Is Regard Libre «neoliberal»? Reply to Julia Steinberger

Supposedly ultra-liberal, this magazine is also hostile to «queer rights», at least according to the latest article by this Lausanne University professor and star of environmental activism. An opportunity to remind ourselves of our values.

You have to pinch yourself to believe it. In a recent publication, Julia Steinberger, professeure à l’Institut de géographie et durabilité de l’Université de Lausanne et auteure principale du groupe n°3 des fameux rapports du Groupe d’experts intergouvernemental sur l’évolution du climat (GIEC), s’attèle à montrer que la lutte contre le changement climatique passera par plus de démocratie… et présente Le Regard Libre as its enemy. According to the ecological economics researcher and political activist, our media is part of the «neo-liberal think-tank» movement, which puts the market above everything else, especially the state and democracy, but also ecology and human rights. Take a look:

«[Ces groupes de réflexion] incluent […] des discussions sur le féminisme, les droits des femmes et des personnes queer, et la migration. Il est important de noter que les groupes de réflexion néolibéraux s’opposent souvent sur ces questions, certains étant plus conservateurs, d’autres plus libéraux. Le fil conducteur, s’il y en a un, sera de s’opposer à l’intervention de l’Etat mandaté démocratiquement. Par exemple, dans l’image ci-dessus, nous voyons le magazine néolibéral suisse « Regard Libre » plaider pour les droits des femmes (à gauche) et contre les droits des personnes queer (à droite). La cohérence n’est pas si difficile à trouver: les droits des femmes ne sont valables que parce qu’ils sont censés découler du capitalisme industriel, c’est-à-dire de l’économie dominée par les producteurs. Les droits des personnes queers sont combattus parce qu’ils demandent une protection collective, démocratiquement mandatée, par le biais de la reconnaissance de l’Etat.»

An absurd summary of our work

In the face of this heap of approximations, the first response is obvious: Julia Steinberger doesn't seem to know the difference between an interview and an editorial. In the interview quoted, one of our editors talks at length with Véra Nikolski about her book arguing that women's emancipation owes more to industrial capitalism than we think. This high-ranking civil servant has some solid arguments; our editor asks her several critical questions. And that's where we come to the funniest part: Véra Nikolski has a left-wing sensibility, and in fact adopts a Marxist reading grid in her book - hailed by a certain Jean-Marc Jancovici.

From its inception in 2014, Le Regard Libre has featured socialist personalities on several occasions, including Valais politician Stéphane Rossini and former French minister Vincent Peillon. In our hundredth issue, published in October, we dedicated ten pages to Pierre-Yves Maillard, member of the Council of States of the Canton of Vaud and President of the Swiss Union of Trade Unions, who is not exactly a «neoliberal». And our editor who interviewed him is not a reader of Hayek, but rather of Michéa.

As for the’editorial by yours truly, I'm reacting to the call by Swiss artist Nemo, winner of the Eurovision Song Contest, to introduce a «third gender» in the civil registry. I'm reacting to Eurovision winner Swiss artist Nemo's call for the introduction of a «third gender» in the civil registry. How can we define this third gender when, according to the social sciences that have theorized the «non-binary» gender in which Nemo recognizes himself, there is a whole range of other genders: «gender fluid», «two-spirited», «xenogenous», etc.? To speak of «the» third gender would not only fail to meet the demands for recognition of the individuals concerned, it would also create new ones. I also note the confusion between «third sex» and «third gender». Sex is binary. At present, biology is simply the criterion for civil status. Why replace it with feelings? An administrative paper will never be able to transcribe all the intimate richness of an individual.

Seriously, how can we detect any neoliberal agenda in this analysis? How does all this play into the hands of the economy or a cabal against democracy? Companies have a vested interest in following new trends and offering products adapted to each new «reality», even if it means adding another layer. They probably don't like my editorial. On the other hand, my text is underpinned by a liberal philosophy, as is a large part of my reasoning, and I fully accept this: what matters to me is the primacy of the individual, over any bureaucratic apparatus in this case. And I'm all for equal rights. It's healthy in a democracy for there to be debate about what is and isn't a right.

A crass insinuation

Another element that needs to be rectified is the link between Le Regard Libre with the Atlas network, taken as an example by Julia Steinberger at the start of her diatribe against «neoliberal think tanks». Le Regard Libre is in no way linked to the Atlas network. A few months ago, we translated a forum published in Schweizer Monat, signed by Senegalese author and businesswoman Magatte Wade, who heads the Atlas network's Center for African Prosperity. But we've never had any contact with this organization. However, Julia Steinberger implies otherwise, which borders on defamation and is a form of disinformation and conspiracy.

Ayant déjà dépassé les 10’000 vues sur le réseau social LinkedIn et connu de multiples approbations par des pairs, cet article intitulé «What we are up against» («Ce à quoi nous sommes confrontés») est celui dont Julia Steinberger dit se sentir le plus fière. Que Le Regard Libre being the only press title quoted must ultimately be seen as an honor: the fact that we're bothering people in bad faith proves that we're actually doing a pretty good job. We'll keep up the good work!

Write to the author: [email protected]

You've just read an open-access editorial. Debates, analyses, cultural news: subscribe to support us and get access to all our content!