by Ben Sixsmith, The Critic (Photo: Wikimedia Creative Commons)
Persecuting critics of the status quo is a bizarre distraction from addressing real problems
The French novelist Michel Houellebecq — author of Whatever and Atomised among other books, and a perennial candidate for the Nobel Prize for Literature — has been placed under formal investigation in France for “complicity in provocation to discrimination, hatred or violence against a group of people because of their origin”.
This is the second time Houellebecq has faced prosecution over his opinions. In 2002, he was tried on charges of racial hatred after calling Islam “the dumbest religion”. The charges did not stick. Now, though, he has been indicted over various comments he made in 2022 to Popular Front about Muslims in France.
“The wish of the native French population,” Houellebecq said, “is not that Muslims assimilate but that they stop robbing and assaulting them. Or, another solution, that they leave.” “When entire territories come under Islamist control,” he predicted, “I think acts of resistance will take place. There will be attacks and shootings in mosques, in cafés frequented by Muslims, in short, Bataclans in reverse.” Finally, Houellebecq claimed that the “great replacement” theory “[is] not a theory, it’s a fact. It’s statistical evidence.”
To be clear, I do think Houellebecq’s phrasing was irresponsible at best. An attack comparable to the Bataclan massacre would definitionally not constitute “resistance”. Nor should Houellebecq have implied that Muslims have collective responsibility for “robbing and assaulting”. It is a shame that a man as intelligent as Houellebecq spoke so crassly — and Houellebecq himself has expressed regret over his remarks.
But the question is not whether Michel Houellebecq chose his words appropriately. It is whether he deserves to be prosecuted — whether inappropriate, or simply controversial, writing and speech should be prohibited.
Read also: Michel Houellebecq must not be silenced by Hugo Timms, spiked