper Eichmann (http://www.anti-rev.org/textes/VidalNaquet92a/) — Pierre Vidal-Naquet, Esprit, September 1980 (revised 1992)
- Some Elementary Comments on the Rights of Freedom of Expression (http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/articles/8010-free-expression.html) — Noam Chomsky, October 1980
- His Right to Say It (http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/articles/8102-right-to-say.html) — Noam Chomsky, The Nation, February 1981
- On Faurisson and Chomsky (http://www.anti-rev.org/textes/VidalNaquet81b/) — Pierre Vidal-Naquet, Democracy, April 1981 (revised 1987)
- The Chorus and the Cassandra (http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/other/85-hitchens.html) — Christopher Hitchens, Grand Street, Autumn 1985
- Reply to Werner Cohn (http://www.chomsky.info/letters/19890601.htm) — Noam Chomsky, Outlook, June 1989
- French Holocaust Denier on Ban of Al-Manar: 'The Big Lie of the Alleged Holocaust ... is the Shield of Jewish Tyranny... Destroy it' (http://www.intelligence.org.il/eng/memri/feb_e_05.htm), Professor Robert Faurisson, in an interview to Iran's Mehr News Agency (MNA) about France's decision to ban Al-Manar TV.es:Escándalo Faurisson