What's going on in Paris?

I'm not too worried. I did just read in the paper here that a LOT of the young kids aren't Muslims. In fact, these "gangs" are one area in France where the Muslims, Christians and whoever else are all getting along and working together on an equal basis. Mind you, they are engaged in criminal activity (much of it petty) but the press here is wrong to portray it as a mini jihad.

I'm packing my sneakers. I usually try not to buy into the whole American tourist look, but maybe the cute shoes are going to have to give way to the fast shoes. But that's pretty much the only consession I"m making.
 
The child may run off with your property. The children in the streets of Paris have been burning cars precisely in order to attract the authorities, whom they wish to fight, not obey.
Please post citations of the actual ages of these "children". Last I checked, the "children" were in fact teens, usually already associated with various street gangs.
 
May I remind you, many of those burnt cars in Paris have been destroyed by children. But if it pleases you, I'll change it. What if it were an adult stealing a candy bar, as unlikely as it may sound, would you be justified in killing him?

Ridiculous comment. What are children to you? Anyone under 30? What does stealing candy bars have to do with arson, murder, and mayhem in general?


The child may run off with your property. The children in the streets of Paris have been burning cars precisely in order to attract the authorities, whom they wish to fight, not obey.

Duhh. We can read the news too. Your point is?


But a candy bar is property. Are you claiming that the value of a candy bar is insufficient to warrant killing? This is in direct contradiction to your previous claim, "The reason this is not disproportionate force is that it is proportionate to what it would take to stop this person from destroying your property, not to the value of the property."

Candy bars again.
 
Secondly, throughout its colonial history and more so after WWII, France has "imported" poor, illiterate, single, men to compensate for the lack of labourers in the rebuilding of the country. They have been parked in slums, dilapidated housings, etc., and when they had their family join them, sent even further away from most opportunities to better their condition.
Emphasis mine. Who sends them away? They are not allowed to live where they choose?
 
Emphasis mine. Who sends them away? They are not allowed to live where they choose?


When, because of your ethnicity/religion/nationality/way of life, you're systematically refused any lodging in the areas you'd like to live and are systematically proposed one in areas that are unconvenient to you, by private or governmental agencies* alike, and can't get credit to buy your own house on account of not earning enough (not mentionning the fact that you won't be sold land in areas where you're considered undesirable), no, you're not free to live where you want ...


* governmental agencies in charge of subsidized housing usually can't get land in desirable areas, even if the law says each municipality should devote 20% to such housing on pain of financial penalties: most posh municipalities prefer to pay, as shown by the prime defender of law and order and promoter of affirmative action, interior minister Sarkozy, who's also mayor of Neully ...
 
I'm not too worried. I did just read in the paper here that a LOT of the young kids aren't Muslims. In fact, these "gangs" are one area in France where the Muslims, Christians and whoever else are all getting along and working together on an equal basis. Mind you, they are engaged in criminal activity (much of it petty) but the press here is wrong to portray it as a mini jihad.

Rather funny comment. Do cars burn differently when the arsonists are christians or atheists ? ;)



I'm packing my sneakers. I usually try not to buy into the whole American tourist look, but maybe the cute shoes are going to have to give way to the fast shoes. But that's pretty much the only consession I"m making

Planning to visit Bobigny by night ? ;)
 
Please post citations of the actual ages of these "children". Last I checked, the "children" were in fact teens, usually already associated with various street gangs.
Aren't teens under the age of 18 still considered "children" (minors) according to French law? 'Cause there are most certainly minors taking part in the riots, whether they are associated with street gangs or not. If French TV station TF 1 is to be believed, the average age of the nearly 500 people arrested over the weekend was 16.
 
Aren't teens under the age of 18 still considered "children" (minors) according to French law? 'Cause there are most certainly minors taking part in the riots, whether they are associated with street gangs or not. If French TV station TF 1 is to be believed, the average age of the nearly 500 people arrested over the weekend was 16.
Calling under-18 year olds "children" is a common legal fiction that has nothing to do with the nature of the individual in question. Anyone over 12 who isn't developmentally disabled or brain-damaged has the mental ability to distinguish right from wrong in the vast majority of circumstances. Anyone over 15 with an average education is perfectly capable of weighing multiple factors of varying importance in deciding their actions.

To say that a 16 year old is morally and ethically and mentally equivalent to a 6 year old is asinine.
 
When, because of your ethnicity/religion/nationality/way of life, you're systematically refused any lodging in the areas you'd like to live and are systematically proposed one in areas that are unconvenient to you, by private or governmental agencies* alike, and can't get credit to buy your own house on account of not earning enough (not mentionning the fact that you won't be sold land in areas where you're considered undesirable), no, you're not free to live where you want ...

The way you describe it, France is deeply racist. Is that true?
 
When, because of your ethnicity/religion/nationality/way of life, you're systematically refused any lodging in the areas you'd like to live and are systematically proposed one in areas that are unconvenient to you, by private or governmental agencies* alike, and can't get credit to buy your own house on account of not earning enough (not mentionning the fact that you won't be sold land in areas where you're considered undesirable), no, you're not free to live where you want ...


* governmental agencies in charge of subsidized housing usually can't get land in desirable areas, even if the law says each municipality should devote 20% to such housing on pain of financial penalties: most posh municipalities prefer to pay, as shown by the prime defender of law and order and promoter of affirmative action, interior minister Sarkozy, who's also mayor of Neully ...

If you expect to be subsidized at the expense of others, even without discrimination, do you still think it right that you dictate where you live and how? I might add; what is it that is so bad about being "given" a place to live that is largely occupied by others just like yourself? Is that discrimination? Poor planning perhaps, in retrospect, but it doesn't waive the thought that this community of similar people had a chance to make something of it; and blew it.
 
Last edited:
Calling under-18 year olds "children" is a common legal fiction
On the contrary; it seems to be legal reality. ;)

luchog said:
Anyone over 12 who isn't developmentally disabled or brain-damaged has the mental ability to distinguish right from wrong in the vast majority of circumstances. Anyone over 15 with an average education is perfectly capable of weighing multiple factors of varying importance in deciding their actions.

To say that a 16 year old is morally and ethically and mentally equivalent to a 6 year old is asinine.
I agree, but as a society we've decided that, for most legal intents and purposes, it's easier to pretend that that's the case.

My point was that when Nick Bogaerts said "The children in the streets of Paris have been burning cars" a few posts up, Luchog interpreted "children" as "anyone younger than a teenager", while I simply took it to mean "minors".
 
Two governors lost to the Republicans today. Maybe my pessimism is unfounded, although I do hear that one of them was immitating conservatives, which could mean......
If by that you mean ... well, yes. Quite. If by conservative you mean traditional Republican, balanced-budget, shun foreign entanglements, basic competence in the leadership types.

The party structure in the US is - to my foreign eyes - remarkably flexible and non-hierarchical, like a spider's web, and signals pass just as rapidly through it. I wish I had the time to devote to understanding it in all its down-home complexity.

eta : Europe is simplicity itself by comparison. No wonder US politicians understand the outside political world so poorly. Understanding the US exhausts them.
 
Last edited:
It ain't only american politicians that understand the outside political world poorly...
 
* governmental agencies in charge of subsidized housing usually can't get land in desirable areas,

The problem with this thinking is that "desireable area" is not something that's fixed in stone, but depends on who lives there. If the Empire State Building became a crackhouse, real estate in the Empire State Building would cease to be desireable.

Wherever the subsidized housing--codename, as I understand, for "slums"--would be built, they would soon cease to be desireable areas. And in any case, if somebody is paying for your house, you cannot very well expect to complain that it isn't to your liking.
 
The way you describe it, France is deeply racist. Is that true?

It's annecdotal, granted, but that is indeed the impression I get. My sister was in the peace corp in western Africa (sub-saharan), and made good friends with one of the locals she worked with. This woman had a sister who had spent some time in France, and brought back lots of tales of discrimination. After my sister returned to the US, she was able to help her friend come to the US on a student visa. After spending some time here, she asked my sister whether her experiences here were normal. She had expected to encounter similar racism in the US and kept not encountering it, and it took her a while to really accept that the US really is different from her sister's experiences in France.
 
It's annecdotal, granted, but that is indeed the impression I get. My sister was in the peace corp in western Africa (sub-saharan), and made good friends with one of the locals she worked with. This woman had a sister who had spent some time in France, and brought back lots of tales of discrimination. After my sister returned to the US, she was able to help her friend come to the US on a student visa. After spending some time here, she asked my sister whether her experiences here were normal. She had expected to encounter similar racism in the US and kept not encountering it, and it took her a while to really accept that the US really is different from her sister's experiences in France.


Interesting. So our flawed nation where even our leftist political party is extremist right-wing by European standards the more progressive on this issue.
 
The way you describe it, France is deeply racist. Is that true?


Unfortunately, yes. As I wrote earlier, there is, in most of Europe, a big problem of an undigested past made of colonisation, wanted and then unwanted immigration (even countries like Switzerland have resisted with all their might the integration of immigrant workers - who were asked to build the country but were expected to meekly return in their home countries - mostly South western Europe in the Swiss case), and unmanageable/unmanaged immigration policies.
 
Interesting. So our flawed nation where even our leftist political party is extremist right-wing by European standards the more progressive on this issue.


I don't know if it is more progressive, but it's definitely a different model. However, when I see what kind of grievances and problems were raised at the time of Katrina, I can see some similarities between the two models, when it comes to those populations who didn't originally came to our countries of their free will.
 
Funny, I usually can predict with quite a lot of accuracy what Zig is going to say about a few subjects...

Anyway, what do you mean by "France being profoundly racist"? Is France more racist than, say, Germany? Or the USA?

How do you go about measuring and deciding these things?

Personally, I don't think France is any more racist than the average western nation... Which implies that there is racism, by the way...
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom