1034 american ethnologist Integral Europe: Fast-Capitalism, Multicultu- ral ism, Neofascism. Douglas R. Holmes. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000. xiii + 253 pp., notes, bibliography, index. DOMINIC BOYER Cornell University I actually had a copy of Integral Europe in my hand on April 21, 2002, when I heard the first reportthatthe radical nationalist Jean-Marie Le Pen had stunned France and Europe by beating Lionel Jospin in the first round of the French presidential election. In a strange way, this jux- taposition was providential—Douglas Holmes's brilliantly original anthropology of extremist nationalist politics in Europe (which Holmes codifies as "integralism" [p. ix]) gave immediate context and significance to what was otherwise simply disorienting, anxiety-inducing news. Two weeks later, the book, which had become a constant companion, was propped up against my computer monitor when I read the news of Jacques Chirac's landslide second round vic- tory over Le Pen, with 82 percent of the popular vote as opposed to LePen's 18 percent. Still, somehow, amidst the self-congratulatory jubi- lation and Prime Minister Tony Blair's verdict that Chirac's triumph represented "a victory for democracy and a defeat for extremism" (http://news. bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/ newsidJ 969000/1969895.stm), all still did not seem quite right in Europe. As Le Pen himself was quick to point out, he gained votes in the second round. Even without this vivid reminder that ex- tremist politics can no longer be ignored in any part of Europe, Integral Europe would be one of the most important and unsettling texts in Europeanist anthropology to be published in some time. Holmes makes interviews with radical nationalist politicians such as Le Pen and Derek Beackon the core material of his ethnography and subjects them to careful and thorough analysis. Yet, from the first chapter, Holmes situates the voices of integralism his- torically and sociologically in terms of three other processes: the intellectual legacy of the Counter-Enlightenment, the postwar political and institutional integration of Europe, and the more recent intensification of the phenome- nology of global fast capitalism in the space of Europe. Holmes discerns a common "integralism" in his interlocutors' political ideologies in the sense that they all seek "to circumvent the alienating force of modernity by means of culturally based solidarities" (p. 4). His argument, which unfolds throughout the book, is that integral- ism represents a discursive and ideological re- action to processes of European integration and marketization; but, importantly, Holmes argues simultaneously that contemporary inte- gralism is intellectually inseparable from plu- ralistic ideologies of Europe as a community of nation-states that first emerged in the Counter- Enlightenment. "Pluralism," Holmes explains, citing Isaiah Berlin, definesa belief "not merely in the multiplicity, but in the incommen- surability, of the values of different cultures and societies" (p. 7). In one of the most effec- tive and impressive moves in the book, Holmes traces the common link of moderate integra- tionist discourse and radical integralist dis- course: their recourse to a pluralistic ideology of the fundamental incommensurability of cul- tures and societies. Thus, Holmes shows how the socialist modernism and social Catholi- cism that inspired the likes of Jean Monnetto theorize a federated Europe is based upon the same pluralistic assumptions of Le Pen and Beackon, no matter how more supposedly civ- ilized and bureaucratically rational the mod- ernist technocrats' languages and planning ex- ercises may seem. Although the intricacies of fast capitalism are not systematically pursued in the book, Holmes provocatively argues that integralism has emerged within and against global capital- ism's ideological corona of neoliberalism. Neoliberalism's global tendency to delegiti- mate social welfarism has reduced nominally left- and right-wing politicians to weirdly simi- lar social programs, as in the centrism of Tony Blair's and Bill Clinton's antiwelfarist, proen- trepreneurial policy agendas. This political shift has, to follow Holmes's model, opened up opportunities for radicalizing politics in spaces where disaffected moderates are increasingly polarized in their search for legitimate alterna- tives to neoliberalism. This radicalization of welfarism combines with the recognition that politicians such as Le Pen have a "willingness to say things that other politicians dare not say" (p. 72). Their intensely nationalistic and xeno- phobic rhetorics that consolidate positive nar- ratives of local social belonging with the assis- tance of negative fantasies of "the foreign" and "the global" (pp. 69-70) may lie at the root of growing popular support for integralist politics.