Monday
Nov072005
Right turn in France?
Monday, November 7, 2005 at 3:00AM
By Ellen Ratner
There's a social tragedy unfolding in France as ghetto rioting passes its 10th day. All of it – the kids throwing stones, the cars set afire, the random, foolish, self-destructive violence – ought to ring some very familiar bells on this side of the pond. It's what happens when a majority population tries to sweep out of sight a minority that it once held mastery over.
In France, it was French colonies in North Africa, populated by Muslims, ruled by Paris – when their descendents came to France, it was clean the toilet, shovel the snow, shut your mouth and recite the Marseilles. In the United States, it was enslaving African-Americans. But in both cases the centuries of oppression simply added up to the same thing: Watts in the '60s, South Central Los Angeles in the '90s, and for the French in 2005, a bad start in a Parisian suburb called Clichy-sous-Bois that has now spread to the City of Light itself.
It's an old story – as old as human injustice. But the thing that really gives me heartburn, as well as our country a black eye is the Schadenfreude – defined by Dictonary.com as "the malicious delight in the sufferings of others" – that has gripped so much of the American right-wing press and blogs.
"If President Chirac thought he was going to gain peace with the Muslim community in France by taking an appeasement line in the Iraq war," sneers the New York Sun's editorialists, "it certainly looks like he miscalculated." The Sun goes on to note (sneeringly) that back in the early '90s, an assortment of blowhard French intellectuals "sneered at America for the Los Angeles riots." Big newsflash – both sides of the Atlantic are lined with blowhards.
What I find so interesting among America's right wing is the depressingly familiar assignment of blame here. Those of us of a certain generation remember all too well what Presidents Lyndon Baines Johnson and Richard M. Nixon, often joined by FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, had to say about the race riots of the '60s – they were caused by the communists. It's the same answer this trio often gave to the anti-war protestors of the same era – they were controlled by the communists.
Well, the communists are gone and the Reds are no longer under beds, so who is left to blame for the French riots? Here's what the right-wing blog Captain's Quarters has to say: "It's probably too late for those answers to combat the Islamist momentum that has built itself in the streets of Paris now" the blogger notes. The answers that CQ thinks are too late are "job opportunities, decent housing and good education for these new citizens."
Today radical Islam serves as the same boogeyman that the Reds served in our parents' generation. And that's really too bad, because as long as we're focused on boogeymen, the real problems – a lack of jobs, housing and education – will go unsolved. Just like Hoover wiretapped Martin Luther King to see which Russian was controlling him, the French will be tempted to deport the arrestees, crack down on crazy mosques and halt legitimate immigration.
All of this could provide the perfect segue for an older French tradition, one just as ugly as violent jihad and one that's never far from the surface in France – French fascism. In the old days, it was Col. Alfred Dreyfus and the Jews. But they're largely gone now, courtesy of the Nazis, Vichyites and assorted collaborators. So what – or rather who – is left?
The Muslims are left, that's who. And who will play the role of scapegoater? The French have a candidate here as well – John-Marie Le Pen, a leader of the National Front, which, as the name implies, is fascism-French-style and anti-immigrant to the rotten core. Think he's some crank on the margin? Think again. Le Pen picked up almost 20 percent of the national vote in 2002. My guess is this could be his year.
The American right won't have much to sneer about if Le Pen and his ilk participate in a future French government. Putting aside the extreme human-rights concerns, his ultra-nationalist economic proposals would position France and no doubt Europe to take a hard line against importing U.S. goods – with disastrous consequences for us. Moreover, if some Americans find Gaullist internationalism a bit irksome at times, they have yet to reckon with the type of French hyper-nationalism that a Le Pen would introduce – Chirac may see us as a rival, but Le Pen believes America is an enemy.
So even putting aside the old adage that people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones – and with our history on race relations, no American should even consider picking up a pebble – although the right in American loves the way our country has turned, they also need to consider the consequences of a sharp right turn in France, and what it could mean to us. Not a pretty picture.
There's a social tragedy unfolding in France as ghetto rioting passes its 10th day. All of it – the kids throwing stones, the cars set afire, the random, foolish, self-destructive violence – ought to ring some very familiar bells on this side of the pond. It's what happens when a majority population tries to sweep out of sight a minority that it once held mastery over.
In France, it was French colonies in North Africa, populated by Muslims, ruled by Paris – when their descendents came to France, it was clean the toilet, shovel the snow, shut your mouth and recite the Marseilles. In the United States, it was enslaving African-Americans. But in both cases the centuries of oppression simply added up to the same thing: Watts in the '60s, South Central Los Angeles in the '90s, and for the French in 2005, a bad start in a Parisian suburb called Clichy-sous-Bois that has now spread to the City of Light itself.
It's an old story – as old as human injustice. But the thing that really gives me heartburn, as well as our country a black eye is the Schadenfreude – defined by Dictonary.com as "the malicious delight in the sufferings of others" – that has gripped so much of the American right-wing press and blogs.
"If President Chirac thought he was going to gain peace with the Muslim community in France by taking an appeasement line in the Iraq war," sneers the New York Sun's editorialists, "it certainly looks like he miscalculated." The Sun goes on to note (sneeringly) that back in the early '90s, an assortment of blowhard French intellectuals "sneered at America for the Los Angeles riots." Big newsflash – both sides of the Atlantic are lined with blowhards.
What I find so interesting among America's right wing is the depressingly familiar assignment of blame here. Those of us of a certain generation remember all too well what Presidents Lyndon Baines Johnson and Richard M. Nixon, often joined by FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, had to say about the race riots of the '60s – they were caused by the communists. It's the same answer this trio often gave to the anti-war protestors of the same era – they were controlled by the communists.
Well, the communists are gone and the Reds are no longer under beds, so who is left to blame for the French riots? Here's what the right-wing blog Captain's Quarters has to say: "It's probably too late for those answers to combat the Islamist momentum that has built itself in the streets of Paris now" the blogger notes. The answers that CQ thinks are too late are "job opportunities, decent housing and good education for these new citizens."
Today radical Islam serves as the same boogeyman that the Reds served in our parents' generation. And that's really too bad, because as long as we're focused on boogeymen, the real problems – a lack of jobs, housing and education – will go unsolved. Just like Hoover wiretapped Martin Luther King to see which Russian was controlling him, the French will be tempted to deport the arrestees, crack down on crazy mosques and halt legitimate immigration.
All of this could provide the perfect segue for an older French tradition, one just as ugly as violent jihad and one that's never far from the surface in France – French fascism. In the old days, it was Col. Alfred Dreyfus and the Jews. But they're largely gone now, courtesy of the Nazis, Vichyites and assorted collaborators. So what – or rather who – is left?
The Muslims are left, that's who. And who will play the role of scapegoater? The French have a candidate here as well – John-Marie Le Pen, a leader of the National Front, which, as the name implies, is fascism-French-style and anti-immigrant to the rotten core. Think he's some crank on the margin? Think again. Le Pen picked up almost 20 percent of the national vote in 2002. My guess is this could be his year.
The American right won't have much to sneer about if Le Pen and his ilk participate in a future French government. Putting aside the extreme human-rights concerns, his ultra-nationalist economic proposals would position France and no doubt Europe to take a hard line against importing U.S. goods – with disastrous consequences for us. Moreover, if some Americans find Gaullist internationalism a bit irksome at times, they have yet to reckon with the type of French hyper-nationalism that a Le Pen would introduce – Chirac may see us as a rival, but Le Pen believes America is an enemy.
So even putting aside the old adage that people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones – and with our history on race relations, no American should even consider picking up a pebble – although the right in American loves the way our country has turned, they also need to consider the consequences of a sharp right turn in France, and what it could mean to us. Not a pretty picture.
Reader Comments