various thoughts (and maybe some answers)
> Sending in the Legionaires would require a change in French law.
indeed. moreover:
- France did not send any troop against his own civilians since the disasters of such strike-breaking operations 105 years ago (in a word: the soldiers adopted the workers cause)
- soldiers fighting in the streets will, for most citizen, mean "civil war"
- a few légionnaires were youngsters in now-rioting suburbs
therefore this is a only a last resort
> Pass anti-discrimination laws, and take police abuse/attacks on minorities seriously.
anti-discrimination laws will remain useless because we need some mentalities change and one cannot obtain such a change thru a law (in fact the opposite is the norm: efficient laws follows mentalities, all others are not worth the paper they are printed on)
abuse/attacks on minorities are very rare. in fact the non-minorities are most often victims of abuses/attacks. moreover attacks by minorities are much less repressed than the opposite. those is a hard facts, very easy to prove
the problem is much more complex. from my point of view it comes from a lack of motivation (or may I write 'commitment'?) from both parts
France gave and gives some resources to all immigrants. I know it fist-hand:
* I'm the grandchild of a couple of them (Russian, arrived in France in the '20, w/o any resources and most of them unable to speak French. they integrated. my mother is mainly from French descent)
* I (born in 1967) was raised and live in one of the most immigrant-rich (esp. North Africans) suburbs of Paris (a town named Nanterre). I lived in the US (for a short time, but I pretty much enjoyed it), in Morocco (15 months, I even learned some dialectal arabic) and more than 35 years in France
France did not behave perfectly (there were shanty town, exploitation and such crap). but many measures efficiently helped and help immigrants
some immigrants (or their children, who are French citizens) just want to steal and 'f..k France' (I use their own words) but most of them behave: many are well integrated in French society. but when the hostiles attack citizens and destroy public or private property without anyone reacting against it... well, they become a major nuisance. in a fair amount of towns some blocks are not really controlled by the French gov and cops can only enter in them by surprise and using massive force
bottomline:
1/ more than 30 years ago a bunch of youngsters severily broke the rules.
nothing really catastrophic: [sh]it happens often everywhere
2/ their parents did not react.
they made a brutal transition from a cultural context to another, were working hard, were avoiding the cops (remember: colonies, independance wars) therefore did not call for help...
3/ the hostile youngsters are more and more aggressive.
the next local 'security device' fails: other citizen do not react. remember: civilians can not be legally armed here, therefore anyone can confidently thinks that he will outpower the average citizen. for instance people were often attacked in very crowded suburbs trains by tiny mobs (there is now dedicated police force patrols). another 'security device' in many African classic structures, a sort of local authority (in North Africa he is called 'caid' or 'mokhadem'), is simply not here. interestingly enough some youngsters fight to become such interfaces between the central power and their block, even if they often do not represent the local majority
4/ police do not react adequately.
there is a major crisis growing between the cops and the population (for many citizen, after May 1968, "cops are repressors and never helpers"), cops are instructed to react softly because of the 'social' form of gov, moreover many judges release the culprits far too quickly (discouraging the cops)
5/ other youngsters see that the hostiles can do whatever they want.
(and yes: dope smuggling is an option), nearly all of them posing as powerful men and some gaining money. those other youngsters are working (or know that integration imply it), and most resources to do so (mainly schools, teachers) are wasted by the others, replaced, wasted again, ..., then not adequately replaced. they feel abandonned, many become hostiles
6/ their parents can not react
because the kids are very numerous and very hostiles, no one can coerce them into obeying. more and more 'neutral' become 'hostiles'
iterate from 3 to 6, for approx 30 years
this annhilates the 'social lift' (French: "ascenseur social"), a very important approach here which means that if you do well at school and behave you can reach all top-level positions, without any respect to other parameters (social origin, race, sex...), granted that school is open (and even mandatory) to all
at some point let various groups try to use them:
* some semi-hostiles
since approx 1980
they officially sell protection services (you pay, they coerce the youngsters into not breaking your shop, this is a form of legal racket)
* islamists
since approx 1985
trying to transform any state into an islamic one one may think that the bad'ole (rotten) Fr politic in Africa coupled to the lack of its will to fight against terros since the '70s (we even paid to recover hostages, and everyone knows what happens to the poor soul abiding to blackmailers)
* French electoralists
since approx 1995
trying to gather votes by lying ("the French society does not give you what you are entitled to"), mainly by distorsion of Human Rights (short version: "society must take care of you even if you don't behave"
add the fact that nearly all rioters are French (citizenship), from French parents (because they were born in France) and don't forget the economic crisis
you now have a pretty accurate view on this sad picture
> police abuse/attacks on minorities seriously
those facts remain very rare and most of them are repressed adequately. many hostiles use very minor incidents as reasons to do whatever they want
> You've seen videos of the rioters running around saying "Allahu Akbar!"?
that's a very important point. nearly all the rioters do not obey islam. in fact the bunch of islamists trying to use them is as threatened by the French context (democracy in a non-religious-tainted state and gov) that we are by the rioters. this is true at the global (int'l) level
on another matter: North Africans are NOT arabs, albeit all their claims, because most arabs (Egyptians, Saudis...) will not recognize them as such. this is another important fact: the arabic community is somewhat loose. there is even a fait amount of hate opposing some of them. this is also true among muslims
> Did it ever occur to you that maybe they are reacting violently to racial discrimination
note: 'racism' simply does not apply for the white-to-North_African relationships because, well... North Africans ARE white! some French (even North Africans) are racists, albeit this behavior is not as sharp and common as in the US. but granted, this is a factor
the 'discrimination' is mainly operating during hiring processes. no adequate school leads to no adequate education leads to no job.
(Fletchette put it well: "in most Western nations (France included, for the moment) education is definitely attainable for those who want it. The real problem here is that several generations of immigrants have been raised under socialism and feel that they are entitled to a good job even if they have nothing to offer an employer.")
> I don't see why they would speak french even less in France
good point: in the first wave of immigrants many spoke French and were used to French habits because they were living in colonies. on this side one must note that most rioters are far from a normal command of French (given their respective ages) and are much less proficient in their grand-parent's language. they have major problems related to the perception of their own identity
> unemployement nation wide has been between 9% and 11% for the last decade... for these minority youths, its 20 to 30 percent.
that's true
> So many Latin American imigrants don't speak English. They can move strait into "Little Cuba/Mexico/Honduras", live in a completely Latin Neiborhood, go to Latin Supermarkets, Attend Latin Curches, and send their children to 90% Latin schools. No English required.
this is not effective in France, albeit some things (esp. shops) slowly starts bending towards this
> French is the business language in Algeria (where most of these immigrants are from)
(Kurush and justashooer answer much more precisely than I would be able to)
this is true but not very relevant as most of the rioters are from parents born in France and most of them never resided in Algeria. as a sidenote: English is gaining momentum there
from my point of view it may works under a totalitarian regime or (I quote):
> so long as there are shared goals and values, strong enough to put all differences in the background.
> whereas many continental europeans are convinced that its socially and morally astute to give money to the "poor immigrants," at the deeper level they are elitist, bigoted, and convinced that the incomers are indeed inferior at every level, and should be held in separation.
the French views on this particular matter are different from those of nearly all other europeans. in her colonies France tried to assimilate the populations and avoided ghettoizing (the standard way of acting for most the others).
> In France, and all of Europe, in fact, if your parents were immigrants and your skin tone is a little off, and maybe you don't hide the accent you use at home when you're with your family, then you are not French. Maybe your kids will be. Or their kids.
true, and this is fueled by reactions to the hostiles who only claim that they are French when it enforces their interests
> the Foreign Leigon has been disbanded!!
nope, see (warning: French ahead)
http://www.legion-recrute.com/
> It may be a lack of integration amongst immigrant communities
it is (growing)
> It may be actual racism displayed towards immigrant communities
it was, it faded away, then it raises again as a reaction to the hostiles
each behavior nurtures the other one
> I was talking with a friend of mine who lives in Paris, who is a devout Moslem, from Morocco. She is in Paris and just wants to have a normal life but she does face racism on a daily basis.
ask her for stories about it. I bet the truth is that she encounters from time to time some vague hostility, maybe a rogue insult annualy shouted by some moron. had she been endangered, beaten, or whatever? if she studied she can work just as any other citizen, esp. given the fact that she is a woman (less prone to rioting). if she behaves she can have a job and live freely, as millions of other North Africans do here. don't forget the crisis: many people don't have jobs, therefore a 'no' from a potential employer does not necessarily mean "I don't hire muslims"
the data '20-25% unemployed among French from African migrant-descent' is very difficult to grasp if you don't realize that you must in fact read 'slightly more than average' (maybe about 12%) among non hostiles among non-hostiles' and much more (maybe 80%) among hostiles
'racism' is a very precise thing, much worse than encountering a few vaguely a priori non-empathic persons. does she thinks that non Africans living in the suburbs are never 'racially' insulted by some Africans neighbors? they are, I know it fist-hand and don't make a fuss with that. how comes that the less-than-average-willing-to-hire-an-African is not compensated by enterprises founded by Africans? how comes that hostiles are very rare among the numerous and very poor non-French speaking people from China and S-E Asia arrived less than 30 years ago?
> One problem they have is that some of their leaders are telling them that the solution to their problems is more Islam, when really what they should be doing is trying to integrate into French society.
[ ... ]
> their leaders are telling them that racism is their problem, which means that their difficulties are not their responsibility and are out of their control, and they are victims. That's a bad way to look at life, and doesn't lead to anything.
I agree wholeheartly
> their problems are related to being newly-arrived
true for many blacks, false for North Africans
> being poor
true but other immigrants arrived later don't have the problem, go figure
> French racism
I don't think it was a major problem from 1980 to 1995
> a poor economy, hate-mongering leaders, and criminal involvement. It's a mish-mash of problems unfortunately.
indeed
> the difference will be that Americans will be armed and capable of protecting their streets and neighborhoods.
indeed. fight to keep this way to keep your liberty
> Give us a cushy civil service job, even if we don't have the skills or education, or we'll torch your cars.
many of the older hostiles think something along those lines
> "It's not a political revolution or a Muslim revolution," said Rezzoug. "There's a lot of rage. Through this burning, they're saying, 'I exist, I'm here.' "
true but the answer is: 'learn something, do something useful' and they don't like it
the problem with Sarkozy are that he is Jewish and not willing to play it the ultracool way
> Anti-muslim sentiment is running high, and the feeling in France is mutual in the light of headscarf bans
it was not aimed at muslims but in order to respect the law (France is a non-religious state since 1905)
> and teargas in mosques
there was <b>one</b> teargas and no one knows who put it there. there were numerous christian churches set afire by the rioters. on this account the rioters are (one more time) not the victims
> Not only that but these kids are poor and feel discriminated against,
search causes
> I'll lay good money that they lack a decent education too.
the hostile burn the schools and attack the teachers since approx 1980, and nearly no one (French gov, other citizens or non-hostiles) try to stop them. the problem lays here and the hostile ARE the culprits, not the victims, albeit non-hostile immigrants are in the worse position of being treated by a growing number of other citizens as hostiles because of their appearance (phenotype) or name. carebear is right: in France no one must burn cars to get some education, to access to books or such things
> I'd be curious to know how you found out what "they" (the mostly French speaking Algerians living in these neighborhoods) think about themselves and how you know it is that "they" are incapable, because of their religious identification, of seeing themselves as French.
islamists (by definition) and some muslims thinks that religion must rule the nation. France, as a state, untied a century ago its last ties to religion. those are antagonistic objectives
> Rezzoug, the caretaker, said he has seen local youths struggle with deep personal conflicts caused by their dual cultures. "They go to the mosque and pray," he said. "But this is France, so they also drink and party."
this is BS: most youngsters do not go the mosque
> He's framing the discussion in religious terms
indeed. moreover this kind of perspective discreetly advocates islam by always saying something along the "they are muslims, therefore they (some good or neutral act) but also French, therefore they (some bad or neutral act)" lines. in such sayings any islamic thing is always at worse neutral but any non-islamic one is at best neutral. islamists deliberately systematically use this way to express thoughts and judgments since many years and this bias gains momentum among unaware populations
> in another article, Arabic names were mentioned as a source of discrimination.
the 3rd generation often bears a single arabic name and no French equivalent (for instance as a second-name). for some French it means "we don't want to be assimilated". this is not very coherent from both parties and the net result is not good but I dunno who is to blame
