So this is where his identity obsession leads: even when he talks about technology, the immigrant still has to be the problem.
And then, one must recognize a remarkable constancy in Zemmour: Everything is always a story of replacement! Yesterday, he waved the specter of the "great replacement": immigrants were replacing the French.
Today, change of scenario: It is the robots who must replace the immigrants.
Immigrants replace the French, robots replace the immigrants… At that rate, in a few years, robots will replace robots.
Zemmour spends so much time searching for who must replace whom that one ends up wondering when he will propose his own replacement.
It would perhaps be the best replacement we have ever known.
In a nursing home, a robot can certainly automate certain tasks, carry loads, or assist staff, but a machine will not replace an outstretched hand, a reassuring word, or the attention of a caregiver to an elderly person.
And above all: why reduce the work of immigrants only in nursing homes?? in my opinion you have never worked your whole life to spout such nonsense!
The heart of your program remains Islam and immigration. You are screwing us in the end!
It is the same mechanism: the immigrant, the African or the Muslim becomes the prism through which a part of France's problems is explained, but one cannot tell the story of France by erasing those who contributed to it.
Contemporary France has enriched itself with its colonial empire, slavery in its former colonies, and soldiers from Africa who fought under its flag during the two world wars. One cannot celebrate national greatness while making disappear from its narrative those whose work, suffering, or blood also belong to that history. "Yes, they gave the blood."
And when political discourse continuously consists of opposing Europeans, Africans, and Muslims, one must recall how far racialization theories have historically led. Gobineau theorized in the 19th century, in his "Essay on the Inequality of Human Races," a supposed hierarchy among human groups. These racial classifications gave rise to many imbeciles who resemble you…
In your famous identity and racist discourse, the European foreigner appears culturally much more easily assimilable, while African and Arab-Muslim immigration is continuously presented as a threat, a problem, or a foreign body that France should get rid of.
Undocumented? Expulsion. Alien delinquent? Expulsion. Foreign unemployed? Again, immigration as a problem. And now, even the one who works, cares for our elders, and participates in the French economy should ideally be… replaced by a robot!
And when the journalist pushes back, he shows his rough attitude: condescension, interruptions, aggressiveness…
Funny how he embodies this civilized France whom he continuously proclaims as its defender!
And there are especially two standards, two measures that exasperate me in these ascorbic media as much as him:
When Dieudonné or Alain Soral make "antisemitic" remarks, they are condemned, marginalized and largely excluded from the major media, whereas I am asked why this same firmness should not apply to this mentally ill person when remarks target Blacks, Arabs, or Muslims?
When Zemmour explains to Hapsatou Sy that his first name is an "insult to France," it is no longer just a political opinion: justice has definitively condemned him for racist insult.
And yet, the character continues to occupy a considerable place in the media space.
It is precisely this inconsistency that bothers me: antisemitism would be intolerable, but the stigmatization of Blacks, Arabs, or Muslims could, in fact, become a permanent political spectacle?
No.
When identity provocation is systematically transformed into a spectacle, polemics into an audience, and the permanent designation of scapegoats into entertainment, one does not just observe the fractures of society: one contributes to feeding them.
And the height of it is that Zemmour, himself from a Jewish family from Algeria who came to Metropolitan France, should refrain from talking about immigration since he is not authentic and does not belong to the autochthonous peoples.
We do not defend France by constantly deciding which French people are more French than others.
France does not need us to eternally manufacture internal enemies for it.
It mostly needs us to leave it alone and to solve the social and economic problems.
Neega Mass
Artist and Pan-African columnist