Remembering Maurice Bardèche:
October 1, 1907–July 30, 1998
Greg Johnson
Today is the birthday of Maurice Bardèche (1907–1998), the French Neo-Fascist writer. Bardèche was a prolific and highly versatile author of literary, film, and art criticism, history, journalism, and social and political theory. He published twenty-odd books and countless essays, articles, and reviews.
Born in modest circumstances in provincial Dun-sur-Auron near the geographical center of France, Bardèche rose by sheer dint of genius to the heights of France’s meritocracy. He received a scholarship to the prestigious Lycée Louis-le-Grand in Paris where he met Thierry Maulnier and his future brother-in-law Robert Brasillach. In 1928, he entered the École Normale Supérieure, where he met such now famous figures as Jacques Soustelle, Simone Weil, and Georges Pompidou. In 1932 he started teaching at the Sorbonne.
During the 1930s, Bardèche primarily collaborated with Brasillach and Maulnier, writing for their periodicals. In 1935 Bardèche and Brasillach published their influential Histoire du cinéma (Denoël et Steele, 1935; expanded edition, 1943). During the Spanish Civil War (1936–1939), Bardèche visisted Spain several times and co-authored a Histoire de la guerre d’Espagne (Plon, 1939) with Brasillach. In 1938, Bardèche began to write for the fascist paper Je suis partout.
In the 1940s, Bardèche became known for his work as a literary scholar. In 1940, he completed his thesis on Balzac. He later turned it into a biography, Balzac romancier: la formation de l’art du roman chez Balzac jusqu’à la publication du père Goriot (1820–1835) (Plon, 1943). Bardèche went on to published highly regarded studies of Stendhal (1947), Proust (1971), Flaubert (1974), Céline (1986), and Léon Bloy (1989).
In 1942, after 10 years at the Sorbonne, Bardèche moved to the Université des Sciences et Technologies de Lille, where he taught until 1944. Always more sympathetic to fascism than National Socialism, Bardèche was not an open collaborationist during the German Occupation of France, although he moved in collaborationist circles. His brother-in-law Robert Brasillach was executed after the Liberation for collaboration. Bardèche was himself arrested for collaboration but was quickly released. His academic career was ended with a ban from teaching in the public educational system.
Bardèche was not silenced by persecution but radicalized. In 1947, he published Lettre à François Mauriac (La Pensée libre, 1947), defending collaborationism, attacking the excesses of the Resistance, and denouncing the purge of Vichy supporters and the execution of individuals like Brasillach. In 1948, he founded his own publishing imprint Les Sept Couleurs (The Seven Colours), named for a book by Brasillach. In 1948, he published Nuremberg ou la Terre promise (Nuremberg, or the Promised Land) (Les Sept Couleurs, 1948), a critique of the Nuremberg trials which landed him in court for defending war crimes. Sentenced to a year in prison, his sentence was commuted by President René Coty. In 1950, he published Nuremberg II ou les Faux-Monnayeurs (Nuremberg II or The Counterfeiters) (Les Sept Couleurs, 1950). In 1952, he founded his journal Défense de l’Occident (Defense of the West), which he published until 1982.
In 1951, Bardèche joined Sir Oswald Mosley, Karl-Heinz Priester, and Per Engdahl in founding the European Social Movement (MSE), the goal of which was to promote pan-European nationalism. Bardèche served as vice-president.
True to his heritage as a “Frank,” Bardèche never dodged labels like “rightist” or “fascist.” Instead, he owned them and tried to give them substance. In the Introduction to his book Qu’est-ce que le fascisme? (What is Fascism?) (Les Sept Couleurs, 1961) he states forthrightly “I am a fascist writer.” Bardèche sought to bring fascism back to its socialist and syndicalist roots. He was particularly attracted to Mussolini’s late experiment, the Italian Social Republic.
Counter-Currents has published the following works by Bardèche:
- “The Fascist Dream,” Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
- “From International Law to Global Oligarchy”
- “Nuremberg or The Promised Land”
- “The Rights of Man”
- “Six Postulates of Fascist Socialism” (Ukrainian translation here)
- “The True Foundations of the Nuremberg Tribunal”
- “What is Fascism?” (Czech translation here)
Remembering%20Maurice%20Bard%C3%A8che%3AOctober%201%2C%201907%E2%80%93July%2030%2C%201998
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
Related
-
The Power of Myth: Remembering Joseph Campbell (March 26, 1904–October 30, 1987)
-
Remembering Flannery O’Connor (March 25, 1925–August 4, 1964)
-
Remembering Kriss Donald (July 2, 1988–March 15, 2004)
-
Remembering Gabriele D’Annunzio (March 12, 1863–March 1, 1938)
-
Remembering Jan Assmann: July 7, 1938–February 19, 2024
-
Remembering hitchBOT (2013–August 1, 2015): Artificial Intelligence and Racism
-
Remembering Yukio Mishima: January 14, 1925–November 25, 1970
-
Remembering G. I. Gurdjieff
2 comments
‘True to his heritage as a “Frank,” Bardèche never dodged labels like “rightist” or “fascist.” Instead, he owned them and tried to give them substance. In the Introduction to his book Qu’est-ce que le fascisme? (What is Fascism?) (Les Sept Couleurs, 1961) he states forthrightly “I am a fascist writer.” Bardèche sought to bring fascism back to its socialist and syndicalist roots. He was particularly attracted to Mussolini’s late experiment, the Italian Social Republic.’
Bardeche was under no moral or logical obligation to call himself a Fascist, since that movement was confined to Italy. If he did so, he was only shooting himself in the foot by accepting his adversaries’ inaccurate and simplistic label. Fascism and similar movements cannot be properly understood using the labels ‘left’ and ‘right’. Bardeche may have been frank, but he was contradicting himself if he believed that he was a ‘rightist’ and that Fascism’s roots were properly socialist or syndicalist.
I understand that the above-named book was intended to as a polemic, meant to provoke controversy, not to define precise limits or be totally objective.
Consider the thoughts of Oswald Mosley: ‘A recent book by John Harrison, The Reactionaries, ascribed fascist tendencies to the following writers: Yeats, TS Eliot, Ezra Pound, Wyndham Lewis and DH Lawrence. In this case the title and the theme were a contradiction in terms, because writers cannot both be fascists and reactionaries. A movement of the Right has nothing to do with fascism, which can be described as revolutionary but not as reactionary.’ (My Life, p.318)
What you don’t understand is that if you accept your adversaries’ terminology – which is, naturally, detrimental to a proper understanding of your own ideas – you are not ‘pushing back’ but being pushed back.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.