FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

The Paris Attacks and the Politics of Memory

While describing the tragic civilian massacre in Paris, many in the French and international media added further fuel to the inevitable racial backlash in the West by a significant, but all too predictable, historical lie. Mainstream newspapers, such as Le Figaro in France, the Telegraph in Britain, the New York Times, the Washington Post and many US journals fed by the Associated Press; all of the major US TV-radio networks; media websites such as Time.com, thedailybeast.com, theatlantic.com and vice.com/fr; and even the progressive reporting of Democracy Now! all claimed that Friday’s events were the worst violence or terrorist attack in a single day in France since World War II.

Every journalist, editor and publisher responsible, however unintentionally, for this historical erasure exemplifies, no doubt, but also further encourages racist amnesia in the broader society that this claim represents. The issue is whose history is remembered
and why.

Over three decades passed before broader French public consciousness began slowly to acknowledge and to condemn the horrific, deliberate police massacre of immigrant Algerian demonstrators marching peacefully in Paris on October 17, 1961. It was the final year of the Algerian war for national independence and peace negotiations were already well underway. Some 30,000 or more Algerian men, women and children were organized by the nationalist FLN to participate in a central city street march protesting a newly imposed racist curfew against Muslim residents of the Paris region. The vast majority of demonstrators, of course, were simply unarmed mobilized civilians, not militant activists, and were still officially citizens of France.

In advance, however, Paris police chief Maurice Papon, ex-Vichy official and later responsible for torture and summary executions in Algeria, explicitly encouraged police to use every means to destroy the demonstration and thus weaken the movement behind it. Papon himself was implicitly encouraged to do so by his knowledge of secret anti-FLN death squads operating in France and endorsed at the highest level of French government. With this green light, Paris police (many of whom belonged to the proto-fascist Secret Army Organization) viciously attacked the October 17th marchers with batons and guns and threw dozens of bound or unconscious men into the Seine to drown. Over ten thousand were arrested and taken for further beatings and murders at police stations or special improvised prison camps. The overall scale of deaths, wounded and disappeared from this Paris attack and massacre, a clear example of state terrorism, is acknowledged by serious observers to be at least comparable to the scale of casualties of this past November 13th.

I was a student in Paris that year and remember that press coverage of the massacre was relatively modest, no doubt in part because of internal and government press censorship. Less than four months later, the deaths of nine French anti-fascist protestors after police charges and beatings in another demonstration provoked a subsequent general strike and presence of half a million in a massive funeral protest at the Place de la République. Yet, by contrast, it took some three decades of diligent research, writings and documentaries by small numbers (including especially Jean-Luc Einaudi) to finally gain the significant public attention that the atrocious event of October ’61 deserved.

Now, with media claims that last Friday’s attack and violence were unprecedented in scale since World War II, the brush of amnesia seeks again to wipe clear the historical record of 1961’s Paris police massacre. The reality and power of media institutional racism to shape historical memory is blatant.

The point here is not to engage in macabre historical competition. Rather, the media’s easy authoritative forgetting of the 1961 tragedy and the influence of that neglect and similar distortions have real consequences on how today’s mass public frames its consciousness and response. Simplistic historical omissions help fuel the tendency toward simplistic and misguided solutions, as already seen in Hollande’s and Sarkozy’s demand for total war and similar outcries from presidential candidates in the US.

Unfortunately and tragically, it is Friday’s victims in Paris, just as civilians throughout the war zones of the Middle East and North Africa, who pay the price of deaths and destruction from the unconscionable demagogy and policies of mindless politicians, war hawks and religious fanatics on all sides.

More articles by:

David Porter is emeritus professor of political science at SUNY/Empire State College and author of Vision on Fire: Emma Goldman on the Spanish Revolution and Eyes to the South: French Anarchists and Algeria (both AK Press). He can be reached at david.porter@esc.edu.

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550
Weekend Edition
January 24, 2020
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
A Letter From Iowa
Jim Kavanagh
Aftermath: The Iran War After the Soleimani Assassination
Jeffrey St. Clair
The Camp by the Lake
Chuck Churchill
The Long History of Elite Rule: What Will It Take To End It?
Robert Hunziker
A Climate Time Bomb With Trump’s Name Inscribed
Andrew Levine
Trump: The King
Jess Franklin
Globalizing the War on Indigenous People: Bolsonaro and Modi
James Graham
From Paris, With Tear Gas…
Rob Urie
Why the Primaries Matter
Dan Bacher
Will the Extinction of Delta Smelt Be Governor Gavin Newsom’s Environmental Legacy?
Ramzy Baroud
In the Name of “Israel’s Security”: Retreating US Gives Israel Billions More in Military Funding
Vijay Prashad
What the Right Wing in Latin America Means by Democracy Is Violence
Jeremy Kuzmarov
Biden’s Shameful Foreign Policy Record Extends Well Beyond Iraq
Louis Proyect
Isabel dos Santos and Africa’s Lumpen-Bourgeoisie
Nick Pemberton
AK-46: The Case Against Amy Klobuchar
Evaggelos Vallianatos
Promtheus’ Fire: Climate Change in the Time of Willful Ignorance
Linn Washington Jr.
Waiting for Justice in New Jersey
Ralph Nader
Pelosi’s Choice: Enough for Trump’s Impeachment but not going All Out for Removal
Mike Garrity – Jason Christensen
Don’t Kill 72 Grizzly Bears So Cattle Can Graze on Public Lands
Joseph Natoli
Who’s Speaking?
Kavaljit Singh
The US-China Trade Deal is Mostly Symbolic
Cesar Chelala
The Coronavirus Serious Public Health Threat in China
Nino Pagliccia
Venezuela Must Remain Vigilant and on Guard Against US Hybrid Warfare
Robert Fantina
Impeachment as a Distraction
Courtney Bourgoin
What We Lose When We Lose Wildlife
Mark Ashwill
Why Constructive Criticism of the US is Not Anti-American
Daniel Warner
Charlie Chaplin and Truly Modern Times
Manuel Perez-Rocha
How NAFTA 2.0 Boosts Fossil Fuel Polluters, Particularly in Mexico
Dean Baker
What Minimum Wage Would Be If It Kept Pace With Productivity
Mel Gurtov
India’s Failed Democracy
Thomas Knapp
US v. Sineneng-Smith: Does Immigration Law Trump Free Speech?
Winslow Myers
Turning Point: The new documentary “Coup 53”
Jeff Mackler
U.S. vs. Iran: Which Side are You On?
Sam Pizzigati
Braggadocio in the White House, Carcinogens in Our Neighborhoods
Christopher Brauchli
The Company Trump Keeps
Julian Vigo
Why Student Debt is a Human Rights Issue
Ramzy Baroud
These Chains Will Be Broken
Chris Wright
A Modest Proposal for Socialist Revolution
Thomas Barker
The Slow Death of European Social Democracy: How Corbynism Bucked the Trend
Nicky Reid
It’s Time to Bring the War Home Again
Michelle Valadez
Amy Klobuchar isn’t Green
David Swanson
CNN Poll: Sanders Is The Most Electable
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
Our Dire Need for “Creative Extremists”—MLK’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”
Jill Richardson
‘Little Women’ and the American Attitude Toward Poverty
David Yearsley
Watching Star Wars in Berlin
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail