Read on to forge his own judgment and not rely on a partisan critical press

It will not be in my comment to offer yet another abstract or even indicate, in detail, what you liked or less liked or disliked in this book. On Amazon, several well-argued and well written appreciations do enough satisfactorily to obviate a new contribution in this direction, which would appear therefore redundant. So is it here instead invite any potential reader of this book to actually read it and form their own opinion and not rely blandly to what critics have said the press in recent weeks. Indeed, given the virulence of certain items (including Birnbaum in Le Monde, Eric Aeschimann in the Nouvel Obs, or Aude Lancelin in Marianne ...), one could expect the worst with regard to this last test Finkielkraut. Read Lancelin announcing the color grading "Finkielkraut: troubled identity" Aeschimann that 2/3 of his article on the test does not refer to trial, but prefers to highlight stories or about the author, sometimes old, always dependent, and Birnbaum concludes his review by an exercise of transitivity rather pernicious ("And Alain Finkielkraut says how far his passion for [Renaud Camus] writer very officially declared his love to the president of the National Front "), one would expect to find, in this last test Finkielkraut, a far-right firebrand, if the last breviary of hatred. In this game the bad review, a palm could be awarded Aymeric Caron, which accesses the shameless trial of intent, in "It is not lying" (26/10/2013), is doing fort " read between the lines "(What does is glad he read the lines and understand!) and wanting to push Finkielkraut, facing him, confessing that" there are too many foreigners in France "(big string the philosopher evidently ignored ...).
When one takes the trouble to read the book, we find ourselves facing a content which differs considerably from that in the report the detractors. We especially, facing you, nuanced questions (albeit often anxious, and then, the worry would it hurt?), Highlighting annoying paradoxes ("Under the prism of Romanticism for others, the new social norm Diversity draws a France where the origin is citizenship on the condition of being exotic and where one identity is struck with unreality, national identity "- p 113;." So Glory to differences but cursed be those who take seriously "- p 179), constant lucidity calls (quoting Peguy:.." You always say what you see Especially you always, which is what more difficult, see what you see. "- p 186) or the exhortation to aidos (the reserve, modesty, modesty ...), he surprised fort whether the program mark the most hard right ... is a philosopher Finkielkraut limits within the meaning of the line separating two spaces, the terminal that puts a risk to another. (With a different note, Houellebecq is another). The 4th cover the also expresses very well: "A good conscience is prohibited us but there are limits to the bad conscience"; "Our heritage, which certainly does not make us superior beings deserves to be preserved, maintained and passed both Aboriginal and newcomers." Refusal of rejection, but limits the acceptability; without self-criticism penitential temptation or in the form of question: "How far is it possible, how far is it permissible to claim and put forward, to think living together, the concept of common identity? "(P. 83).
Anyway, I said I was not aiming so much here to give my opinion to strongly recommend reading "The unfortunate identity" to form their own opinion.