| |
Home page
Cultural Revolution within the anti-cult fight, by Raphaël Liogier
03.03.08
For the first time in nearly thirty years, a way of thinking
grounded on experience on the field and stemming both from the Ministry
of the Interior, mindful of the safety of individuals, and from sociologists,
mindful of the knowledge of religion, now wins over sheer denunciation.
But it is not easy, not without a hand-to-hand struggle
fought today at the top of the state. Because it is important to understand
that regarding sects, we are absolutely not in front of a political debate
– contrary to what is hidden by the current uproar - , but in a face-to-face
confrontation of two communities of senior officials, two administrative
mentalities in short: on one side the Ministry of the Interior (Central
Bureau of Worship, BCC), and on the other side Matignon(1) (the Inter-ministerial
Mission of Vigilance and Fight against Sectarian Abuses, Miviludes).
Let's go back to the early 80s, the time of the first
parliamentary report on cults, when the administrative anti-cult consensus
takes place: Matignon and the Ministry of the Interior speak the same
language. This is the time of the disenchantment of Miterrand’s Left which
- after the victory of 1981 - , must undertake a policy of austerity because
of the economic crisis. Culprits for this frustrating situation are to
be found. Weird sects are a perfect scapegoat, but not only them. The
first denunciations of suburbs’ wild youths took place at the same time.
The administrative machinery will get carried away from the beginning.
Two associations have won fame in this crusade: the Centre
against mind control (CCMM), rather Jacobin secular left wing, which guards
the shrine of rational truth against superstitions, and the National Union
of Associations for the Defense of the Family and the individual (Unadfi),
rather liberal(2) right wing, even Christian, defending the family and
the individual against harmful influences. Both associations will become
the only licensed informers of the State, receiving millions of euros
in subsidies.
All scholars, researchers at the CNRS (National Centre
of Scientific Research), appointed and paid by the Republic to scientifically
study these movements will initially be slightly blamed because of their
reluctance to point the finger at the sectarian danger, then they will
be excluded straight out from any discussion and finally accused of betraying
the Republic. All researchers, without exception, and I mean all of them,
regardless of their partisan affiliation or their political views, all
specialists on religious matters agree to the fact that for the past thirty
years, the lists prepared by the parliamentary commissions, as well as
the so-called inquiries by inter-ministerial missions are fanciful.
In the 1990s, Matignon, with the inter-ministerial Mission
of fight against sects (MILS), will become the Vatican of this crusade,
mobilizing all ministries (education, work, health, etc.) against anything
more or less resembling to a sect. But this beautiful consensus will crumble
for two reasons.
First of all, because people in the field, from justice
and national education ministries, academic inspectors and especially
of course the General Intelligence officials (RG), who were convinced
at the beginning of a sectarian threat, realize that the problem is overstated.
Second, because major religions, particularly Catholics and Protestants,
who hitherto had said nothing in front of such timely disqualification
of rival groups, are concerned about this crusade atmosphere. Actually,
the last MILS report was not only on sects, but also on superstition,
fundamentalism, and finally religion in general.
In 2001, the About-Picard Act against sects is about
to be passed: it had never gone this far. But all of a sudden, when Elisabeth
Guigou, Minister of Justice at the time, consults the Advisory Committee
on Human Rights (which includes representatives of major religions) on
this law, there is a lukewarm reaction. The law will then be stripped
of its contents, in spite of the fierce resistance of anti-sect troops.
The power balance has changed.
Immediately after these events, the MILS was replaced
by the Inter-ministerial Mission of Vigilance and Fight against Sectarian
Abuses. The message is clear: just being vigilant and not going on a crusade,
not hitting sects as such, but only those which “go astray”.
Since 2001, the confrontation between these two administrative
mentalities has embittered. On one hand the Ministry of the Interior,
the BCC with the General Intelligence Service, globally agreed with researchers
on the innocuousness of the overwhelming majority of new religious movements,
and on the other hand, an offensive Miviludes remained deaf to criticism
and entrenched behind Matignon. This antagonism will suddenly break out
in broad daylight at the hearing of senior officials from different ministries
in front of the commission in charge of the last report of December 2006
on cults.
Most ministerial officials declared that there was no
problem, first the Head of the central office of worship, who will point
out about the Jehovah's Witnesses, targeted at the time, that there was
no problem related to children’s lives in danger because of transfusion
refusals, contrary to some allegations stating ... 45 000 children at
risk.
The Head of the General Intelligence Service will even
dare to add that after surveys done in prefectures, National Education,
the DASS (Directorate of Health and Social Affairs), day camps, and agencies
dealing with young people, there are only "a few dozens of alerts." The
Head of BCC will then be attacked, violently summonned to retract.
The statements by Michele Alliot-Marie on the Miviludes
or by Valérie Pécresse on sects have then nothing to do with "secularism
in danger", but reflect an administrative shift legally required by the
European Court of Human Rights, which has been severely criticizing France
for several years for religious discrimination.
Moreover, the Miviludes’ administrative mentality which
is based on voluntary ignorance of the field, does not help to fight against
really dangerous sects, but instead protects them because of the confusion
it fuels. Result: inefficiency and discrimination! The solution lies in
a serious body, consisting of representatives of the civil society and
researchers, such as “Inform” for our English neighbors, which exists
not to condemn sects beforehand, but to inform both the state and the
public without fantasizing.
1 : The Prime Minister’s office at the Matignon Palace
in Paris.
2 : Liberal: used now-a-days by the left in France to
mean modern capitalism liable for unemployment, company relocation and
loss of social advantages and of State control on industry, different
from the old right wing mentality like De Gaulle who was more interventionist.
--------------------------------------
 --------------------------------------
Home
page
CAPLC -
CAP pour la Liberté de Conscience - Liberté de Religion
- Liberté de Conviction
|
