Chiraq bans Muslim head scarves in State Schools

Hmmm ... I tend to agree with whut the US said here, and not with what France has decided, so I wouldnt want to begrudge you your glee ...

but basically, what Chirac is exercising here is the French state's traditional militant secularism - and how's militant secularism ever been "to the right" of anything? ;-)

Yes, yes, I thought of that for a wee minute, and dismissed it due to glee.
Personal rights! Freedom of expression! Clothing rights!!!

CHIRAC: OPPRESSER OF THE MASSES!

<nods>

According to an NPR news brief today, 69% of the French support Chirac's move. Hardly oppressing the masses there . . .

CHIRAC: OPPRESSOR OF MINORITIES!

<even more ominous>

OK, kidding aside, how will this affect the next elections? What party usually gets the Muslim vote? I have read the Muslims have put together a pretty decent voting bloc...

Good question. Dunno. I know which way the Dutch minorities vote, which way the English minorities vote, I've seen some records of how German minorities vote, but French Muslims? Not a clue.

I was going to run to Google to look it up, but then I realised it was probably no use. From Germany, the UK and Holland I know that pollsters have measured voter preference by ethnicity. But in another historically entrenched quirk of the French system, closely related to the one we're discussing here, it is absolutely not done to keep tally of people according to "ethnicity" and so on - in fact, the whole notion is denied validity. If you're a French citizen, you're a Frenchman, end of story.

This concept has obviously come under pressure exactly because of the Muslim immigration and the North-Africans' more immediately obvious Otherness - in fact, it's the Maghrebiens themselves who increasingly have demanded recognition as a minority group with its own needs and requirements. But its still mostly taboo to categorize, count and measure on "ethnic" basis.

For example. We're involved in this European project to monitor media coverage of minority groups. That means counting - how many people of minority identity are among the reporters, how many are interviewed, how often they are (directly) quoted in comparison with people from majority groups, et cetera. But the official partner from France could hardly do anything with any of this. The identity of a black French citizen is, in their discourse, French. Period. Funny, that - there's a direct parallel to that referendum ballot California Republicans were campaigning for, to make it illegal to register someone's ethnic background.

Anyway, in short, I doubt French pollsters can get away with counting what "Algerian" Frenchmen, "Lebanese" Frenchmen, et cetera vote, for example - even if enough people would be willing to answer questions on that basis to base a poll on. Would be interested to find out, though!

As well as being a religious symbol, isn't the headscarf a form of modesty? If a law was passed which stated that, in order for me to attend university, I'd had to go topless, I'd find my education somewhere else.

31 percent of France's population is still millions and millions of people.

I can't believe they can't count voters (and such) by ethnicity!

By god, those damned Froggies ! ! !

They need a regime change so bad, it hurts. We need to go over there and straighten them snail-eatin' creeps out !

A convert!

<My work is done>

<But, we don't want to actually go over there. We just want to criticise bitterly from a distance>

I think they are attempting to teach us a lesson.

I hope we learn it.

I know. Abolish religion.
Frank, has religion done something hideous to you?
You have some serious hate going.

Religion has done horrible things to much of the world.

I think that religion has done horrible things -- and I would love to see it gone from the face of the Earth.

But that is not what I think they are teaching us.

I think they are teaching us that it makes sense to keep religion and anything public completely separate.

And I think they are teaching us that the strongest guy on the playground doesn't necessarily get to dictate what happens on the playground!

I have no hate going in this regard, Sofia. It is an opinion that I am sharing.

That remark was uncalled for.

No personal insult was intended toward you, Frank.

I have noticed you spend a great deal of your energy here on anti-religion issues. It made me think something more than just an opinion must fuel your focus. I thought, though, it was obvious that you hate religion--just based on what you have said. Don't you hate religion?

And, wouldn't the 'strong guy on the playground' be Chirac (as compared to the Muslim population)? So, isn't the strong guy seemingly getting what he wanted?

Well, I'm sure - err, I'm actually not quite sure, but I'd think - there isnt actually a law or anything against it - its just absolutely not done.

France has always been the main symbol of, say, the civic or political nation instead of the ethnic nation. Which is great for basic minority rights. You're born in France, you're a French citizen, with all rights that come with it - period. Compared to the German, "ethnic" brand of nationalism, where you're only accepted as a German (or even as a German citizen) if you have German "blood" (i.e., if your parents are German, etc), it's extremely liberal.

(The French government did make a first modification of citizenship laws a few years ago, I think, whereas the German Red-Green government has been pushing a change in the laws that makes it easier for second-generation immigrants to gain citizenship, though I think its been stifled by the right-wing opposition thus far - i.e., the two countries do seem to be moving towards each other, slowly. But for a century or two, they were the two opposing European models of national identity and citizenship.)

Basically, the French model is based on the same principles as the American concept of nation and citizenship was in the pre-multiculturalism, melting-pot era. Everyone can become an American, but you are, then, to be an American - period. Just like minorities in the US started resisting that, claiming the right to retain and cultivate their cultural diversity (enter the "salad bowl" model to replace the melting pot), minorities in France are also starting to claim recognition as a minority - with its own needs for its own organisations, arrangements, etcetera. But the idea of equal, secular citizenship (the subject is very much related to that of this thread) is at the bottom of the whole concept of the French nation, from 1789 onwards - its very deeply entrenched. And tinkering with it is risky, too - the more you start defining and recognizing the minorities' Otherness, the more the same change in logic will be used to challenge the liberal notions of French citizenship and Frenchness, too.

Odd coalitions apply here ... its the minorities, on the one hand, and the followers of Le Pen from the far-right Front National on the other, who are increasingly emphasising the cultural Otherness of minority groups within French society - with opposite objectives of course; much like it was the Afro-Americans and the Southern segregationists who from opposite sides came to challenge or resist the "melting pot" concept. And its the mainstream left and right, Socialists and Gaullists, Jospin and Chirac, who are forcefully insisting on upholding the principles of the secular, civic, unitary French nation.

All that said, I still dont really know how they do it with the census, for example - whether they really not count origin etc, at all ...?

Heh. Good point ;-).

Good for Chirac. The majority of entire countries at one time were the same religion. This is simply no longer true. Kids in a school room are listening to parents & teachers, still. They should be able to come up with their own answers regarding religion. Keep it out of public schools.

If crosses and stars on people antagonize, then they shouldn't be worn either. Not in a public school. Nor white sheets, swastikas.
Don't mean to sound harsh but maybe it all has to go. BTW, surprised I feel this way.

Should someone wish to wear certain jewelry close to them for any reason whatever, I do think that should be allowed. Under the clothing, that is.

We are becoming rather mixed, which I think is good.

I'm sure the atheists among us will testify that I spend damn near as much of my time and energy on what could be termed "anti-atheistic" issues also.

Actually, I spend my time and energy advocating the agnostic position -- probably for the same reasons theists advocate theistic positions and athesists advocate atheistic positions.

Under any circumstances, your comment...

...sounded like more than merely an observation. Perhaps I was being overly sensitive!




It is my opinion that religion does as much to alienate humans from each other as any other force that I can think of.

I speak out against it at every opportunity.

I speak out against atheism at every opportunity also -- although I do not see atheism as the alienating force religion is.

I also speak out against "belief systems" that truly do not fit easily into either category.

It is my opinion that NOT MAKING GUESSES about REALITY and Ultimate Questions serves humanity best.





Chirac, as I understand it, has pledged to uphold the French constitution -- and that is what he seems to be doing. And, he has been standing up to the bullying of the United States -- for which I personally have more respect than the ass-kissing that Blair is doing.

Frank--
I was surprised for a while that you took offense.
Now, I see my wording could easily be considered provocative.
I did not intentionally antagonize you.
I thought your hatred of religion was common knowledge.

My question about whether some event had caused this could have possibly been worded better.

Per the playground. Didn't think the US merited principal status in the Chirac v Religious garb issue. I see now you expanded it. (But, I can't find the bully that didn't get his way.)

Frank
I wholeheartedly agree with you. IMO Religion has been responsible for more prejudice, bigotry, deaths, wars, genocide,
massacres than any other source the Nazi's included.
I should also note that many of those killed by the Nazi's were killed because of their religion.