| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| France confronts 'social crisis' |
| 2006-04-26 |
| Jacques Toubon, a former French minister of culture and justice, is a member of the European Parliament and the president of France's National Museum of the History of Immigration, scheduled to open next year. He visited Atlanta this week on a trip organized by Alliance Francaise, a nonprofit organization that promotes French culture. In an interview with Atlanta Journal-Constitution staff writer Mark Bixler, Toubon discussed recent riots by immigrants in France and similarities between the immigration situation in the United States and France, among other subjects. Here are excerpts, edited for context and clarity. Q: What is your message here in the United States? A: I was invited to explain . . . the history of immigration and the history of France as a great country of immigration. France is the United States of Europe. During the 19th and 20th centuries, all the European countries except France sent emigrants to other countries. France, since the beginning of the 19th century, welcomed millions and millions of immigrants from Poland, Spain, Italy and Portugal. The identity of France is made by this immigration. We are very diverse, but our model of integration was very different from the model of the United States. Now we are taking into account our differences. Q: Why change? A: Because France has changed. We are confronted with social realities. From a moral point of view, some people said, "We have to recognize our depth, what all these people gave to France." Q: A few months ago, riots in France called attention to the many thousands of Muslim immigrants in France from North Africa and the Middle East. Can you give us a sense of whether these immigrants have successfully integrated or are likely to successfully integrate? A: First, the majority of the people were not from North Africa but were black . . . from sub-Saharan Africa. That means that in some instances people from North Africa are more integrated than . . . black Africans. Most importantly, the suburban crisis has its roots in two issues. One is the situation of inequality, of discrimination between people of foreign origin, whether they are French citizens or not, and other people. But this is not only an issue about immigration. It's an issue about segregation between two parts of our country: the center of big urban areas and the suburbs. This suburban crisis is more complicated than an immigration issue. In the American press, the riots were generally presented as young foreigners against French society. That's not true. Q: What is a more accurate description? A: There are a lot of people who think the future will be worse than the present. With the recent demonstrations in France of the young students, it was rather the same thing. The issue of immigration is just one component of a social Q: Do you think that the influx of so many Muslim immigrants threatens France's cultural or national identity? A: Among the Muslims, there is a minority, an activist minority. They want Islamic law to apply to them and not the civil law, but we ought not to exaggerate this phenomenon. In the long term, I am sure that with the Arab and Muslim people, we will have the same integration process. It will be more difficult. It will be longer. Gee, how reassuring. Q: On balance, you see the influx of Muslim immigrants more as an asset than a liability? A: Right. Immigration was not, is not and would not be a problem but an asset. Uh huh. Q: The influx of Muslim immigrants to France comes at a time when the Christian church seems to be in decline in France and Europe. Does this influx threaten the French religious identity? A: Like Europe, France is a strong Jewish-Christian civilization.? The Islamic religion can't change that.?!? Q: People who are born in France become French citizens, just as people who are born in the United States become U.S. citizens. Do you see other similarities between the immigration phenomena in France and the United States? A: The great similarity is that in the second half of the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century, by the same proportion, France and the United States were the two big countries of immigration. But in France it was not so well organized. Quelle surprise! For instance, between 1890 and 1920, the United States had a main point of entry for immigrants: Ellis Island. In France, people came in from the north, south, east and west. The other difference is that they represent two opposite models of integration. In France, integration is individual, without intermediaries of communities. Equality was the foremost value of the republic, and basically the republic aimed at erasing the origins. America cherishes more freedom and makes the minorities (hyphenated Americans) sacred. Don't forget the third difference, that one system seems, despite its flaws, to be distinctly more successful than the other, because of the difference between the two models. |
| Posted by:ryuge |
| #3 1+0=0. 2+2=5. 0-infinity=+30,000. Time for the next koan. |
| Posted by: Perfesser 2006-04-26 15:41 |
| #2 Oops, I forgot to highlight the last line! |
| Posted by: ryuge 2006-04-26 14:22 |
| #1 Jacques Toubon, one of the Great Minds Of the 20th century, now going on to the 21th (IIRC, Shiraq thought he was an idiot) passing the official multicultural mantra around. The National Museum of the History of Immigration will be an another multiculti gadget; I'm not sure, but I seem to recall having heard that a famous museum on french ancient local popular customs had to be closed for this to open. Well, you've got to keep up with your time. French history : bad. Immigration : good. He's a "conservative", by the way, just imagine how are our leftists. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-04-26 14:01 |