“To analyze how the worlds of popular education are crossed by the questions associated today with secularism and religion”: this was the objective of a survey* carried out by three academics between 2015 and 2021, and published Friday, April 21 by the National Institute of Youth and Popular Education (Injep) – an organization that depends on the Ministry of National Education and Youth. The free study (which means that the ministry did not know the content before publication) carried out by Lila Belkacem, Séverine Chauvel and Francine Nyambek-Mebenga is the voice of a significant mistrust of professionals in this sector vis-à-vis secularism perceived as “a question imposed from outside”.
“This is particularly sensitive insofar as it poses a risk of stigmatization and discrimination to Muslims, and reveals wider social and ethno-racial inequalities within French society”, argue the authors, based on on their observations and interviews conducted in the field. A very critical analysis vis-à-vis those they call “the defenders of a new secularism” who, they say, “have managed to put the “problem of Islam” on the political and media agenda and to associate the question of “secularism” with that of the supposed “lack of integration” of certain populations categorized as coming from immigration”. Finally, the researchers report strong tensions observed during training in the values of the Republic and secularism organized with actors of popular education since the attacks of 2015.
Asked by L’Express, Sarah El Haïry, Secretary of State for Youth and Universal National Service, expressed her “terror” on reading this report and spoke out against what she considers to be a ” deviation” from the principle of secularism and the laws that govern it.
L’Express: The authors of this study, carried out during the seven years following the terrorist attacks of 2015, describe a context where the “defenders of a new secularism” began to want to restrict “religious freedoms beyond only public service agents”. Do you agree with this analysis?
Sarah El Hairy: Absolutely not. It is important to remember that secularism does not need qualifiers or any more or less contextualized interpretations. And I quickly insist on the fact that this report is academic research, the comments of which engage only their authors and not the National Institute of Youth and Popular Education, although this organization has brought them its funding. I say this with all the more force that, on reading this work, I felt a certain dread. What is described there represents the exact opposite of what secularism represents: a value dedicated to protecting those who believe and those who do not believe, which makes it possible to fight against discrimination linked to skin color, gender or gender equality. The comments relayed in this text constitute a deviation from this principle.
The study explains that issues related to respect for secularism come “in tension with the values of popular education” based on “principles of openness to all” and “emancipation through education”. Are these two aspects really contradictory?
But not at all ! Popular education is in no way opposed to secularism which, once again, is one of the most founding and most protective principles of our Republic. As for popular education, what is it for? To open minds, to provide informal education complementary to the training provided by the school, to offer citizenship courses, to allow young people to go to summer camps, to get to know each other, to transmit the taste for collective. The fact that this report puts forward discourses of victimization, presaging future discrimination linked to a confession which is that of Islam, is totally counter-productive and even extremely dangerous.
Enemies of our secular Republic are now seeking to fragment our society and we will not let ourselves be caught in this trap. Coming myself from a family of Muslim faith, I assume with all the more force the fact of saying that our country protects, on the contrary, from all forms of religious discrimination. Letting imagine, as this report does, that secularism stigmatizes a particular religion, is absolutely deleterious. But for this discourse to be heard and correctly interpreted, it is essential to make a clear distinction between Muslims, Islam and political Islamism.
Researchers also report strong tensions observed during “Values of the Republic and secularism” training. Have you ever been informed of such lifts?
These training courses, set up for civil servants, professionals and voluntary associations, represent an enormous commitment by the State and are aimed precisely at countering these readings which attempt to pervert the principle of secularism. A few weeks ago, we already identified weaknesses in the civic and civic training of volunteers in civic service, convincing us, my colleague Sonia Backès (Editor’s note: Secretary of State responsible for citizenship) and myself, to seize the general inspectorates. A certain number of recommendations will soon be communicated to me, which will enable us to implement measures intended to provide a better framework for all of these training courses and to ensure that they comply with the legal framework.
Some respondents insist on the importance of preserving the autonomy of popular education “to protect against readings imposed on secularism by the State”. Can they escape the current legislation?
In any case, this is what this text implies and it seems very serious to me. This fight against those who try to evade the law tolerates no complacency and no cowardice. Which does not mean that it is a question of cutting back on the freedom of the pedagogical actions of popular education. Once again, secularism and popular education have the same objectives: openness, respect for others and emancipation. As far as I am concerned, I have complete confidence in the players in the field with whom we meet on a daily basis. A large majority of them are in phase with the republican values that we defend, unlike certain structures cited extensively in this report.
At the same time, Minister Pap Ndiaye modified the roadmap of the Council of Elders of Secularism. This arouses strong reactions in the camp of those who defend republican universalism. Are you also worried about the future of this body?
I myself am a staunch defender of republican universalism, which is moreover the very foundation of my political commitment. I was alongside Jean-Michel Blanquer when he created the Council of Elders of Secularism in 2018. The current Minister of National Education has chosen to make new appointments and to widen his scope to the fight against racism, anti-Semitism and all forms of discrimination. I have no doubt that its president, Dominique Schnapper, will continue to carry out the work of the board. I recently contacted this body with Minister Pap Ndiaye on issues of secularism that arise in the context of universal national service and its members have just submitted a high quality report to us. Like them, I remain an activist for secularism, a value at the heart of our Republic.
* Act in the name of secularism. Dilemmas among popular education professionals (Île-de-France, 2015-2021), INJEP