Laïcité Part 4: Universalism vs. Separatism Today

For four centuries, laïcité has been a guiding principle of life in Paris and throughout France. Yet is remains a hot-button issue today, as France struggles to define a national character while fulfilling the aspirations of the Republic. Does secularism even have a place in a country and an interconnected world undergoing vast demographic and cultural transitions? 

This podcast is part of "Paris: A City of Ideas," a series created and narrated by Roger Mummert (rogermum@aol.com).
For more information: www.theparisproject.net

This podcast was created by Roger Mummert for www.theparisproject.net.

Transcript

Laîcité Today

Laïcité remains a hot-button issue today. The restoration of Notre Dame Cathedral following the 2019 fire provides a prime example. The Catholic clergy has proposed an interior renovation aimed at promoting Catholic principles. A protest has gone out from secularists, citing the 1946 Constitution that made all religious buildings property of city councils. The councils were charged with building maintenance but were forbidden to provide public funding of religion within. This was reinforced by Article 1 of the 1958 Constitution. 

Defenders of laïcité abhor any perceived public funding of religion, which they claim would be violated by the clergy’s plan for Notre Dame. (They mock it as a “Disneyfication” with light shows and moving images.) The clergy argue that their aims are educational and that their domain covers everything within the thick cathedral walls. Private funds will cover their plans, anyway, they say.  

Secularists have triumphed outside of the cathedral. A huge wall with detailed educational panels surrounds the worksite today. Images and text are entirely focused on the engineering techniques and scientific advances going into the rescue, analysis and renovation of the 800-year-old cathedral. There is no mention of religion whatsoever. 

Universalism vs. Separatism

Laïcité was essentially on the ballot in the presidential election of 2022, as both candidates embraced it—with differing interpretations. President Emmanuel Macron put a finer point on the issue with the interjection of the concept of “universalism.” He argued that the lofty, universal values of the Revolution prevail over ostentatious religious expressions such as the wearing of large crosses, stars of David, and head coverings by students in public schools. Religious observance is firmly guaranteed by the state, he insisted, just not in public schools. Basic laïcité 101. 

Marine Le Pin, Macron’s conservative adversary, presented a clever if shaky argument for banning the head scarf not just in schools but on the street, as well. (She later back off the latter.) Women who cover their heads with a scarf, she argued, are doing so not out of piety and modesty; rather, they are flaunting the “uniform of Islamic radicalism” that threatens the survival of French society and values. Here, she invoked laïcité: She was not suggesting restricting religion, she said, just the tribal separatism that poses a social and security threat. Her argument clearly was a dog whistle to anti-Muslim racists and anti-immigrant factions, groups that in former years might have unabashedly chanted, “France pour les Francais!” 

Laïcité is decidedly a French idea, yet one easily can see contrasts with other societies, where populist demagogues form alliances with the religious right to secure power often by anti-democratic means. In America, populists tout their “faith-based values” and disparage their opponent’s “California values,” implying liberalism steeped in sin. Even more blatant: “God, Guns and MAGA.”  Such slogans recall the backlash to a 1962 court decision that found school-sponsored prayer unconstitutional: “Put prayer back in schools,” was the refrain for an emotional wedge issue that drove evangelicals to the polls. 

Interpretations for public schools

The United States embraces “diversity” in its changing school populations, adding holiday vacation days for Chinese New Year, Diwali, Ramadan and Juneteenth, Not so in French schools: “Easter” holiday in France Is “Spring” holiday. Students in the US might perform a nativity play with a corresponding Chanukah reference in assembly, but such references are forbidden in French public schools. 

In fact, such displays of differentness are antithetical to laïcité. Unity of the social fabric is the ideal. Tribalness, in which ethnic or religious qualities are highlighted, is corrosive to that unity. It caries a clinical and foreboding name: communautarisme.   

French public schools see frequent laïcité conflicts as more students are French-born Muslims, many of them descendants from immigrants from former colonies. In 1989, a conflict arose over girls wearing head scarves in schools. In the ensuing debate, laïcité was interpreted two ways. The scarf was seen as a religious expression injurious to social unity—but banning the scarf could drive some girls from school and into the shadows, reducing gender equality, another key social goal. 

Again, accessories were political. The state ruled that the head scarf alone does not constitute a violation of laïcité; the issue goes to “ostentatious displays” of religious expression in the public sphere such as the wearing of large crosses and yarmulkes. The French put a bang on this with a wave of legislation intended to promote social unity. In 2004, the wearing of conspicuous religious symbols was banned in schools. In 2010, another law forbid face coverings in public. In 2016, nativity scenes were forbidden at town halls. The state bent over backwards to remain neutral toward religious expression—while creating more restrictions to it.  

From inception, laïcité was intended to guarantee religious freedom of expression and to ensure a secular democratic state. But as it is exists today, French Muslims see it as a direct attack on their religion and culture, and Muslims around the world have organized boycotts of French products. But French secularists ask why should there be factions within France at all? Laïcité is about unity and universal values. 

Again, it’s the French way: They debate…and then pass laws to achieve social goals.  

Anti-Separatism

The Anti-Separatism Bill of 2021 caries the formal title “Principles of the Republic and the fight Against Separatism.” It was proposed in the Lower House by Interior Minister Gérard Darmanin, then in the Senate by Senator Jean-Michel Blanquer. It was supported by President Macron (who was said to be triangulating to appease right, left and center as an election year approached). The bill was approved by both houses and is now law.  

The Anti-Separatism Bill arose out of the horror and fear from a series of Islamic terror attacks: the Charlie Hebdo assassinations, the Bataclan Theater massacre, the beheading of a French school teacher accused of disrespecting the Prophet Mohammed. It was a “something needs to be done” moment for some, but a rejection of Republican values and an anti-Muslim backlash to others. Its constitutionality was challenged; the Constitutional Council ruled that it was.

So, whither laïcité? In the present day, is this well-intended set of universal principles from the time of the French Enlightenment and Revolution still relevant in France and the world?

Proponents of laïcité appear to believe that the solution to the current challenges to secularism is…more secularism.

I point to Jean Baubolét, who calls for renewed dedication to the principles of Republican secularism: “Secularity cannot be reduced to a legal system, it is also a culture, an ethos, an emancipation from all ‘clericalism’ understood as control of the mind by an established discourse rejecting all debate.”