Guillaume, Pierre (Ed.). La Vieille Taupe: Organe de Critique et d’Orientation Postmessianique no.1. Paris: La Vieille Taupe, Spring 1985. 134p.; 22 x 14 cm; ill.; white and red cover with text in black.

Debord’s recuperation by the extreme right wing is a fascinating topic, but has generated limited scholarship. We are only aware of a single piece, “Recuperation a tous les etages: Guy Debord et l’extrême-droite” in Archives et Documents Situationnistes 1, Paris, Denoël, n°1, automne 2001

Here we deal with an article published in La Vieille Taupe, a negationist (i.e., historical revisionist) publication which was born from a split from La Banquise, a pro-situ periodical whose editorial board did not share Pierre Guillaume’s views on the Holocaust. This first issue is of great interest because it features a 50-page, highly unusual article on Debord’s alleged support of – or, at the very least, lack of criticism towards –  historical revisionism (pp. 63-113).

Not Bored! offers a great summary of this piece: “[Pierre Guillaume] provides information on Debord’s resignation from SB [Socialisme & Barbarie, an ultra-left group] not available from other sources. However, his gloss on the information is highly particular, conditioned by his analysis of his own experience. It should be noted that any use Guillaume’s text is complicated by his revisionism (denial of the Holocaust). He turns his relationship to Debord to its service: he appropriates the “public enemy number one” persona and uses it to legitimate his politics, and spends much of the latter part of the article intimating that at least some of the old Situationists approve of this appropriation, as if to say that such approval makes Guillaume a legitimate heir to Debord”. A partial translation can be found at

Laid in is a 4-page “Bulletin des Amis de la Vieille Taupe”, signed by Pierre Guillaume

Uncommon in the trade, with only 3 OCLC copies (BNF, Nanterre, Stanford)

[Should it not be sufficiently clear from previous blog entries, please note that my posts are of strict bibliographical / informative nature. In this particular case, it goes without saying that I do not in any way condone Pierre Guillaume’s historical views] photo 5

photo 4

photo 3photo 2

photo 1