German newspaper the SPIEGEL continued its pro-Obama propaganda campaign on Monday by publishing an interview with Frenchman Bernard Henry Levy.

The subject of the interview was “why Europeans love Obama”: a sure sign that the interview was not meant as an in-depth and critical look at the Democratic candidate for president but, rather, a propaganda piece meant to boost him and his image in Europe.

Despite the clearly attempt to make the case for Obama in yet another piece, Levy actually had some interesting things to say. He started off by talking about the groups who say they are against slavery, oppression of women, and for tolerance, but who, in fact, are not.

“The barbarism 30 years ago when I wrote ‘Barbarism With a Human Face’ was Marxism, which pretended to be a fight in favor of justice, social equality, freedom, eradication of slavery, and which was exactly the contrary. And you have today a new barbarism in the case of these women and men who pretend to fight in favor of tolerance, in favor of anti-imperialism, in favor of anti-colonialism, and actually plead for slavery of the women, massive violation of human rights. Or when they don’t plead for that, they tolerate them, refuse to denounce them,” Levy said. 

He continued to criticize the anti-globalization crowd in the United States and Europe by saying: “Those, for example, who pretend to be anti-mondialist … I don’t know if you have this in America? Anti-mondialists fight against globalization. Anti-globalization … They are the dark side of the left of today.”

The interviewer – the interview was originally conducted by Salon, the left-wing magazine – then tried to convince Levy that the left has fought many good battles in the United States, and increased tolerance significantly. Levy responded: “These battles, of course, you fought. I fought … And it is won. It is achieved. Barack Obama being a candidate for the presidency and maybe — I hope — elected means that the fight is won, more or less. Frankly a country where racism is sued in front of lawyers, a country where the women won the power of preventing discrimination and so on, this is great. This is a huge cultural revolution, which America led.”

“But,” he went on to say, “in the name of tolerance there can be also some crimes — not committed but veiled … For example, those who tell us that we have to be tolerant of the radical Islamist movements. Those who tell us that being tolerant means trying to understand their reasons and their justifications. Those who tell us that, about women, to veil the face of a woman is just a customary habit, which we Westerners are not allowed to judge according to the standard of human rights. This is a very bad thing.”

Levy is a ‘lefty,’ and calls himself as such, but he did not pull any punches. In fact, Levy could very well be one of the left’s fiercest critics: “There is a duty of unfaithfulness also to the family in question — to the left when the left is embodied by Noam Chomsky, or when it is embodied by Naomi Klein,” he said.

He then proceeded to explain what he thought of the left, what his definition of ‘the left’ was: “The real dream of equality, which fed the battle, for example, for the civil rights, Martin Luther King and so on, and the battle for individual freedom. Those who ask to choose between the two — if you have freedom you do not have equality, if you have equality, you do not have freedom — for me, they are not leftist. This is a good definition of the left.”

Agree or disagree with Levy, one has to acknowledge that he’s always intellectually honest and principled; a man who takes on the left and the right, regardless of who those involved are.

He then explained that, to him, the battle should not be over remaking mankind but, rather, changing the world for the benefit of the ‘have-nots,’ the oppressed. The Salon interviewer then interfered saying: “I think that if Obama is elected, it will be a revolution in the United States.” To which Levy responded: “In a way, you can understand it like this. I am in favor of that myself. I hope, if I could pray I would pray, for Obama being elected.”

It is absolutely fascinating to see the ‘journalist’ try to get Levy say things he does not want to say, and that the journalist eventually makes his own opinion very clear – since Levy refuses to say it, the interviewer does it himself.

Levy was then asked why Europeans love Obama so much, in yet another attempt to get Levy to say something very nice about Obama. Something they could use for propaganda purposes.

Levy’s answer disappointed the Salon crowd: “I don’t know. I can’t tell you why. I don’t love him, by the way. I wish him to be elected. It’s not a question of love or hate … This is not the best way to make politics.”

He then proceeded to explain why he believes Obama should be elected, and made a nice case from the leftist European perspective. “Why Obama should be chosen, in my opinion: No. 1, because it would mean really the end — and the complete victory of the battle begun in the ’60s. No. 2, because it will mean the end of a new American evil, which is the dividing, the Balkanization of American society. This is another counter-effect of a great idea, which was tolerance.” And, No.3: “you have another ideal in the America of today, which I call the competition of victims. Competition of memories. If you are in favor of the Jews, you cannot be in favor of the blacks. If you remember the suffering of slavery, you cannot remember too much the suffering of the Holocaust, and so on and so on. The human heart has not space enough for all the sufferings. This is what some people say. Obama says the contrary. It will mean the end of this stupid topic, which is competition of victimhood.”

In short, Salon tried, but did not get Levy to herald Obama as the new Messiah, which resulted in a far more interesting interview than it would have been if Levy would have played along.