Seminar Paper

Analysis of J’Accuse- A Letter to Mr Félix Faure, President of the Republic

Émile Zola

In 1898 journalist Emile Zola, risked his livelihood, career and possibly his life when he wrote the influential and subversive ‘J’Accuse’. He was writing in protest against the injustices of what is known as the ‘Dreyfus Affair’. His article permeated the mainstream media and was widely known across the continent, with most people having an opinion in alignment with their political persuasion. This demonstrates how the printed media disseminated extensively, and the effect and persuasiveness it could have.  Zola outlined all the people culpable for the miscarriage of justice to the detriment of the right-wing administration. He was stigmatised into a figure of hate by anti-sematic, right-wing supporters and the French Military. He was tried for libel and defamation of character, subsequently fined and given a prison sentence, but instead he fled to London.

            Such injustices are characteristic of the power of the intellectual, as opposed to the hegemony of the state. Zola’s pursuit was in the interest not only of justice, but of humanism. He states, ‘My nights would be haunted by the specter of innocence that suffer there, through the most dreadful of tortures, for a crime it did not commit.’ In totalitarian fashion and by means of continuing to cover their tracks, Zola was persecuted. The persecution of Zola for confronting the military command and Dreyfus’ inexplicable victimisation demonstrate the power of the French administration; they were able to initially, without opposition, frame and punish an innocent man without providing any evidence at the Court Marshall.

There is a tangible link between this and present day government. The same incongruous reasoning is presented in many terrorism cases; that the exhibition of any evidence would be a threat to national security. This effectively sanctions the state to withhold information, which invariably should be freely available. This can be seen in a recent quote from Barack Obama referencing the release of photographs showing the body of Osama Bin Laden, he said “given the graphic nature of these photos it would create a national security risk”2qr

            Zola openly condemns anti-Semitism, one of the most prolific antagonisms to shape history. He denounces this discrimination when he says, ‘the hunting for the "dirty Jews", which dishonours our time.’

            The hatred for the Jewish community in right-wing France in the late nineteenth century is comparable to and a likely pre cursor to the Nazi Parties Final Solution. The French administrations were notorious for scapegoating Jews. Under the rule of Napoleon III, the French were defeated, captured and humiliated by the Prussians at the Battle of Sedan in 1871. To avoid the degradation of accepting his prestigious and illustrious army had been overwhelmed by Prussian forces, a conspiracy theory pertaining to a Jewish syndicate was used as a scapegoat. Anti-Semitism towards the top of the French military hierarchy was also rife. Zola notes that Major Picquart re-opened the case and pleaded with his superior Dreyfus’ innocence, but was unsympathetically denounced. The superior dismissed, ‘What is it to you if a Jew rots on Devil’s Island’.

            Zola was not shy in attacking the integrity of the French military command, he writes, ‘Here for a year General Billot, General De Boisdeffre and General Gonse have known that Dreyfus is innocent, and they kept this appalling thing to themselves! And these people sleep at night’. This attack on the truthfulness of the administration has modern day implications. It can be associated with the undisclosed information about civilian casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan, revealed to the general public through Wikileaks. This is also demonstrated in the concealment of the mistreatment of prisoners of war, for example at Guantanamo Bay.

The genuine perpetrator, supplying French intelligence to the Germans, was Commander Esterhazy. The military were keen to keep Dreyfus on Devil’s Island; Intelligence Services even coached Esterhazy on how to lie in court, as well as co-conspiring with handwriting experts to secure Dreyfus’ conviction. The underlying connotations are that people in power potentially have control and authority beyond public awareness.

            The cover ups and co-conspiring in the ‘Dreyfus Affair’ has left an indelible influence upon Western society. Conspiracy theories are endemic; most discerning people will perceive stories as incredulous until concrete evidence is provided. This is epitomised in the recent shooting of Osama Bin Laden, the US Government’s reluctance to release photographic evidence has left uncertainty in many people’s mind.  

            Despite evident miscarriages of justice, the ‘Dreyfus Affair’ did not serve to unify people. It reinforced the divisiveness between the right and left wing parties and their supporters. Zola was exceptionally courageous writing; ‘I am not unaware of subjecting myself to articles 30 and 31 of the press law of July 29, 1881, which punishes the offense of slander. And it is voluntarily that I expose myself’. This shows the power of the individual and the impact far-left socialism can have upon a right-wing administration as well as the effect the media can have upon the spread of information and opinion.  

Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Rousseau’s romantic ideologies were largely based around the divinity and purity of nature. He was fascinated by all things natural, from the sound of waves, the grandeur of mountains and the beauty of animals. He believed nature alleviated anxieties and engendered a ‘sense of being’.  The innocence and wholesomeness he bestowed upon nature, he extended to man.  This likening was based upon the notion of the natural or primitive man; a man uncorrupted by civilisation and unalienated by fashion or social standards. This also inspired Rousseau’s controversial condemnation of scientific progression, intimating that it detracts from our human connection with the natural world. 

He expanded upon the thoughts of preceding philosophers when he discussed the ‘state of nature’; a hypothetical idea of humanity before any governance, where man was primitive and one with nature. Rousseau acknowledges this may never have existed, also that it would be implausible to regress to such a state. He asserts that in the ‘state of nature’, men were virtuous and untainted. He wrote ‘man is born free, but forever in chains’. Here he insinuates our passion, emotions and self-esteem are suppressed and extinguished by corporation and civilisation. 

This regressive ideology was criticized by some academics, such as Voltaire, an Enlightenment scholar, he wrote of Rousseau, ‘No one has used such intelligence to persuade us to be stupid. After reading your book one feels as if one should walk on all fours’.

Alongside John Locke and Thomas Hobbes, Rousseau was a figurehead of contractarianism, outlining a theoretical model, detailing the extent of governmental powers, as well as the rights of civilians and their relationship with the administration. Rousseau’s ambitious utopia, detailed in the ‘General Will’, was based around the ideal of direct democracy. It is a unanimously agreed set of rules amongst the people. The ‘General Will’ is democratic in that if civilians unanimously disagree it cannot be enforced by a monarch or superior power; in turn Rousseau believed this was representative of freedom.

Parallels can be drawn with John Locke’s Social Contract. He, like Rousseau, asserted that the hegemony should lie with the people. He wrote the purpose of the government should be to settle small disagreements and land disputes. Locke’s liberality only extended to the private sphere, unlike Rousseau who didn’t differentiate between the two. Locke’s principals of ‘life, liberty and property’ are largely analogous with Rousseau’s ideologies, but Rousseau opposed the concept of ownership.

Rousseau’s influence on the French Revolution is incalculable. The Storming of the Bastille in 1879 was the manifestation of the breaking of Rousseau’s metaphorical chains. The deplorable economic situation bought about widespread poverty. The ‘Divine Right of Kings’ was still in operation giving the monarchy omnipotence over the common man. The revolt against the oppression of the higher powers demonstrated Rousseau’s ideologies in action or as William Wordsworth put it, the idea of the ‘natural man in practice’.