French President Emmanuel Macron has warned Europe of a return to the 1930s because of the spread of a nationalist "leprosy" across the continent, in an interview published Thursday.

He also warned that Europe risked losing its sovereignty if it is "pushed around by foreign powers."

"I am struck by similarities between the times we live in and those of between the two world wars," he told the newspaper Ouest-France, urging people to be aware of the threats.

"In a Europe divided by fears, the return of nationalism, the consequences of economic crisis, one sees almost systematically everything that marked Europe between the end of World War I and the 1929 (economic) crisis," the paper quoted him as saying.

"You must bear that in mind, be clear-headed and know how to fight back," he added.

Macron, who is about to start a week-long visit to north and eastern France to mark the centenary of the end of World War I, has recently criticised fellow European Union members for giving up on EU principles.

'Europe faces a risk'

He has notably singled out Hungary and Poland whose nationalist governments have clashed with Brussels, as well as Italy which has a populist government including the far-right League party figures.

Looking ahead to his tour of World War I battlefields, the president said he was looking for the lessons of history, while seeking to promote "a more sovereign and multilateral" Europe.

"Europe faces a risk -- that of being broken up by nationalist leprosy and of being pushed around by foreign powers. And thereby losing its sovereignty," he said.&nbsp;

"That is to say having its security depend on US choices, having China play an ever greater role when it comes to essential infrastructures, and Russia sometimes tempted to try its hand at manipulation, and have financial interests and markets sometimes play greater roles than that of states."

Macron, who has been losing ground in the opinion polls, is attempting to position himself as the champion of centrist politics and multilateralism in the run-up to European parliamentary elections in seven months' time, saying he expects the duel to be one between "progressives" and "nationalists".

According to the latest Vivavoice poll, released on Tuesday, Macron has lost 10 points since August with his approval rating now at 26 per cent.

The poll, carried out between October 19 and 22, with a margin of error of between 1.4 and 3.1 per cent, also suggested that nearly two out of three people have a "poor opinion" of him.

French President Emmanuel Macron has warned Europe of a return to the 1930s because of the spread of a nationalist "leprosy" across the continent, in an interview published Thursday.

French President Emmanuel Macron has warned Europe of a return to the 1930s because of the spread of a nationalist "leprosy" across the continent, in an interview published Thursday. He also warned that Europe risked losing its sovereignty if it is "pushed around by foreign powers." "I am struck by similarities between the times we live in and those of between the two world wars," he told the newspaper Ouest-France, urging people to be aware of the threats. "In a Europe divided by fears, the return of nationalism, the consequences of economic crisis, one sees almost systematically everything that marked Europe between the end of World War I and the 1929 (economic) crisis," the paper quoted him as saying. "You must bear that in mind, be clear-headed and know how to fight back," he added. Macron, who is about to start a week-long visit to north and eastern France to mark the centenary of the end of World War I, has recently criticised fellow European Union members for giving up on EU principles. 'Europe faces a risk' He has notably singled out Hungary and Poland whose nationalist governments have clashed with Brussels, as well as Italy which has a populist government including the far-right League party figures. Looking ahead to his tour of World War I battlefields, the president said he was looking for the lessons of history, while seeking to promote "a more sovereign and multilateral" Europe. "Europe faces a risk -- that of being broken up by nationalist leprosy and of being pushed around by foreign powers. And thereby losing its sovereignty," he said. "That is to say having its security depend on US choices, having China play an ever greater role when it comes to essential infrastructures, and Russia sometimes tempted to try its hand at manipulation, and have financial interests and markets sometimes play greater roles than that of states." Macron, who has been losing ground in the opinion polls, is attempting to position himself as the champion of centrist politics and multilateralism in the run-up to European parliamentary elections in seven months' time, saying he expects the duel to be one between "progressives" and "nationalists". According to the latest Vivavoice poll, released on Tuesday, Macron has lost 10 points since August with his approval rating now at 26 per cent. The poll, carried out between October 19 and 22, with a margin of error of between 1.4 and 3.1 per cent, also suggested that nearly two out of three people have a "poor opinion" of him.

France's Macron warns Europe of a return to 1930s because of nationalist 'leprosy'

Gurmehar Kaur, who became the focal point of a nationalism debate last year, says her answer to repeated questions about how she survived the vitriol and social media trial and from where she gathered the strength to move on is her new book.

&quot;Small Acts of Freedom&quot; is the story of three generations of single women in a family who have faced the world on their own terms. It has an unusual narrative structure that crisscrosses between the past and the present, spanning 70 years from 1947 to 2017.

From her grandmother who came to India from Lahore after Partition to the whirlwind romance between her parents, from her war martyr father&#39;s state funeral to her experiences since her days of student activism, Gurmehar&#39;s debut is about the fierceness of love, the power of family and the little acts that beget big revolutions.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The book has an unusual narrative structure that crisscrosses between the past and the present, spanning 70 years from 1947 to 2017</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The book has an unusual narrative structure that crisscrosses between the past and the present, spanning 70 years from 1947 to 2017" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

Gurmehar writes about the women in her family who fought their own battles, who stood by each other and who kept going.

&quot;I grew up with these women, listening to their stories over and over again and watching them take on the world on their own terms,&quot; she says.

In February 2017, Gurmehar, a 19-year-old English Literature student at Lady Shri Ram College here, joined a peaceful campaign after violent clashes at Delhi University&#39;s Ramjas College.

As part of the campaign, her post (that she is not afraid of the ABVP and all students are with her) made her the target of an onslaught of social media vitriol, including death and rape threats and furious commentary from people ranging from politicians to cricketers, actors to media influencers.

Also back in the spotlight was her April 2016 video campaign for peace, in which she held up a placard saying about her father, a Kargil martyr, &quot;Pakistan did not kill my dad, war killed him.&quot;

Suddenly, she was at the centre of the entire nationalism debate and found herself under fire from innumerable sources online and offline.

Gurmehar says she wants no one to go through what she went through, what her family went through.

&quot;I&#39;ve been trolled, mocked and bullied. I&#39;ve had people call me names. And I&#39;ve been frightened for my life. But I emerged from all of that more determined than ever before to never be silenced,&quot; she writes in the book, published by Penguin.

She says she has been asked different variations of one question over and over again: how did she survive that? What kept her going? What did she hold on to?

&quot;I write this book to answer just that. My story does not start with me. The courage - or resilience or whatever you want to call it - that I was able to display did not come to me overnight. My strength is inherited. I don&#39;t believe that my existence is all about a three-day-long controversy,&quot; Gurmehar says.

'Small Acts of Freedom' is the story of three generations of single women in a family who have faced the world on their own terms

Gurmehar Kaur, who became the focal point of a nationalism debate last year, says her answer to repeated questions about how she survived the vitriol and social media trial and from where she gathered the strength to move on is her new book. "Small Acts of Freedom" is the story of three generations of single women in a family who have faced the world on their own terms. It has an unusual narrative structure that crisscrosses between the past and the present, spanning 70 years from 1947 to 2017. From her grandmother who came to India from Lahore after Partition to the whirlwind romance between her parents, from her war martyr father's state funeral to her experiences since her days of student activism, Gurmehar's debut is about the fierceness of love, the power of family and the little acts that beget big revolutions. The book has an unusual narrative structure that crisscrosses between the past and the present, spanning 70 years from 1947 to 2017 × Gurmehar writes about the women in her family who fought their own battles, who stood by each other and who kept going. "I grew up with these women, listening to their stories over and over again and watching them take on the world on their own terms," she says. In February 2017, Gurmehar, a 19-year-old English Literature student at Lady Shri Ram College here, joined a peaceful campaign after violent clashes at Delhi University's Ramjas College. As part of the campaign, her post (that she is not afraid of the ABVP and all students are with her) made her the target of an onslaught of social media vitriol, including death and rape threats and furious commentary from people ranging from politicians to cricketers, actors to media influencers. Also back in the spotlight was her April 2016 video campaign for peace, in which she held up a placard saying about her father, a Kargil martyr, "Pakistan did not kill my dad, war killed him." Suddenly, she was at the centre of the entire nationalism debate and found herself under fire from innumerable sources online and offline. Gurmehar says she wants no one to go through what she went through, what her family went through. "I've been trolled, mocked and bullied. I've had people call me names. And I've been frightened for my life. But I emerged from all of that more determined than ever before to never be silenced," she writes in the book, published by Penguin. She says she has been asked different variations of one question over and over again: how did she survive that? What kept her going? What did she hold on to? "I write this book to answer just that. My story does not start with me. The courage - or resilience or whatever you want to call it - that I was able to display did not come to me overnight. My strength is inherited. I don't believe that my existence is all about a three-day-long controversy," Gurmehar says.

Gurmehar Kaur writes book, says it answers question she was asked over and over again

Union minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi has said that the nationalism debate around Vande Mataram and Jan Gan Man are irrelevant.

Speaking exclusively to WION&rsquo;s Kartikeya Sharma, Naqvi, Minister for&nbsp;Minority Affairs,&nbsp;also delves into the love jihad issue.

Here&rsquo;s the full transcript of the interview:

Q: What has the government done for various minorities in the country?

A: Our focus is on development with dignity and we are trying to focus on segments which remained untouched during UPA&rsquo;s tenure. We don&rsquo;t believe in appeasement and in the past minorities were exploited. If the total amount of money set aside for the minorities would have been spent properly then none of them would have been living below the poverty line. The funds got pilfered and brokers siphoned them off.

Q: Social vigilantism is an issue in India. Despite Prime Minister Modi&rsquo;s warning, it has not come down. Why?

A: I agree with you. But our focus is only on development. Gau Raksha activism is being done by people with nefarious design. But I assure you that no destructive agenda can dominate the developmental agenda of our government. These are isolated cases. These isolated cases too should not happen and that is why PM in no uncertain words have criticized them in past. These are criminal activities which are being described by some as communal activities. It is not correct.

Q: There is a raging debate on nationalism. Don&rsquo;t you think this debate ultimately ends up hurting the minorities as nationalism becomes a tool for political hectoring?

A: There are some people who think they are the custodians of nationalism and it is wrong. They think that they need to give certificate on nationalism. On the other hand, we have champions of secularism who believe that unless and until they don&rsquo;t certify people as secular the other cannot exist as one. These two extremes are not in the interest of the country. &nbsp;Then there are those who accuse people for being anti-national if they don&rsquo;t get up for Jan Gan Man or Vande Matram. No. If you sing or not sing Vande Matram it doesn&rsquo;t make you an anti-national. But if you insult these symbols purposely then it becomes a different case all together. These are irrelevant debates.

Q: How did you built consensus on Haj reforms?

A: One lakh seventy thousand people from India go to Haj every year. Supreme Court has already directed the government to frame new Haj policy for 2018. We constituted a committee and consultations took place which ended up in recommendations. We ended the ban of women not been able to perform alone. Now we have allowed group of four women to go for Haj and in future we will also allow single women to go and perform Haj. Time has changed. As far as Haj subsidy is concerned, it will be abolished by 2018. Haj subsidy never benefited the pilgrims. It went to the Air India.

Q: Your government has taken strong positions on certain contentious issues like triple talaq. Does it pave the way for a debate on Uniform Civil Code of Law?

A: We are committed towards Uniform Civil Code of Law. It is incumbent on every government to build consensus for common civil code. It requires consultation and consensus. There has to be broad agreement on this matter.&nbsp;

Q: Most of the times reforms have taken place because of enlightened decisions and not consensus?

A: Understand that we are living in a democracy. If there is no democracy then reforms can take place any time. We will have to build consensus and it will not be forced. Law Commission is already seized of the matter.

Q: Since when inter-faith marriages have become cause of national security? You also have an inter-faith marriage? How can every case of inter-faith marriage be love jihad?

A: I agree with you. Yes, I have an inter-faith marriage. I don&rsquo;t know where this word of love or hate jihad has come from. All inter-faith marriages are not love jihad. But also understand that no country can afford forceful conversion. I think if there is a conspiracy then it should be investigated and exposed.&nbsp;

Q: Lot of cases of radicalisation has come to light. Young men and women are joining ISIS. What is your department doing to de-radicalise such people?

A: These are isolated incidents. al-Qaeda could not succeed in India and in the same way ISIS has not been able to succeed. Yes, there are cases but in a larger perspective it isn&rsquo;t like Europe. Indian Muslims are strongly nationalistic. Our security agencies are doing the job but essentially Indians stay away from radical thoughts. If that was the case then Hindu Maha Sabha or Muslim League would have been running the government.

Q: Talks on Ayodhya are on. Should there be consensus on Ayodhya?

A: I think consensus is an ideal solution. We welcome the steps taken by the civil society and we welcome it.

Q: Response towards Dineshwar Sharma has been lukewarm. He is the interlocutor for Kashmir. Is there any hope?

A: I don&rsquo;t agree (with this). I&rsquo;m very much confident. People of Kashmir are patriotic. Time to time fanatic forces have been defeated by them. Only two districts of Jammu and Kashmir are affected. Ladakh and Jammu are not affected.

Q: How do you explain the killing of political workers? Do terrorists have sanctuaries in the Valley?

A: Yes, there are hostile forces, but killing will not benefit anyone. People don&rsquo;t appreciate these kinds of things.

Q: There is petition in the court that Hindus in some states should be given minority status...

A: Government works within the framework of the Constitution. It is not logically correct or possible. Minorities are defined in the Constitution.

Q: You were accused of politicising terror when you did the press conference on a hospital demanding an explanation from Ahmad Patel. What do you have to say about that?

A: We didn&rsquo;t politicise terrorism. It is our duty to ask questions. Certain linkages came out in public domain and Congress was asked to explain it. We did the right thing.

Q: Some people said that BJP is doing it to deflect attention from demonetisation and GST as they generated bad publicity?

A:&nbsp;The performance of the government has been good. Reform, perform and transform is the mantra of BJP. I think we have done a good job and in the long run it will have a positive impact.

Union minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi has said that the nationalism debate around Vande Mataram and Jan Gan Man are irrelevant.

Union minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi has said that the nationalism debate around Vande Mataram and Jan Gan Man are irrelevant. Speaking exclusively to WION’s Kartikeya Sharma, Naqvi, Minister for Minority Affairs, also delves into the love jihad issue. Here’s the full transcript of the interview: Q: What has the government done for various minorities in the country? A: Our focus is on development with dignity and we are trying to focus on segments which remained untouched during UPA’s tenure. We don’t believe in appeasement and in the past minorities were exploited. If the total amount of money set aside for the minorities would have been spent properly then none of them would have been living below the poverty line. The funds got pilfered and brokers siphoned them off. Q: Social vigilantism is an issue in India. Despite Prime Minister Modi’s warning, it has not come down. Why? A: I agree with you. But our focus is only on development. Gau Raksha activism is being done by people with nefarious design. But I assure you that no destructive agenda can dominate the developmental agenda of our government. These are isolated cases. These isolated cases too should not happen and that is why PM in no uncertain words have criticized them in past. These are criminal activities which are being described by some as communal activities. It is not correct. Q: There is a raging debate on nationalism. Don’t you think this debate ultimately ends up hurting the minorities as nationalism becomes a tool for political hectoring? A: There are some people who think they are the custodians of nationalism and it is wrong. They think that they need to give certificate on nationalism. On the other hand, we have champions of secularism who believe that unless and until they don’t certify people as secular the other cannot exist as one. These two extremes are not in the interest of the country. Then there are those who accuse people for being anti-national if they don’t get up for Jan Gan Man or Vande Matram. No. If you sing or not sing Vande Matram it doesn’t make you an anti-national. But if you insult these symbols purposely then it becomes a different case all together. These are irrelevant debates. Q: How did you built consensus on Haj reforms? A: One lakh seventy thousand people from India go to Haj every year. Supreme Court has already directed the government to frame new Haj policy for 2018. We constituted a committee and consultations took place which ended up in recommendations. We ended the ban of women not been able to perform alone. Now we have allowed group of four women to go for Haj and in future we will also allow single women to go and perform Haj. Time has changed. As far as Haj subsidy is concerned, it will be abolished by 2018. Haj subsidy never benefited the pilgrims. It went to the Air India. Q: Your government has taken strong positions on certain contentious issues like triple talaq. Does it pave the way for a debate on Uniform Civil Code of Law? A: We are committed towards Uniform Civil Code of Law. It is incumbent on every government to build consensus for common civil code. It requires consultation and consensus. There has to be broad agreement on this matter. Q: Most of the times reforms have taken place because of enlightened decisions and not consensus? A: Understand that we are living in a democracy. If there is no democracy then reforms can take place any time. We will have to build consensus and it will not be forced. Law Commission is already seized of the matter. Q: Since when inter-faith marriages have become cause of national security? You also have an inter-faith marriage? How can every case of inter-faith marriage be love jihad? A: I agree with you. Yes, I have an inter-faith marriage. I don’t know where this word of love or hate jihad has come from. All inter-faith marriages are not love jihad. But also understand that no country can afford forceful conversion. I think if there is a conspiracy then it should be investigated and exposed. Q: Lot of cases of radicalisation has come to light. Young men and women are joining ISIS. What is your department doing to de-radicalise such people? A: These are isolated incidents. al-Qaeda could not succeed in India and in the same way ISIS has not been able to succeed. Yes, there are cases but in a larger perspective it isn’t like Europe. Indian Muslims are strongly nationalistic. Our security agencies are doing the job but essentially Indians stay away from radical thoughts. If that was the case then Hindu Maha Sabha or Muslim League would have been running the government. Q: Talks on Ayodhya are on. Should there be consensus on Ayodhya? A: I think consensus is an ideal solution. We welcome the steps taken by the civil society and we welcome it. Q: Response towards Dineshwar Sharma has been lukewarm. He is the interlocutor for Kashmir. Is there any hope? A: I don’t agree (with this). I’m very much confident. People of Kashmir are patriotic. Time to time fanatic forces have been defeated by them. Only two districts of Jammu and Kashmir are affected. Ladakh and Jammu are not affected. Q: How do you explain the killing of political workers? Do terrorists have sanctuaries in the Valley? A: Yes, there are hostile forces, but killing will not benefit anyone. People don’t appreciate these kinds of things. Q: There is petition in the court that Hindus in some states should be given minority status... A: Government works within the framework of the Constitution. It is not logically correct or possible. Minorities are defined in the Constitution. Q: You were accused of politicising terror when you did the press conference on a hospital demanding an explanation from Ahmad Patel. What do you have to say about that? A: We didn’t politicise terrorism. It is our duty to ask questions. Certain linkages came out in public domain and Congress was asked to explain it. We did the right thing. Q: Some people said that BJP is doing it to deflect attention from demonetisation and GST as they generated bad publicity? A: The performance of the government has been good. Reform, perform and transform is the mantra of BJP. I think we have done a good job and in the long run it will have a positive impact.

All inter-faith marriages aren't love jihad: Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi to WION

nationalism-debate

Nationalism Debate, News on Nationalism Debate, stories on Nationalism Debate, articles on Nationalism Debate, Nationalism Debate stories at Wion, Nationalism Debate news, Nationalism Debate latest news