More French riots

[Flo]

Mentioning a person's religion where a single crime has been committed generally is pointless, unless religion is somehow a motivating factor in the crime.

First you have to establish it actually is a motivating factor, which hasn't ever been done.

But when one particular crime or type of crime is being committed throughout the country, and the vast majority of those crimes are being committed by people from one single religion, then it's clear there is some relationship between the crimes and the religion.

Good, then serial children and sex-murders are due to catholicism, then, since almost every single such crimes in France and Belgium have been committed by catholics (Fourniret, Heaulmes, Dutroux, ...). See the problem ?

Don't misunderstand, as Orwell has, that I'm saying they are rioting because they are Muslims. I don't know what their supposed grievances are. But the fact is that most of these rioters are Muslims, and it does no one any service to hush up that inconvenient fact.

And it does no one any service to suggest that correlation might be causation

France has had riots before. In August, 1572, saw a particularly memorable, protracted, and enjoyable one that the history books have taken note of. You can't read any of those histories without having the rioters' religion play a prominent role. Why is today different?

you're pulling my leg, right ?

As I said, I don't know why they are rioting. It could be because of job discrimination or housing discrimination or because the weather is nice for rioting or Muslims have a gene that predisposes them to violence or because it is part of a plot hatched in Mecca to Islamize all of Europe. I don't know. I do know that it's a question Reuters should be asking. After all, they're in the business of information gathering and dissemination.

Then stop the wild speculations ...

 

[Flo]

There is a danger in media reporting details like religion or race when it's done inconsistently. Tabloids in Europe have been known to describe criminals as black when they are black but leave out the description when it's a "white" person committing the crime. Sure, you can't accuse the individual article on bias -- after all they're reporting the truth -- but what do you think the effect on the general public will be if they always read about black or muslim crimes but never about white protestant crimes?
I'm all for reporting uncomfortable facts, but only when it's relevant. Otherwise it just helps to build prejudice and stereotypes.

Too true ...

 

[Flo]

Then why is it predominantly Muslims rioting, in a country that is largely Roman Catholic? Why aren't the Catholics rioting?

Maybe because being or looking "regular catholic" doesn't expose you to the kind of discriminations those who look "African or Arab" experience on a daily basis, including having their supposed religious belief systematically held against them... ?

 

[Orwell]

Then why is it predominantly Muslims rioting, in a country that is largely Roman Catholic? Why aren't the Catholics rioting?

And on what evidence do you base your conclusion that "there doesn't seem to be a religious component to these riots"? Interviews with rioters? Placards they're holding up proclaiming no religious motivation? Torched cars with the words, "Burned By Muslims, But Not Religiously Motivated" spray-painted on them?

Quite right. But their race was described, often, and at length, because that was a common thread amongst the rioters.

Ok, here's a bit of pointing out the bleeding obvious.

It so happens that France has a disproportionally large number of North-Africans who are treated like second-class citizens. And it also happens that many of these North-Africans are muslim.

There are quite a few Muslims in the US, and they don't riot. That's because most of them are solid middle class. But as you well know, there have been a few race riots in the US. And it so happens that most of the rioters where black, although I think there were quite a few latinos in the L.A. riots, and I remember reading about puerto-ricans participating in NY. You probably are getting my point at this time...

The common thread connecting these rioters isn't religion. It's poverty, it's the crap "banlieu" where they live, it's their perceived lack of opportunities.

About French catholics not rioting... Well, in fact, they do. But, typically, not in the "slash and burn" fashion of these recent riots: French truckers and farmers are notorious for direct action, as in blocking roads, in order to enforce their demands.

I wonder how BP would have described the Mai 68 riots: would he have used the words "french catholics"?

 

[Flo]

About French catholics not rioting... Well, in fact, they do. But, typically, not in the "slash and burn" fashion of these recent riots: French truckers and farmers are notorious for direct action, as in blocking roads, in order to enforce their demands.

I wonder how BP would have described the Mai 68 riots: would he have used the words "french catholics"?

And what about Corsica, where the locals are bombing bars, police stations, and houses of "continental French invaders" on a regular basis ? All catholics ...

 

[Mycroft]

Not bad, but you forgot to blame the je... er, "zionists" as well somewhere.

Key word: "Globalists."

 

[Mycroft]

So they're rioting because they're muslims? Sounds to me that that's what you're trying to imply.

That's one interpretation. Another might be that the rioters are primarily Muslim because France hasn't done a very good job of integrating its Islamic immigrants and so it's the Muslims that are disproportionately poor, unemployed, and have particular reason to riot. Is thinking that evidence of racism too?

 

[Mycroft]

Quite right. But their race was described, often, and at length, because that was a common thread amongst the rioters.

Further, in Ireland when violence breaks out there, nobody is shy about mentioning religion even though it is not a religious conflict.

 

[Orwell]

That's one interpretation. Another might be that the rioters are primarily Muslim because France hasn't done a very good job of integrating its Islamic immigrants and so it's the Muslims that are disproportionately poor, unemployed, and have particular reason to riot. Is thinking that evidence of racism too?

No. In fact, I wrote something similar: see post 64.

 

[Mycroft]

The common thread connecting these rioters isn't religion. It's poverty, it's the crap "banlieu" where they live, it's their perceived lack of opportunities.

Okay, so while we're pointing out the "bleeding obvious", if the majority of the poor in France also happen to be Muslim, isn't that worth mentioning? Doesn't that raise the issue of why Muslims in France seem to be a permanent under-class and unable to work their way into middle-class status?

If out of a misguided sense of political correctness we try to hide the Islamic nature of the rioters, don’t we do them a disservice in hiding that this demographic might have a reason to riot while others don’t?

 

[Mycroft]

First you have to establish it actually is a motivating factor, which hasn't ever been done.

I'm sorry, I must be misunderstanding you. Are you claiming no Muslim has ever been inspired by his religion to commit a crime?

Good, then serial children and sex-murders are due to catholicism, then, since almost every single such crimes in France and Belgium have been committed by catholics (Fourniret, Heaulmes, Dutroux, ...). See the problem ?

What problem do you see? If there is a strong positive correlation between Catholicism and child sex-crimes, why shouldn’t the issue be raised?

 

[Mycroft]

No. In fact, I wrote something similar: see post 64.

So you agree that merely pointing out that the rioters have Islam in common (mostly) does not necessarily imply that they're rioting because they are Muslim? And that knee-jerk condemnations of people who notice the correlation may not be appropriate?

So they're rioting because they're muslims? Sounds to me that that's what you're trying to imply.

 

[Orwell]

I'm not trying to hide the "islamic nature of the rioters". I'm telling you that their religion is inconsequential. Although most of the North African Muslim population in France has had trouble integrating, there are nevertheless Muslim French of North-Africans descent who did manage to join the more prosperous classes. Are they rioting along with these folks?

I should also point out that while most of the rioters seem to be of a Muslim background, most of them are of that background in a pretty vague way, similar to the way how most of the French are catholics. Also, as far as I know, a significant number of these rioters are not even muslim: some second-generation Portuguese immigrants and even some children of native French have taken part.

 

[Orwell]

I'm sorry, I must be misunderstanding you. Are you claiming no Muslim has ever been inspired by his religion to commit a crime?

No, Mycroft. He is telling you that no one has been able to show that religion has played a direct role in the French riots. That's the subject of this thread, remember?

 

[Mycroft]

I'm not trying to hide the "islamic nature of the rioters". I'm telling you that their religion is inconsequential.

Orwell has spoken, it’s settled.

Although most of the North African Muslim population in France has had trouble integrating, there are nevertheless Muslim French of North-Africans descent who did manage to join the more prosperous classes. Are they rioting along with these folks?

That’s a great question. One that will never be raised unless we first notice that the rioters are primarily Muslim.

I should also point out that while most of the rioters seem to be of a Muslim background, most of them are of that background in a pretty vague way, similar to the way how most of the French are catholics.

If true, that’s an important observation. One that would never be made if we first didn’t observe that the rioters are primarily Muslim.

Also, as far as I know, a significant number of these rioters are not even muslim: some second-generation Portuguese immigrants and even some children of native French have taken part.

What I’m seeing here is many factors that would lead one to conclude that even though the rioters are primarily Muslim that there are also many reasons not to conclude they are rioting simply because they are Muslim. Therefore I wonder why the issue shouldn’t be raised.

 

[Mycroft]

No, Mycroft. He is telling you that no one has been able to show that religion has played a direct role in the French riots. That's the subject of this thread, remember?

I think you should let Flo and BPSCG speak for themselves.

BPSCG: "Mentioning a person's religion where a single crime has been committed generally is pointless, unless religion is somehow a motivating factor in the crime."


Flo: "First you have to establish it actually is a motivating factor, which hasn't ever been done."

Obviously a riot isn't a "single crime" so unless Flo misunderstood what BPSCG said, which is quite possible, the subject of that statement was not the French riots.

 

[fabian_lidman]

What I’m seeing here is many factors that would lead one to conclude that even though the rioters are primarily Muslim that there are also many reasons not to conclude they are rioting simply because they are Muslim. Therefore I wonder why the issue shouldn’t be raised.

As a simple exercise, compare these two fictional headlines: Muslims riot in France and Unemployed youth riot in France. The first one leads the reader to believe that the riots are somehow motivated by Islam. Correct? The second makes the reader draw the conclusions that the riots were motivated by unemployment.
Now, if Reuters think (in agreement with the French people posting in this thread) that the latter explanation is the correct one, what's the point of raising the issue? We already know that this isn't a religious problem!

 

[Grammatron]

As a simple exercise, compare these two fictional headlines: Muslims riot in France and Unemployed youth riot in France. The first one leads the reader to believe that the riots are somehow motivated by Islam. Correct? The second makes the reader draw the conclusions that the riots were motivated by unemployment.
Now, if Reuters think (in agreement with the French people posting in this thread) that the latter explanation is the correct one, what's the point of raising the issue? We already know that this isn't a religious problem!

I think a more accurate would be Unemployed immigrant youth riot in France. I too agree that involving Islam in this topic is about as relevent as the type of shoes they were wearing.

You have a country with high unemployment rate for young people and where labour laws make it difficult to get a low skill job. Couple that with the fact that it's not going to get better any time soon, and France's requirement of pure assimilation into its culture before the system will work with you and the riots were inevitable. That most happened to be Muslim is a coincidence and takes away from the real issue.

 

[BPSCG]

No, Mycroft. He is telling you that no one has been able to show that religion has played a direct role in the French riots. That's the subject of this thread, remember?

Interesting. Earlier, you claimed there didn't appear to be a "religious component" to the riots, and I asked you to back that statement up:

And on what evidence do you base your conclusion that "there doesn't seem to be a religious component to these riots"? Interviews with rioters? Placards they're holding up proclaiming no religious motivation? Torched cars with the words, "Burned By Muslims, But Not Religiously Motivated" spray-painted on them?

You never did; instead you now sidestep the question by claiming, "no one has been able to show that religion has played a direct role in the French riots," despite the fact that no one (here at least) has made such a claim.

Now, would you please show the evidence in support of your claim that "there doesn't seem to be a religious component to these riots"? How do you know this?

 

[Mycroft]

As a simple exercise, compare these two fictional headlines: Muslims riot in France and Unemployed youth riot in France. The first one leads the reader to believe that the riots are somehow motivated by Islam. Correct?

If it does, I think it's because the larger world-wide issue of Islamic inspired terrorism has linked violence and Islam so that it becomes an easy connection to make. I think if the headline read Mormons riot in France or Buddhists riot in France the natural inclination of the reader would be to wonder what is being done to the Mormons or Buddhists that makes them want to riot.

The second makes the reader draw the conclusions that the riots were motivated by unemployment.

Yes, but the issue isn’t just unemployment, is it? It’s also relevant to see who is unemployed and to ask why this demographic seems to be hit hardest this way. The underlying issue is that France has done a piss-poor job of integrating its immigrant population, and unless you’re able to say that it’s not just “unemployed youth” who are rioting, then the issue is hidden.

Now, if Reuters think (in agreement with the French people posting in this thread) that the latter explanation is the correct one, what's the point of raising the issue? We already know that this isn't a religious problem!

You’re ascribing opinions to a news agency, and that is a problem. Reuters, and other news wire services, should be more neutral.