La critique du nationalisme de la "Semaine Sociale de Bordeaux" à la "Lutte pour la civilisation et la philosophie de la paix"

Over a long period the philosopher, Maurice Blondel, was an outspoken critic of exaggerated nationalism. The series of articles that appeared in 1909-10 in the Annales de philosophie chrétienne under the title of « La Semaine sociale de Bordeaux », and later were published in book form, contained a philosophically and theologically motivated critique of the early support shown by French Catholics for the doctrinaire nationalism of Charles Maurras. In 1928 Blondel returned to a critique of this same nationalism in his detailed article « Patrie et Humanité ». But the further criticism of nationalism contained in parts of his book Lutte pour la civilisation et philosophie de la paix, which was published in 1939 (and anew in 1947 in a slightly revised edition), was of a different order, being focused on the nationalism associated with what Blondel termed totalitarisme in its then German or Nazi form. Despite this record, it would be a mistake to assume that Blondel was an internationalist fitting clearly into the Briand mould. After the First World War Blondel favoured the hard-line foreign policy advocated by Poincaré and Foch, in particular over the future of the Rhineland. And he remained a conservative Catholic. His book of 1939 denounced not only totalitarisme in both its Nazi and Soviet forms, but also, on an opposing front, liberalism in the social and economic sphere. As to the deleterious effect of nationalism on international relations, he was an advocate of strengthening international law, notably the corpus of law emanating from The Hague. Maurice Blondel was greatly admired by Robert Schuman, the prominent French foreign minister under the Fourth Republic and a key figure for post-war European integration.

Arlette Laguiller:does the mainstay of the French political far-left enjoy linguistic parity with her male counterparts?

While language use has been argued to reflect gender asymmetry, increasing parity has been evidenced in official settings (Holmes, 2000; Dister and Moreau, 2006). Our hypothesis is that the French national press has developed a norm of equal linguistic treatment of men and women. In a corpus of articles from Libération, Le Monde, and Le Figaro, we examine the treatment of Arlette Laguiller, the female leader of the French extreme-left 'Worker's Struggle' Party (Lutte Ouvrière), during the run-up to the 2007 presidential elections. How Laguiller is referred to and described in comparison with her male counterparts evidences no asymmetry. Breaches to parity are only found in the right-wing Figaro newspaper. The ideological distance between the newspaper and the candidate suggests that power struggles are a primary source of asymmetrical treatments. The discursive functions of such treatments can be understood through an investigation based on a portable corpus linguistics methodology for the measure of discrimination. © 2011 Elsevier B.V.