Following its 2020\u20132025 action programme to combat racism, the EU has decided to launch a new programme for the period 2026\u20132029.<\/p>\n
The dialogue partners under Article 17 of the TFEU were invited on 9 February 2026 to a meeting with the new programme coordinator, Ms Micaela Moua, to express their views on this new programme.<\/p>\n
Whilst the AEPL unreservedly supports the fight against racism, it is not convinced by the EU\u2019s strategy, which we feel sometimes muddies the debate and, in our view, is overly influenced by the influence of theories such as intersectionality and, as a result, moves away from the universalist vision that we uphold.<\/p>\n
We have therefore reiterated the four principles we uphold:<\/p>\n
1<\/strong>. Shared humanity: rejecting fragmentation<\/strong><\/p>\n At the heart of our commitment lies the conviction that there is only one humanity, regardless of differences in skin colour, nationality, culture, religion, gender or sexual orientation. The concept of \u00abrace\u00bb, which has no scientific basis, should not shape public policy. We regret that the European action plan places such a central focus on this vague notion, which risks fuelling artificial divisions and providing inappropriate responses to the real challenges of equality.<\/p>\n 2. Shared sociality: promoting mutual enrichment<\/strong><\/p>\n Human beings are fundamentally social: the richness of our societies lies in the diversity and quality of our relationships. To ensure harmonious relations, we must seek a consensus based on recognition not only of our differences, but also of our similarities. We warn against the rise of the essentialisation of identities, which, far from promoting social harmony, gives rise to \u00abmurderous identities\u00bb (Amin Maalouf) and threatens social cohesion.<\/p>\n Certain excesses, such as the condemnation of \u00abcultural appropriation\u00bb, run counter to mutual enrichment: preventing artists from other cultures from appropriating universal works would be absurd and impoverishing. Nor can collective memory be erased at the whim of sensibilities: tearing down statues or rewriting history does not resolve discrimination, but risks fuelling resentment and misunderstanding. An honest and nuanced approach to remembrance is essential.<\/p>\n 3. Individuation: championing equality through diversity<\/strong><\/p>\n Policy must enable everyone to assert their individuality and develop their potential, without harming others. However, the European action plan places undue emphasis on intersectionality, inspired by Judith Butler and \u00abFrench Theory\u00bb. Whilst it cannot be denied that some people face multiple forms of discrimination, the proliferation of particularist demands risks fragmenting society and transforming the \u00abright to difference\u00bb into \u00abdifferences in rights\u00bb, to the detriment of equality and social cohesion.<\/p>\n Intersectionality, far from bringing people together, tends to pit minorities against one another and to multiply the grounds for outrage, sometimes over trivial matters. This approach leads to an inflation of identity-based demands, which ultimately undermines social cohesion and the effectiveness of the fight against genuine discrimination.<\/p>\n 4. Controlled opposition: ensuring democratic debate<\/strong><\/p>\n Conflict and differences of opinion are inherent in any vibrant society. But they must be expressed whilst respecting the common framework and the principles of open debate. We condemn the excesses of \u00abcancel culture\u00bb and the temptation to censor any opinion that offends a group, however small that group may be. There is no such thing as the right not to be offended: the response to criticism is reasoned argument, not censorship.<\/p>\n Equating criticism of a religion with racism \u2013 particularly through the use of the term \u00abIslamophobia\u00bb \u2013 is a dangerous confusion: freedom of conscience and expression entails the right to criticise all beliefs. Religious freedom, as set out in Article 9 of the ECHR, must be reconciled with the public interest and cannot be absolute.<\/p>\n The full text of our position statement is available here:<\/p>\n