Manifesto for a European Renaissance by Alain de Benoist

Manifesto for a European Renaissance Reviews

• 
  Leonard Gaya

  This is a short political handout, written in the 1990s by French political thinker Alain de Benoist, as a framework for his political ideology. Benoist is, with
  Guillaume Faye, one of the founders of what has come to be known as the French Nouvelle Droite, a movement started in the late 1960s, that has been advocating communitarianism and anti-immigration, against the French republican, egalitarian and integration-driven model.
  
  This Manifeste is compelling insofar as the ideology set out by Benoist has influenced to a large extent today’s far-right or “alt-right”. The Trump administration in the USA and its associated media outlets (Steve Bannon’s Breitbart News), as well as the European populist parties, radical right -or radical left for that matter-, in different ways: Marine Le Pen and Jean-Luc Mélenchon in France, to mention only a few examples.
  
  Some of the ideas in this short “Neo-Right” catechism are, in no particular order: against economic globalisation and cultural homogenisation and in favour of a multipolar world; against mass migration flows and in favour of multiculturalism; against Catholicism, the Enlightenment and human rights (i.e. Western universalism) and in favour of paganism and local laws; against racism and feminism; against free-market, consumerism and materialism; finally, against financial neoliberalism, the political and corporate elite, the welfare state, and in favour of a federal Europe of regions, allied with Russia.
  
  Alain de Benoist is thus in total disagreement with Fukuyama, who argued in
  The End of History and the Last Man, that the fall of the Soviet Union had marked the triumph of modern liberal democracies and the “end of History”. On the contrary, he would be quite close to Huntington’s
  Clash of Civilizations thesis, who argued that, after the Cold War, the world had entered a period where cultural identities and religious conflicts would become most significant.
  
  Some aspects of Benoist’s diagnosis on modernity bear the stamp of common sense, but the consequences he draws from it, literally sprinkled with philosophical concepts, are at the same time purely theoretical and quite optimistically naive. Contrary to Huntington’s ideas, they present an irenic and utopian world, where liberal capitalism could just disappear into thin air, where xenophobic sentiment wouldn’t exist, and where the different civilisations would live and cooperate peacefully: a sort of Star Trek Federation of Planets... In the end, what Benoist seems to be expressing is the desire for a regeneration of the European culture, and, at the same time, a sullen yearning for an ancestral and mostly idealised world, from before the Babel of modernity. Fundamentally, a set of political positions with a heady neo-fascist whiff indeed, and a dream of making Europe great again.
• 
  Vapula

  It consists of a few pleasant quotations but it's just a piece that sounds more or less the same as the more lukewarm of communitarians. It's not even really rightist in the way some may assume of de Benoist.
• 
  MarkieXIV

  Decent short book, worth reading for anyone not so familiar with late 19th century to now rightism.
  
  Alain de Benoist has the typical shortcoming of many reactionaries, libertarians, and marxists that think very abstractly, and through the lens of ideologies and ideas; that is, he throws the baby out with the bathwater IE he seems to find it impossible to conceive of a positive outcome coming out of something he has decided is bad on principle. In this example we take centralisation of the state.
  
  Benoist wants to have his cake and eat it too; meaning that he wants a multipolar world of states that are each strong enough to not be dominated by the others, this would thus necessitate each of them to have a level of military and economic might about equal to each other obviously. Here is where he starts eating his cake while expecting his cake to still be there, he wants this whilst simultaneously advocating for the decomplexification, derationalisation etc of the proposed new Federation of Europe. How exactly does he expect a localist, highly decentralised Europe to compete with the other civilisation states if they are utilising all of the Power-generating tools of modernity which he wants to relinquish? There isn't an answer in this book, just fantasising about a world which would obviously be much more ethical and better for everyone but isn't tenable unless *The End of History* happened where every state decided to cooperate, end politics, and kumbaya together in the new world based around ecology, respecting differences etc. Ironically he critiques the end of history in this very book, while his proposal necessitates the end of history, otherwise his Europe would be vulnerable to conquest.
  
  If Benoist just accepted that centralisation doesn't have to be detrimental on principle, simply because of the bad examples of Liberalism and Marxism, his ideas would make a lot more sense. For those who want to see an example of an Ethical Socialism that is also centralised, essentially accomplishing everything that Benoist wants, then just read about the proposals, philosophies, enacted policies etc of the 20th century revolutionary nationalists.
  
  Perhaps in another book Benoist goes more in depth on how his federalised and decentralised Europe could possibly work in the real world, but he does not in this book which just gives the impression of him essentially playing a sandbox video game with his political philosophy, IE it's all abstract with no concern for reality. Which is odd considering his critiques, obvious influence of realist thinkers such as Schmitt etc.
• 
  Griffin Wilson

  This work is more or less a manifesto of the European "Nouvelle Droite" (New Right). Of all contemporary political theorists and schools, this is perhaps the one which, at least currently, I have the most sympathy for; however, I have really only read a few works from these thinkers, but I do appreciate their influences (Nietzsche, Spengler, Michels, Gramsci, etc.), so I will probably continue to explore this loose group in the future.
  
  I looked everywhere online for the original French version of this book, but could not find it. Finally, I looked on French Amazon, as I thought they would certainly have such an influential work as this; it seems as if -- at least in French -- this book has been banned(!), just like many other *naughty* "right-wing" books. As de Benoist writes:
  
  "One no longer discusses, one denounces. One no longer reasons, one accuses. One no longer proves, one imposes."
  
  I find it ironic that related ideologies and thinkers mentioned in this pamphlet are decried by leftists as "bourgeois ideology," when it is in fact these books and thinkers that get banned by the various "bourgeois" institutions (YouTube, Amazon, Facebook, etc.); this is then celebrated as a victory. So far as I know, no communist, anarchist, or otherwise leftist thinker or book has been banned as of late -- it is almost as if their cosmopolitan, universalist, and progressive ideology is more in-line with the "bourgeois ideology" than any other.
• 
  Miguel Noronha

  The political manifesto of identitarians or the "new right" by one of its main ideologues. It turns out to be based on shallow, uniformed and unhistoricall. Altought de Benoist claims equal distance from both communism and liberalism it turns out to be mainly an iliberal manifesto which most of the political jargon of the alter-globalists, neo-communists, or (suprise!) the "new left". Regarding the last (Spring 2017) french presidential elections, it comes to no suprise that far-left and far-right candidates were disputing the same electorate.
• 
  Chris

  Alain De Benoist never disappoints. And this manifesto reads exactly how a good manifesto should. Intriguing, provoking, on point, and direct, Benoist is a writer who understands the European spirit, what has been lost, and what the solution is. You may not agree with all of his points, but no doubt you will be left wondering if perhaps, maybe, it is you who are wrong, and not him.
• 
  Angel Veliz

  Literate and definitive.
  
  A very forthright book. It critically dissects the truth behind our everyday lives. From the colossal idea of people working together to disregard the poor to slums that are neglected. Its a mission to read this book and a lesson to understand it.
• 
  Husham

  Its a Short and really good summary of the Philosophy of Alain de Benoist
• 
  Rui Coelho

  Extremly unoriginal
• 
  Diego González

  I thoroughly enjoyed this book. It is a clear look at some of the problems that face Europe, and indeed the world. I respect that the issues are complicated, and treated as such. This is no knee-jerk reactionary trying to get back to the "good old days" though he obviously respects tradition and its lessons greatly.
  
  If I have one critique (and indeed it is the reason I do not give it more stars), it is that I live in the United States, and, being of South American heritage, am a product of European colonialism. de Benoist's arguments, in particular those regarding homelands and cultures, are inapplicable to many of the circumstances in which Americans (North and South) find themselves. Some may lay this at the feet of the lack of a truly American culture in general, but the fact remains that these arguments, while perhaps useful to Europe (and in a broader sense other cultures with deep roots), are not particularly helpful to those 'rootless cosmopolitans' living in a more globalized situation. Extracting ourselves from this is not an option for most.
  
  Besides, hybridization can be just as strong a force as traditionalism.
• 
  Nick

  De Benoist takes positions which to an American seem pretty left wing and doesn’t seem like the kind of nationalist we’re familiar with as he advocates a federal Europe rather than independent nation states and a kind of multiculturalism he calls “pluriversum”. In general critical of“Judeo-Christian” “bourgeois” values which are at the heart of what the American right considers Western values.
• 
  TR

  A concise statement of purpose for a noble cause. There's some good rhetoric in here as well.
  
  Note that it can be found online under its original title, 'The French New Right in the Year 2000'.
  
  http://home.alphalink.com.au/~radnat/...
• 
  Thiago Naves

  Very interesting book. Curiously, GRECE's view of the world and it's ideas, are very similar to mine, which made it a fun book to read. Wished it was longer, and also that more people would have interest in genre.
• 
  Horst Walther

  Well, I read this book with mixed feelings.