Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

Drawing on ethnographic research among activists, journalists, and educators in Belgium, I explore systematic suspicion as the attitude that allows progressive civil society to combine emphasis on independent critical thinking with support for legal regulation of public speech.

Paper long abstract

In 2026, Francophone Belgium stands out for its lack of an institutionalised far right. This phenomenon is often attributed to the cordon sanitaire: a legal ban on broadcasting anti-democratic or xenophobic views in the media. This prohibition enjoys popular support and is part of a political culture centred on compromise and moderation. Among Belgian progressive activists and intellectuals, this regulated vision of what is permissible to say coexists with a strong emphasis on critical thinking, as well as a systematic distrust of the state. How can this combination of trust and mistrust be explained? Drawing on ethnographic research among activists, journalists, and educators, I highlight suspicion as the central attitude. Francophone Belgian civil society is shaped by the progressive legacy of the 1990s, when a positive political agenda was replaced by the relentless deconstruction of mainstream media narratives. These narratives are seen as veils concealing elite interests. In the absence of an alternative epistemic authority, this milieu has organised itself around a posture of systemic suspicion. This posture enables heightened vigilance against the far right and neoliberalism, but it also traps the activist world in a reactive mode: any official truth (the necessity of austerity measures, the dangers of immigration, the usefulness of vaccines, the Russian threat) is rejected out of hand. Civil society is thus “civil” in both senses: it is structured by rites and beliefs that prevent the emergence of an “uncivil society,” but at the same time, it blurs the line between legitimate and less legitimate criticism.