FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

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.

January 16, 2019
Patrick Bond
Jim Yong Kim’s Mixed Messages to the World Bank and the World
John Grant
Joe Biden, Crime Fighter from Hell
Alvaro Huerta
Brief History Notes on Mexican Immigration to the U.S.
Kenneth Surin
A Great Speaker of the UK’s House of Commons
Elizabeth Henderson
Why Sustainable Agriculture Should Support a Green New Deal
Binoy Kampmark
Trump, Bolton and the Syrian Confusion
Jeff Mackler
Trump’s Syria Exit Tweet Provokes Washington Panic
Barbara Nimri Aziz
How Long Can Nepal Blame Others for Its Woes?
Cesar Chelala
Violence Against Women: A Pandemic No Longer Hidden
Kim C. Domenico
To Make a Vineyard of the Curse: Fate, Fatalism and Freedom
Dave Lindorff
Criminalizing BDS Trashes Free Speech & Association
Thomas Knapp
Now More Than Ever, It’s Clear the FBI Must Go
Binoy Kampmark
Dances of Disinformation: The Partisan Politics of the Integrity Initiative
Edward Curtin
A Gentrified Little Town Goes to Pot
January 15, 2019
Patrick Cockburn
Refugees Are in the English Channel Because of Western Interventions in the Middle East
Howard Lisnoff
The Faux Political System by the Numbers
Lawrence Davidson
Amos Oz and the Real Israel
John W. Whitehead
Beware the Emergency State
John Laforge
Loudmouths against Nuclear Lawlessness
Myles Hoenig
Labor in the Age of Trump
Jeff Cohen
Mainstream Media Bias on 2020 Democratic Race Already in High Gear
Dean Baker
Will Paying for Kidneys Reduce the Transplant Wait List?
George Ochenski
Trump’s Wall and the Montana Senate’s Theater of the Absurd
Binoy Kampmark
Dances of Disinformation: the Partisan Politics of the Integrity Initiative
Glenn Sacks
On the Picket Lines: Los Angeles Teachers Go On Strike for First Time in 30 Years
Jonah Raskin
Love in a Cold War Climate
Andrew Stewart
The Green New Deal Must be Centered on African American and Indigenous Workers to Differentiate Itself From the Democratic Party
January 14, 2019
Kenn Orphan
The Tears of Justin Trudeau
Julia Stein
California Needs a 10-Year Green New Deal
Dean Baker
Declining Birth Rates: Is the US in Danger of Running Out of People?
Robert Fisk
The US Media has Lost One of Its Sanest Voices on Military Matters
Vijay Prashad
5.5 Million Women Build Their Wall
Nicky Reid
Lessons From Rojava
Ted Rall
Here is the Progressive Agenda
Robert Koehler
A Green Future is One Without War
Gary Leupp
The Chickens Come Home to Roost….in Northern Syria
Glenn Sacks
LA Teachers’ Strike: “The Country Is Watching”
Sam Gordon
Who Are Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionists?
Weekend Edition
January 11, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Richard Moser
Neoliberalism: Free Market Fundamentalism or Corporate Power?
Paul Street
Bordering on Fascism: Scholars Reflect on Dangerous Times
Joseph Majerle III – Matthew Stevenson
Who or What Brought Down Dag Hammarskjöld?
Jeffrey St. Clair - Joshua Frank
How Tre Arrow Became America’s Most Wanted Environmental “Terrorist”
Andrew Levine
Dealbreakers: The Democrats, Trump and His Wall
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Que Syria, Syria
Dave Lindorff
A Potentially Tectonic Event Shakes up the Mumia Abu-Jamal Case
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail