Riots in France

If the students win, do you expect the immigrants to take another turn rioting?

Opposing factions rioting seems ominous.

No idea - and actually I haven't seen (althought that was already a fortnight ago) or read anything, why "immigrants" should now turn "another rioting!.


As far as I remember, the riots we spoke about here before, where done by suburbian youth, naibly of not white European origin, but it wasn't an immigrant rioting.


I suppose that the laws will be weakened or even cancelled. And Villepin step down.

It's now a "tug-of-war" (bras de fer) about the CPE as nearly all French media and commentators see it.

Recent article re the situation in France.
DeV took this unpopular step to alleviate the "immigrant descendants/ minorities" rioting of a month or so ago. If that attempted help is going to be turned back by these riots, the "immigrant descendants/ minorities," who thought they were getting some relief and positive help from the government, are going to be even madder. Their remedy was offered and held out to them, and may be snatched back by the whites. White students have an unemployment rate of approximately 20%, while minorities of the same age is 50%.

If DeV bails, I think France had better have an alternative idea in the pipeline. Seems to me, they (the ones who rioted before {was that February?} will be in the streets if the white students et al get their way.

Concerns of a race war...

I have no idea at all, from what you get these idea of of a race war - today was declared "a day of national protests against the employment policies of the Dominique de Villepin government".

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH "R A C E" BUT WITH LABOUR LAWS!!!

Code du travial

The Law on a negotiated shorter working week (older version)


Franco-allemand:
French and Germans up in arms over labour reforms

Well, Walter. I have to admit your responses have me a bit puzzled.

You seem to refute the analysis of the make up of the first round of rioters, as well as their reasons.

Chirac agrees with me. Do you deny his quotes?

French first round of rioters--largely immigrant.

Chirac: We'll Fight Discrimination
PARIS, Nov. 14, 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
French president Jacques Chirac, Nov. 11, 2005 (AP)

France's worst unrest since the 1968 student-worker protests is forcing the country to confront decades of simmering anger over racial discrimination, crowded housing and unemployment.

(CBS/AP) President Jacques Chirac said Monday that unrest in the poor suburbs of France is the sign of a "profound malaise" that the entire nation must heal, with firmness and measures to combat the poison of discrimination.

In his first address to the nation since unrest erupted Oct. 27, the president said the laws of France must be obeyed and that values kindled in youths living in the poor, highly immigrant suburbs ringing French cities.

Chirac, speaking with a French tricolor and EU flag behind him, said that should be combatted. But he appeared to rule out U.S.-style affirmative action.

"There is no question of entering in the logic of quotas," the French leader said.

He said he has decided to set up a corps of volunteers to offer training for 50,000 youths by 2007. He also said the French media, which is not very ethnically diverse, must "better reflect the reality of France today."

He told companies and unions they must encourage diversity many immigrants from North and West Africa live with their French-born children in high-rise housing projects.

______________________________

? There is a heavy immigrant (read racial) component to the troubles France is experiencing.

I had speculated that the initiating element of the current riods in France was student's indignand at the perceived loss of job security. I noted that the disputed law was meant to combat both the general side effects of an over-regulated labor market and , in particular, the barriers confronting French youths of North African origin in employment. I further suggested that French university students, if they were indeed the initiators, in truth have little about which to be indignant - the employment risks they face are common throughout the developed world and they are better equipped than most people to deal with it. Wazlter's response was as follows --


Later on the same page Walter wrote,



And still later this--



I spent a few minutes searching the news sites (BBC, Reuters, etc) and I get an equally confused - and confusing - picture of just who may be creating the disturbances and why they are doing it. Various reports suggest university students, Labor Unions, Socialists, youths from poor neighborhoods and others. Whatever else may be the particular focus a general resistence to the weakening of government protection for job-holders seems to be a central factor.

However the central fact remains is that this new legislation was put forward specifically to aid the disaffected youth of North African origin, and it is being resisted by a fairly confusing mixture of other forces in French society, but not notably including those for whom the new law was crafted. Walter has called this "playing the race card". I think he is dead wrong.

The problems France faces in this area are hardly unique. Nearly every developed nation, the U.S. included, faces or has faced similar issues - and dealt with similar consequences. In many ways France appears to me to be a much more healthy, vibrant, and adaptive society than those of Southern and Central Europe. Economic growth and birth rates have been higher and the general economic sclerosis a bit less than in Spain, Italy, Germany, etc. Moreover the French have attempted to deal seriously with the problems of cultural diversity and national unity (as have others). Questions have emerged about the wisdom of some aspects of their approach. However, I am not aware that anyone has found a perfect solution to these problems. Constructive engagement seems to be the key differentiating factor betheen thoise who succeed and those who merely bury problems - and France is certainly engaged.

My own opinion is that the Social Democratic welfare and regulatory structures that grew up and appeared to operate so successfully during decades of steady growth in Europe have become the central problem in a situation now dominated by vastly different conditions - low economic growth, ageing populations, labor shortages and (paradoxically) high unemployment, and the challenge of assimilating a large non-European immigrant population (and their offspring). An internally competitive society and the meritocracy that it can promote are necessary to promote the adaptations required of all the people. Attempting to preserve a rigid, inflexible welfare structure will serve only those regressive forces seeking to get or preserve individual advantage through the force of government. This will (obviously, I think) promote only continued political struggle and delay the practical steps individual people must take to deal successfully with the new conditions.

The banner they fly: Anticapitalism!

You both might be correct.

It only differs by what I've read and seen in France (and Germany).

And "yes" - it's certainly "anti-capitalism", fully agreed on that.

I've no reasons to deny his quotes - but I selodm if ever agree with conservatives - especially with those like Chirac and especially on social and labour issues.

Between 1.5 million and 500,000 French citizens took part in today's demonstration, and everyone seems to be quite glad that not much rioting happened.

I must admit: I'd expected some real rioting especially, because it's a weekend and - looking back at last year - "the usual suspects" could have started email/sms notifying again.

It seems that the alliance which already worked in 1968 and 1994 becomes the major force in French politics again.

Polls done between March 7 and March 11 by Ifop/JDD, with 1,854 people asked, suggest that 61% of the French aren't content with Villepin while that figure for Chirac is 60%.

The 'content' figures fell from 43% in February to 37% for the French PM, while the president went up from 37% to 39%.

Ségolène Royal seems to become more and more accepted even by the more centrist and right-sided French: 64% of the French consider it possible to vote for her.

"Only" 170 rioters have been arrested last night - according to police sources - like before - persons from extreme right and left known groups.

The march organisers decry the CPE as a "Kleenex contract" that lets young workers be "thrown away like a paper tissue".

As said abobe: opposition politicians also joined the protest, only the third time in almost four decades (after 1968 and 1994) that students and workers marched together - the pressure on Villepin gets higher now:

It doesn't seem likely that meaningful reform of the economic stagnation that is increasingly affecting the French will occur anytime soon. That means the social tensions and the economic difficulties in France will continue to grow, France will be less able to compete effectively in global markets and the political opposition there will increasingly blame their difficulties (which, in truth, are of their own making) on the unseen forces of 'globalization'. Not a happy picture.

If so, that is not an encouraging sign for either France or the EU. Reform and adaptation to new internal and external conditions is a part of the nature of life. Cultures and political systems that don't adapt to meet such challenges are generally swept from the scene. France is on its Fifth Republic now - not a particularly impressive track record.

Well, other countries are still living with their ancient, more than 200 years old constitution and didn't modernise it five times completely.

Union leaders now spek for the first time about national general strike, if Villepin doesn't withdraw the law until tomorrow.


Just wondering again what you, my dear American friends, would say, when in some other country the head of a government would institute a law, without discussions in parliament, even without informing his cabinet about it.
(That's possible in France - rarely/never used in the Fifth Republic lately, a relict from de Gaulle - and was done by de Villepin re this new law.)

it is likely that, as you guessed, we wouldn't like it. On the other hand our '200+ year old unmodernized constitution' doesn't permit such unilateral action in domestic affairs. One has to have had five distinct opportunities to get it right to come up with something like that. :wink:

According to all available source some decission might happen today.
Villepin won't change the law - his government doesn't seem to be on his line.