The Federalist Formation of Albert Camus*

Agnès Spiquel
Chairwoman of the Society of Camusian Studies, Paris; Professor Emeritus of French literature at the University of Valenciennes, France

The stages of Albert Camus’ “federalist formation” begin with his engagements in Algeria in the 1930s; his views in common with Ferhat Abbas or his proximity to Messali Hadj; the decisive influence of a man like Robert-Édouard Charlier; his encounters and his friendship with Chiaromonte or Silone. Camus does not learn federalism from books; he discovers it through men -especially at that essential crossroads of the war which, in the forced mixing of intellectuals, allowed meetings where the convergences strengthened one’s convictions: the federalist thought reinforces Camus’ prejudices against nationalisms, and makes clearer his desire of Europe. It is fascinating to see him gradually learning about Europe and constructing a political thought that will support his articles in Combat and his texts and interventions when confronting the rise of the cold war; and will also support his involvement in the international liaison groups.

His federalist illumination also sheds a different light on “The Rebel” [“L’homme révolté”]; this was to be expected since several works of the recent decades have emphasized Camus’s deep convergences with the French libertarians’ thought, and the abundance of his publications in the organs of that current. This same light is equally convincing for a re-reading of “Algerian Chronicles”: on its political side, “Misery of Kabylia” proposes a federal evolution of the province, starting from its traditional communal organization; and one understands better what is meant by his reference, often mocked, to Lauriol’s proposals in “Algeria 1958”. Is also taking shape, for Camus as for the Italian federalists with whom he is in contact and who are also trying to think of a way out for Algeria, a federation scheme, both internal and external, for Algeria and for France: a new Algeria, multi-ethnic and multi-religious, could be built as a federation, in turn federated to France and the European federation, then to a Euro-African federation, before arriving at the world federation.

People will smile and cry out to utopia as, in the 1950s, they cried out to blindness at the brave attempts of those Liberals who, with Camus, tried to advocate an Algeria liberated from colonization, but plural and maintaining a link with France in mutual respect and in “the union of differences”. Their third way, which they tried to bridge between the increasingly extreme solutions put forward by nationalists and colonialists, was not that of a middle ground comfortable for one’s conscience – but a resolute choice for freedom and justice. Their historical failure does not invalidate their political convictions.

Camus saw nationalism as the breeding ground for totalitarianisms of all kinds; the world today confirms it to the point. His intellectual evolution shows how a political thought is gradually elaborated through the often rough contact with experience – the latter being constantly passed through the crucible of a burning exigency, indissolubly political and ethical.

Translated by Lionello Casalegno

* Excerpt from the foreword in Alessandro Bresolin’s book Albert Camus: l’union des différences, Lyon, Presse Fédéraliste, 2017, pp. 14-16.