By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Jordan Bardella, leader of France’s National Rally party, cancelled his CPAC speech after Steve Bannon concluded his address with a fascist-style salute, a gesture met with audience cheers. Bardella cited Bannon’s allusion to Nazi ideology as the reason for his withdrawal. Bannon, while denying the gesture was a Nazi salute, performed a similar salute multiple times during his speech. The incident highlights CPAC’s shift toward a Trump-centric rally and the normalization of such gestures within certain right-wing circles.
Read the original article here
The cancellation of a prominent French far-right leader’s speech at CPAC, a major American conservative gathering, highlights the profound discomfort even within extreme right-wing circles caused by Steve Bannon’s Nazi salute. This seemingly simple act has created significant ripples, revealing a surprising level of intolerance even among those typically associated with far-right ideologies.
The incident underscores a deep-seated aversion to overt Nazism, even within a movement often accused of harboring far-right sympathies. The French far-right leader’s decision to withdraw speaks volumes; the reputational damage associated with being seen alongside someone performing a Nazi salute outweighs any perceived benefits of appearing at CPAC. This suggests a calculated strategy to maintain a degree of plausible deniability, distancing themselves from the most extreme elements within the broader right-wing spectrum.
The reaction also points to a fundamental difference in the tolerance levels for such displays. While some within the American far-right might dismiss Bannon’s actions as mere “triggering of liberals,” a significant portion of the European far-right, particularly in France, clearly views this as unacceptable. The historical context of Nazi occupation in France plays a crucial role in shaping this perspective. The memory of the trauma inflicted during World War II, including the establishment of a Nazi puppet regime in Vichy France, still resonates strongly within the national consciousness.
This historical context provides a stark contrast to the American political landscape, where the understanding and condemnation of Nazism often feels less deeply rooted in the collective memory. The relative lack of direct experience with Nazi occupation might contribute to a more muted reaction to such symbols in the US, compared to the visceral response seen in France and other European countries. The stark difference in reaction underlines the varied historical weight placed on such actions. It also suggests a significant gulf in understanding the symbolic implications of actions associated with Nazi Germany.
The episode further demonstrates the internal divisions within the global far-right. While some individuals and groups may actively embrace overtly fascist or Nazi imagery and rhetoric, others seek to distance themselves to maintain a more palatable public image. The very act of a far-right leader cancelling their appearance demonstrates this internal struggle for legitimacy and the attempts to manage public perception. This internal conflict is not merely a matter of tactical positioning; it reflects a deeper disagreement over the acceptable limits of rhetoric and symbolism within far-right movements themselves.
The incident also serves as a reminder of the dangers of normalizing extreme behavior. The excuse of “triggering the libs” is frequently employed to justify outrageous actions, thereby obscuring the underlying significance of these actions and undermining legitimate concerns. The normalization of extreme rhetoric and behavior, particularly within political discourse, creates a slippery slope that undermines democratic norms and values.
Ultimately, Bannon’s Nazi salute, and the subsequent reaction from the French far-right, reveal a complex interplay of historical memory, political strategy, and internal divisions within the far-right itself. The incident serves as a case study in the evolving dynamics of extreme right-wing movements globally, highlighting the differences in tolerance levels across borders and the internal tensions within such movements regarding the appropriate level of explicit association with historically condemned ideologies. The very act of cancellation underscores the limitations and contradictions inherent within movements that seek both to maintain a level of mainstream appeal while simultaneously embracing extreme ideologies. The French far-right leader’s actions, while driven by political expediency, inadvertently reveal deeper anxieties and fault lines within the broader far-right movement.