|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2010 22:11:19 GMT
I had not at all planned to do so, but after my family duties this morning, I felt an imperious need to join today's demonstration against the racist policies of the current government regarding gypsies and immigrants in general. Such demonstrations are nearly always from Place de la République to Place de la Bastille, which are two highly symbolic places. I was hoping to get a bus to Place de la République, but the police closed the street a bit earlier than scheduled, so I was dumped at Gare de l'Est with the other passengers and walked from there. No matter what the reason, I love anything that empties the streets of traffic, such as Boulevard de Magenta here, one of the most clogged streets of the city. Place de la République is dominated by the statue of the Republique (always represented by a woman). The poster for Aung San Suu Kyi is a fixture that has been there for years and which will remain until she recovers her rights. I arrived about 20 minutes for the official start of the demonstration, and obviously I was not the first person there. There is often some odd performance art in French demonstrations, such as these creatures representing the deported Roms. The march began, and thousands of people began heading towards the Bastille. Many different groups defended their cause, including of course the Roma. The Roma flag represents the wheel of a gypsy wagon. It was extremely appropriate that the march route passed in front of the Cirque d'Hiver, a stronghold of Roma performance culture. (to be continued)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2010 22:56:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by fumobici on Sept 5, 2010 1:47:30 GMT
How nice to see people take their legitimate political concerns to the streets. I'd imagine it would have been pretty easy for the authorities to swoop on the demonstration looking for people that looked "foreign" to check for documents and find undocumented people. It's a credit to Paris that such measures aren't attempted.
On a mostly unrelated matter, Paris is such a traffic nightmare compared to many other European cities that put heavy restrictions on private vehicle use in the central city areas, has it ever occurred to the city authorities to follow the examples of those other cities? One can only imagine how magical Paris would be with perhaps 2/3s or 3/4 of the private vehicular traffic removed.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2010 6:05:57 GMT
Place de la Bastille could be seen in the distance. (to be continued)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2010 18:54:23 GMT
After a few demonstrations, you figure out how these things are put together. Basically, the organization that called for the demonstration leads the way with its banner, carried by the militants and various celebrities. Following this will be similar groups, even if they don't have exactly the same agenda. Protest marches will generally take anybody they can get, as long as the group is respectable. For example, this inevitable harmless group. Then there are all sorts of groups. One doesn't know what to make of certain groups, even if their heart is definitely in the right place. This particular march was supported by something like 150 groups, trade unions and political parties. What about unaffiliated marchers? That is what I have always been. You just choose a likely group or political party, but you can also generally find a big section of people just like you who have formed a groupless group. Naturally, a lot of people just prefer to watch. Refreshments are available along the way, but in any case in most demonstrations, the cafés remain open everywhere. The shops only close if violence is considered possible. This happens when an unexpected event riles people up. Nothing like that this year -- the current government is super predictable. (to be continued)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2010 19:35:18 GMT
People outside of France are often astonished when they learn that France is the least unionized country of the developed world. Only 8% of workers in France belong to a trade union. However, the unions that exist are well organized and must be reckoned with. Here come the trade unions. They will be the stars on September 7th against the upcoming retirement law, but on September 4th, they took their designated back seat. Besides trade unions, there are student unions. I only saw the high school unions at this march, because school had started 2 days earlier. Universities don't start until October, so there was no way to organize them for this march. Here are some typical French high school students. Before the political parties bringing up the rear, there were a certain number of NGO's. (to be continued)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2010 20:24:42 GMT
The political spectrum in most of Europe is much wider than in the two-party countries. Having "two round" elections allows people to vote in the first round for their true ideals, and the in the second round when there are just two people left, you vote for reality. Of course, it has now been proven that this system is not without danger. In the 2002 presidential election, it was a sure thing that the Socialist prime minister Lionel Jospin would beat President Jacques Chirac in the second round. Unfortunately, the first round screwed everything up. Can you imagine that everything was so splintered that the president of the country could not even muster 20% of the vote? Jacques Chirac 19,88 % 5 665 855 Jean-Marie Le Pen (Front national) 16,86 % 4 804 713 Lionel Jospin (Parti socialiste) 16,18 % 4 610 113 François Bayrou (Union pour la démocratie française) 06,84 % 1 949 170 Arlette Laguiller (Lutte ouvrière) 05,72 % 1 630 045 Jean-Pierre Chevènement (Mouvement des citoyens, soutenu par le Pôle républicain) 05,33 % 1 518 528 Noël Mamère (Les Verts) 05,25 % 1 495 724 Olivier Besancenot (Ligue communiste révolutionnaire) 04,25 % 1 210 562 Jean Saint-Josse (Chasse, pêche, nature et traditions) 04,23 % 1 204 689 Alain Madelin (Démocratie libérale) 03,91 % 1 113 484 Robert Hue (Parti communiste français) 03,37 % 960 480 Bruno Mégret (Mouvement national républicain) 02,34 % 667 026 Christiane Taubira (Parti radical de gauche) 02,32 % 660 447 Corinne Lepage (Citoyenneté action participation pour le XXIe siècle) 01,88 % 535 837 Christine Boutin (Forum des républicains sociaux) 01,19 % 339 112 Daniel Gluckstein (Parti des travailleurs) 00,47 % 132 686 Oops! This left us with the choice between corrupt right wing Chirac and fascist racist Le Pen. No more Jospin. Chirac was re-elected with more than 82% of the vote. Yes, even I voted for him in the second round. In the first round, I voted for Olivier Besancenot, the head of the Communist Revolutionary League. Did I want him to become the president? Of course not. But he is one of the most popular politicians in France because he can say what he thinks instead of having to weigh his words. He is fantastic in debates and demolishes right wing adversaries. His day job is mailman. He lives right down the street from me, but that is not why I voted for him. Anyway, he was there on Saturday. It was decided that the "Communist Revolutionary League" was maybe not the best name for a political party in the 21st century, so now the name of the party is the New Anticapitalist Party. This was supposed to be a temporary name until they came up with something better, but unfortunately, they never came up with anything better. Noël Mamere, another presidential candidate from 2002, was also present. He is a former TV new anchorman who joined the Green Party. Since 2002, he has taken a back seat to other stars of the Greens, but since his profession gave him a way with words, he is often the spokesperson for the party. Political parties! The Socialists are (boring) traditionalists. These mayors are wearing their traditional sashes to give moral weight to their opinions. (final chapter soon!)
|
|
|
Post by lagatta on Sept 5, 2010 23:02:49 GMT
Kerouac, this is a lovely demonstration on a beautiful day and I would NEVER trivialise this issue - alas not everyone knows that Roms (Gypsies) were among the human groups deported and gassed by the Nazis - but I had to get in a clin d'oeil à K2 - you did notice the t-shirt the little boy in the centre of the Union française des associations tsiganes contingent is wearing? Serious comments later.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2010 5:35:07 GMT
Yes, I was wondering if anybody else would notice it. The demonstration finally reached the Bastille, where various symbolic acts were performed. It would still be an hour or so before everybody reached the Bastille. The police bring up the rear of any demonstration of course, followed by the cleaners. And then there was this lady. Was she having her own private demonstration or just enjoying being able to walk down the center of the street? Just a few more minutes and everything will be back to normal, until the BIG demonstration on Sepember 7th.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Sept 6, 2010 6:38:26 GMT
Boy, I love a good megamarcha, and this was the real deal. I do have lots of questions, if you or others could answer them, please.
In no particular order, and apologies if you explained any of this and I missed it:
1. What is the significance of September 7?
2. Was this demonstration mostly triggered by the recent "repatriation" of gypsies, or has the sentiment been on the boil since the destruction of the migrant camp in Calais almost a year ago?
3. How are gypsies generally regarded by the average person in France? In Europe?
4. Do you think most of the marchers have seen the illegal encampments and would they be willing to have one "in their back yards"?
5. What proposals have been made, either in the government or by concerned civil groups, for alternate solutions?
Finally, that was a really interesting explanation of how a multitude of political parties can splinter the vote. Do those parties ever form coalitions for elections, such as has become common in Mexico?
Great pictures -- lots of movement, lots of excellent crowd scenes, and a really good sense of how the day felt.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2010 7:49:14 GMT
1. What is the significance of September 7? No particular significance, except that it was the date chosen to protest the upcoming retirement law. The parliamentary debate starts imminently, so the main point is to show how many people are against it. The biggest change that people are protesting would probably make most people around the world faint with jealousy: retirement age is being raised from 60 to 62. Saturday's demonstration was against the treatment of the gypsies (official administration name in France = gens du voyage = travelling people) and xenophobia in general, particularly a proposed law to strip naturalized citizens of their French citizenship for certain crimes. You can find the whole spectrum, from "just a bunch of chicken thieves" to "indispensable and vibrant part of popular culture." Most people have absolutely no problem with them, but they also don't have a well formed opinion, so their opinions are mostly molded by whatever the media is saying about them, pro or con. Just about everybody has seen illegal camps. Even within one kilometer of the Paris city limits, you can find groups of dilapidated trailers set up on the most miserably horrible scraps of land, next to freeway interchanges or in empty lots next to abandoned factories. Yet, every city of France with a population of more than 5000 is supposed to have an official camping area for these people, with access to water and electricity. A lot of towns put this next to the municipal dump, so it is very easy to understand why people refuse to bring their families to such places. What a lot of the rabble rousers tend to forget is that about 70% of the local gypsies have adopted sedentary lives and have normal jobs and live in normal houses or apartments. But a lot of them enjoy taking to the road for a month or two if they get a chance. The government has adopted the chicken thief approach and is saying that it is a "security" problem. They say that we law-abiding citizens are living in terror surrounded by foreign criminal elements. As for other groups, they are in favor of what the gypsies are requesting: to be left in peace and to be allowed to live in acceptable surroundings. That is not much to ask for. Yes, otherwise France would be ungovernable. The Socialist Party is officially allied with the Greens, the Communist Party, and a few other small parties (Front de Gauche, Mouvement des Citoyens), and it generally benefits from tacit support from the ultraleft, although those parties will never call to vote for the 'wimpy' Socialists (New Anticapitalist Party, Workers' Struggle, etc.). On the other side is the UMP that Sarkozy created (Union for a Popular Majority). Basically, all of the smaller right wing parties were forced to dissolve themselves into the UMP, which decreed that unity was the most important thing and that it was time to stop nitpicking. The main result was to neutralize all of Sarkozy's rivals, who became automatically subservient. At the moment, the UMP has started to crumble as Sarkozy becomes political poison, and the rats are leaving the ship. And of course there is the ultra right wing National Front, which preys exclusively on fear of the "other" (race, nationality and religion -- the National Front leaves lifestyle and sexuality alone -- this is France, after all! The National Front will never call to vote for the UMP, but it supports it tacitly, since the UMP has pretty much implemented the political agenda of the National Front.
|
|
|
Post by bjd on Sept 6, 2010 8:00:17 GMT
To answer a few of Bixa's questions: 1. No particular significance to Sept 7. It's just the day chosen for a big strike and demonstrations because everyone is back from vacation. You don't suppose they would try to organize anything in August do you?
2. This demonstration was probably triggered by the recent deportations, but as you see, everybody else with something to say joined in. hence, the Americans against the war, the trade unions, the Communists, etc.
Mind you, in their concern for the workers, the marchers could have avoided throwing so much crap on the streets.
3. From what I read on the BBC website and in the paper, about 65% of the French agree with deporting the Roma. They do not have good press and do not make things easier for themselves when they set up their illegal camps, stand at traffic lights squeezing soap on car windows and beg. I am certainly cynical, but I'm sure none of those marchers have an illegal encampment behind their house.
4. There are several alternatives -- where we live, every town of a certain population (10,000?) is supposed to set aside a campsite with facilities like bathrooms and electricity for the Roma to stay in for periods of time. We have one, as do all the small towns nearby. And their children are supposed to be welcomed into schools. A friend of mine who was the director of a nursery school said they often had Roma kids, at least French ones, but their attendance was very spotty and they rarely continued in the same school for any length of time.
I don't think there are alternative solutions for recently arrived Roma though. What the government invokes are EU rules that people arriving from other EU states are not supposed to stay more than 3 months if they have no visible means of support, so that they do not benefit from the arrival state's social benefits. In this weekend's paper, I read that Italy has also been deporting gypsies back to Romania and Bulgaria, but with less publicity than in France.
It's a big problem. There is indeed this parallel to the deportations in WW2 (not only of gypsies, but Spanish Republicans, Jews, political exiles, etc) that was not acknowledged for years, and only recently has been mentioned a lot more. The French have had a hard time coming to terms with their past, after being told for years about how wonderful they all were resisting the Nazis, so that there would be political peace after the war. So this is a rather shameful reminder of past behaviour.
On the other hand, things are difficult economically, and the idea that some people arrive and take advantage of social services that they never contributed to, set up illegal camps, and their only visible activity seems to be begging does not make anyone look at them favourably. This, of course, plays into the far right's anti-immigrant fear-mongering.
I think too that there are differences in the way those who come from North Africa or sub-saharan Africa are seen. So many of them have been working and paying taxes for years, but have not been allowed to get legal residence. The bullshit about them taking away jobs from the French is nonsense. Most French don't want to sweep the subway stations or work in crappy jobs with low pay.
5. I'm not competent for the political stuff, but as Kerouac said, most people vote for the small parties as either a protest or because they wish to express an opinion, but none of those polling 1.4% would be capable of running the country. And would probably be incapable of forming a coalition either.
|
|
|
Post by Jazz on Sept 6, 2010 8:08:14 GMT
Interesting. I do have ‘lots of questions’. I don't see this as a ‘lovely demonstration on a beautiful day’. I also didn't notice the little boy's T-shirt, but I immediately noticed this.--- I know little of French and Parisian politics and I am curious about the need for demonstrations re: ‘the racist policies of the current government regarding gypsies and immigrants in general”.(Kerouac, OP)---
...From Wikpedia, 'By law, French censuses do not ask questions regarding ethnicity or religion, but do gather information concerning one's country of birth. From this it is still possible to determine that the Paris and its aire urbaine (metropolitan area) is one of the most multi-cultural in Europe: At the 1999 census, 19.4% of its population was born outside of metropolitan France[68] At the same census, 4.2% of the Paris aire urbaine's population were recent immigrants (people who had immigrated to France between 1990 and 1999),[69] in their majority from Asia and Africa.[70] 37% of all immigrants in France live in the Paris region.[64] As of 1999, roughly 20% of the population of Paris was foreign born. Today, perhaps 40%?
…. From Wikipedia, The demographics of Toronto make Toronto one of the most multicultural cities in the world. Data released by Statistics Canada as part of the 2006 census indicates that Toronto is more ethnically diverse than Miami, Los Angeles, and New York City. 49.9% of Toronto's population is foreign born ----More, as of today. Possibly 60%?. We do not seem to have problems with immigrants. Our immigrant population is far higher than that of Paris. (60% to 38%?) Why is there a problem in Paris with immigrants and not in Toronto? In reality, I think our immigrant population now doubles yours.
|
|
|
Post by Jazz on Sept 6, 2010 9:54:19 GMT
The sunny day of political protest has clouded over. A few thoughts on bjd’s post,
Bjd: 3. From what I read on the BBC website and in the paper, about 65% of the French agree with deporting the Roma. They do not have good press and do not make things easier for themselves when they set up their illegal camps, stand at traffic lights squeezing soap on car windows and beg. I am certainly cynical, but I'm sure none of those marchers have an illegal encampment behind their house.
----- I must say that the French (not the Roma) do not have good press, with 65% agreeing to deport the Roma. This is far too reminiscent of the deportaton of the Jews in WW2, which the French agreed to. Not a good memory. In Toronto we also have homeless people, and the squeegees at traffic lights.---there is no move to deport them. WTF?
bjd: 4. There are several alternatives -- where we live, every town of a certain population (10,000?) is supposed to set aside a campsite with facilities like bathrooms and electricity for the Roma to stay in for periods of time. We have one, as do all the small towns nearby. And their children are supposed to be welcomed into schools. A friend of mine who was the director of a nursery school said they often had Roma kids, at least French ones, but their attendance was very spotty and they rarely continued in the same school for any length of time. ---Obviously, the roma culture is different.
bjd: I don't think there are alternative solutions for recently arrived Roma though. What the government invokes are EU rules that people arriving from other EU states are not supposed to stay more than 3 months if they have no visible means of support, so that they do not benefit from the arrival state's social benefits. In this weekend's paper, I read that Italy has also been deporting gypsies back to Romania and Bulgaria, but with less publicity than in France. ---What to say? ...Italy has been deporting gypsies but with less publicity. Not good, actually, ugly.
bjd: It's a big problem. There is indeed this parallel to the deportations in WW2 (not only of gypsies, but Spanish Republicans, Jews, political exiles, etc) that was not acknowledged for years, and only recently has been mentioned a lot more. ---Yes, its a big problem. The parallels to the deportations of WW2 are powerful.
bjd: The French have had a hard time coming to terms with their past, after being told for years about how wonderful they all were resisting the Nazis, so that there would be political peace after the war. So this is a rather shameful reminder of past behaviour. -----Yes, the French have had an extremely hard time coming to terms with their past. However, this is the first time EVER that I have heard...'after being told for years about how wonderful they all were resisting the Nazis! Pardon?...how wonderful the French were in resisting the Nazis? Please, what history are you reading? This, I have never heard, and yes, it is a shameful reminder.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2010 10:53:53 GMT
The poll results are completely inaccurate, and there are other polls that say exactly the opposite.
As we all know, you can make a poll say whatever you want it to say.
First of all, this Figaro newspaper poll that the international media have picked up was done over the internet and not using the traditional polling safeguards.
The exact question was this:
Etes-vous favorable ou opposé aux expulsions vers la Roumanie de Roms sans papiers?
Are you in favor or against the expulsion to Romania of Roma without papers? (yes or no only)
The question was totally fallacious, because most people in France are in favor of expelling anybody "without papers." However, the Roma are not without papers and have every right to be in France. The "without papers" was added to the question to make sure the people gave the 'correct' answer.
There are dozens of analyses about this particular poll on the net, as well as many other polls where the results were determined in advance by the formulation of the questions.
Other questions asked if "illegal camps" should be closed rather than asking about "unauthorized camps." The word "illegal" will get the correct response every time.
I never believe any poll that I read about unless there is full publication of the precise question asked.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2010 11:24:59 GMT
Just a brief follow-up after going through the poll analysis sites. It is estimated that the addition of the words "without papers" gave this question a 25 point boost over the results of similar polls. Not bad!
|
|
|
Post by Jazz on Sept 6, 2010 11:44:34 GMT
......"The exact question was this:
Etes-vous favorable ou opposé aux expulsions vers la Roumanie de Roms sans papiers?
Are you in favor or against the expulsion to Romania of Roma without papers? (yes or no only)
The question was totally fallacious, because most people in France are in favor of expelling anybody "without papers." However, the Roma are not without papers and have every right to be in France. The "without papers" was added to the question to make sure the people gave the 'correct' answer.
There are dozens of analyses about this particular poll on the net, as well as many other polls where the results were determined in advance by the formulation of the questions.
Other questions asked if "illegal camps" should be closed rather than asking about "unauthorized camps." The word "illegal" will get the correct response every time....."
This all sounds lame to me. It gives people, in the end, the built in opportunity to 'innocently' justify their choice, at will. 'Oh, I didn't want to suggest deporting the Roma, I was only outraged that they didn't have papers...and you say they were Roma?" Please, we all read between the lines and in France it is an art form. Let me assure you that NO ONE wants to EVER hear again the bleating, pathetic attempts to differentiate (?) between 'illegal camps' and 'unauthorized camps'. NO ONE, EVER. It's been done before, with horrible results.
The boost of 25% with the phrase 'without papers' is both depressing and frightening. Certainly nothing to be proud of.
|
|
|
Post by bjd on Sept 6, 2010 12:14:30 GMT
Jazz, after WW2, in order to make political peace in a country that had been extremely divided and there were a lot of hard feelings, de Gaulle basically tried to wipe the slate clean. I don't know whether it was him or someone else who said that even those who had not resisted officially had been resistants in their minds.
Nobody wanted to drag up unpleasant memories. Ophul's film The Sorrow and The Pity was not shown in France when it was first made.
Communists became resistance heroes, even though they had been on the side of the Germans until 1941 (following the lead of the USSR).
And for years, nothing much was mentioned officially. Look how long it took until Maurice Papon was put on trial -- until the 1990s. Bousquet, the head of police in Paris, was a friend of Mitterand's. He was assassinated before he was put on trial -- in the 1980s. Mitterand himself worked for the Vichy government until he felt the wind change direction in 1943. That was never mentioned when he was running for president, or if it was, it was read as a right-wing attack with no basis in reality.
For all of Chirac's faults, he was the first to make a public apology for French behaviour in deportations and the role of the French police/militia. But that was in the 1990s -- 50 years after the war! ***********************************************************************
It's true that poll numbers can mean anything and nothing. How questions are asked influences answers. I have only ever once been asked to respond to a telephone poll, and I found the questions left no space for nuance. Basically, "do you agree or not?" with no place for "yes, but" or "no, but".
The only people happy in all this are the supporters of the National Front. Even they must realize that Sarkozy is trying to cut into their electorate, although, as long as their anti-immigrant, anti-everyone except Joan of Arc, policies are implemented, maybe they don't care.
I notice that even those politicians connected with the government, whether part of Sarkozy's part, or co-opted like Bernard Kouchner, who made a token protest about the expulsions, none have actually resigned. Being in power is more fun than being out of it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2010 12:42:12 GMT
For a recent parallel of "wiping the slate clean" we can look at Cambodia or Iraq, as well as many other countries where members of a previous murderous regime are still part of the power structure because it is essential for the cohesion of the country.
My own ideals are affected by the need to be realistic, but I often see people stretching their ideals into complete nonsense (probably because they have a different agenda). For example, I was reading about Obama's new priority of high speed rail travel in the United States, and the article mentioned places where projects were already into advanced studies. Probably the most advanced project is the Orlando-Tampa Bay line in Florida, and all of the high speel rail countries want to be involved in the project. However, there is a court case to exclude France (but not, for example, China) because the French national railways were used during WW2 to help deport Jews. The high-minded individuals behind the case seem not to care that the French were not controlling the railroad at the time, but just the fact that it existed is considered a crime.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Sept 6, 2010 16:49:35 GMT
This is extremely interesting and enlightening. It was particularly helpful to get answers from both Kerouac and Bjd, especially since they simul-posted. And this is a case when I really appreciate this forum, since both Kerouac and Bjd are long-time residents of France, but totally understand how my cultural background would shape the questions I asked.
Jazz's comments point up the flaws in using ones own country to judge another country. Even though I'm appalled at the vicious xenophobia sometimes displayed in the US in discussions of "illegal immigrants" taking advantage of our social programs, I'm about equally appalled that so many people in the US haven't noticed what a shitty social network the US gives its citizens. It also makes me laugh bitterly that practically the whole point of the US was as a refuge from countries which didn't give their citizens enough opportunities for decent lives. Now those same countries have so far surpassed the United States in practical uses of tax money for the benefit of the citizens that they have to worry about "outsiders" coming in to take advantage of their excellent social programs.
And let's face it, any prosperous country with at least a nominally non-repressive government that is not surrounded by water or huge mountain ranges is a magnet for people from poor or repressive countries. The European Union contains several such "magnet" countries, with France seeming particularly desirable, with its good social programs, reputation for tolerance, and the extended and vulnerable border with other countries.
I'm probably rambling here, but all of this is to say that the answers from both Bjd and Kerouac make clear how public opinon is formed and also how a yes-or-know poll sprung on citizens seeing ... illegal camps. Even within one kilometer of the Paris city limits, you can find groups of dilapidated trailers set up on the most miserably horrible scraps of land, next to freeway interchanges or in empty lots next to abandoned factories. Yet, every city of France with a population of more than 5000 is supposed to have an official camping area for these people, with access to water and electricity. A lot of towns put this next to the municipal dump, so it is very easy to understand why people refuse to bring their families to such places. (<--Kerouac)
and dealing with:
... things are difficult economically, and the idea that some people arrive and take advantage of social services that they never contributed to, set up illegal camps, and their only visible activity seems to be begging does not make anyone look at them favourably. This, of course, plays into the far right's anti-immigrant fear-mongering. (<--BJD)
might be swayed into saying, yes, get rid of the undesirables.
BJD wrote: I think too that there are differences in the way those who come from North Africa or sub-saharan Africa are seen. So many of them have been working and paying taxes for years, but have not been allowed to get legal residence. The bullshit about them taking away jobs from the French is nonsense. Most French don't want to sweep the subway stations or work in crappy jobs with low pay.
The parallels with "illegal Mexicans taking our jobs away" in the US are too obvious to be stated.
Those of you who followed the discussion in Port & Starboard about the test to show whether one is liberal or conservative will appreciate Kerouac's statement: The question was totally fallacious, because most people in France are in favor of expelling anybody "without papers." However, the Roma are not without papers and have every right to be in France. The "without papers" was added to the question to make sure the people gave the 'correct' answer.
There are dozens of analyses about this particular poll on the net, as well as many other polls where the results were determined in advance by the formulation of the questions.
Other questions asked if "illegal camps" should be closed rather than asking about "unauthorized camps." The word "illegal" will get the correct response every time.
The fact that this many people would turn out to protect the rights of a marginalized group that might actually eat some of their tax money is laudable. However, since marches for rights are also stirring, I wanted to know about the thinking on the "correct" side as well as that of the Sarkozy's adherents. I greatly appreciate the very thoughtful and informed answers from Bjd and Kerouac.
|
|
|
Post by Jazz on Sept 6, 2010 21:43:44 GMT
Thanks, bjd and Kerouac, for your excellent and informed commentary about an extremely complex subject. Years ago, when it was released in 1969, I saw The Sorrow and the Pity. It is a remarkable work, deeply disturbing yet compassionate. I have never forgotten it. I didn't realize that it was not shown in France at that time, but I can understand.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2016 15:21:53 GMT
Rather than starting a new thread which might have been called "A crisp night of political protest" I thought it would be more appropriate to add something new on a similar theme here. Basically, spring is here and the youth are rumbling, as often happens at unpredictable moments. I find the starting point of the current situation really quite bizarre. In recent weeks, the trade unions have been protesting and organising demonstrations about a new "simplified" labour code that the government would like to implement to replace the bulky and outdated old one. Well, the current labour code is extremely bulky because it was written and modified over the years due to the strength of the trade unions at the time. But now, union membership is down to just 8% of the working population, which is the lowest percentage in the world for developed countries. Due to the way that the rules were written, unions are in charge of labour negotiations even in companies where almost no one is a union member. I took full advantage of this in my own company because when it became clear that there was going to be a massive reduction of staff, I joined a union with a colleague, and we were elected to represent all of the personnel for the next two years that we dragged out the issue. ( We weren't the ones doing the dragging -- it was the company trying to pay as little as possible and us not weakening before their threats and cajoling. It should be mentioned that we were elected with 100% of the vote of our colleagues, so we knew we had their support.) I wouldn't call the labour code ridiculous, but many things need to be changed or completely eliminated. Just as an example of things having been imposed by the unions of the years, there is an obligation to have a dressing room and lockers for all employees. In a white collar office where nobody wears a uniform, this is a total waste of space and money, but it is obligatory. We had lockers and absolutely never used them. Even female employees who have an extra pair of shoes or something thought it was fine to keep them in a filing cabinet or a desk drawer. So, this is the sort of situation where the new code would like to relax the rules. Basically there are two big sticking points concerning which workers feel they are being sold down the river -- loosening the restrictions on working hours and putting a cap on the amount that can be awarded in labour court for employee grievances and illegal dismissal. Oddly enough, this last point is where the folly of youth legitimate concerns of future workers comes into play. High school students were restless (spring, as I said), and they decided that they wanted to join the union demonstrations, always an excellent way to skip classes all afternoon. The schools were blockaded, and the students were in the streets, like it or not. And what were they protesting about? The cap on financial penalties for illegal dismissal. Here are teenagers who won't be working for at least five years, and they are already planning to attack their future employers for illegal dismissal. Okay, it does sound really silly, but it really is the expression of a completely legitimate anxiety over the fact that 'generation z' is almost certainly going to be the first generation in at least a hundred years that probably won't live as well as their parents. They are perhaps totally off target on what they should be protesting, but it is all part of being a teenager and having to learn from their errors. Some university students also joined the movement but generally with much more specific concerns about their upcoming careers. Anyway, it is a good time to be against the government ("elected as being socialist but applying capitalist policies"), and there is a huge bandwagon on which to jump. On the 31st of March it all came to a head. At the end of the demonstration, the kids decided that they didn't want to go home. They were going to stay at Place de la République until the government backed down, and they decided to call their movement "Nuit Debout." This has engendered a number of translations in the English language press -- Rise up at night, Standing night, Night on our feet. More than a thousand people were there the first night. When day broke, the riot squad and other police made them leave for the day, which they did. But they return every evening around 18:00 and stay until dawn, not just the young but also many career activists and random dreamers. It rained pretty hard the next two nights, which came pretty close to extinguishing the flames of revolution, but then the fire caught and spread across France to about 30 cities, and it has apparently also started in Brussels. So last night, on March 37th (because that is how they are counting the days -- those kids!), I went to see it for myself. I took the bus and arrived at about 23:30. There was a little table so that you can add your own revolutionary demands -- I hope somebody thinks to publish the best ones in a book. Every day they set up some tents and protective tarps and every morning they take them down when the police come. A disciplined group of about 400 (not all standing for some reason) were listening to the official interventions. Each speaker is allowed 3 minutes max. If you need a break from too much revolutionary fervour, there is a place for you to go. This took me back so many years when my own combats of youth seemed so totally important and urgent. The speakers could talk about anything, from helping the Kurds to invading the factories to liberate the workers to saving puppies.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2016 15:37:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2016 15:47:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2016 15:51:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2016 16:16:25 GMT
Thank you for taking the time to do this report, K.
|
|
|
Post by fumobici on Apr 8, 2016 17:17:51 GMT
Yes indeed, thank you for witnessing this for us. Sometimes the putative reasons for protest are secondary at most and people just need to vent their malaise in solidarity with others publicly. The gaping ideological dissonance between the ruling party's rather bizarre near total embrace of right wing neoliberal corporate economics and its branding as socialist makes his government one that almost literally makes no sense. When the dominate "left" party is almost completely right wing in economic policy, as it is too here in the US, there are bound to be broad expressions of contempt for it. Left parties that embrace identity politics as a substitute for actual left wing economic policy will never satisfy those who seek social justice. Social justice cannot be reconciled with the economic status quo and its ever increasing wealth inequalities no matter how many gay pride or anti-xenophobic slogans are pasted on it; social justice demands things that will actually take from and yes, harm the rich and entitled--things the powerful and wealthy fear and will never willingly accede to.
|
|
|
Post by htmb on Apr 8, 2016 21:27:40 GMT
I've just read this whole thread, which was new to me. I found the earlier photos and explanations quite interesting. I also appreciate seeing pictures from last night, along with the added detail. I have been reading about the demonstrations in the press, but now feel a bit more informed as to what is going on.
Kerouac, you mentioned, near the beginning of this thread, that you and a fellow employee joined a union, thus forcing your company into union negotions. You also mentioned you were elected by your fellow employees to represent them in the negotiations. Since I am a member of a union in the U.S., and only the members of the union are allowed to vote, this comment confused me. The other employees were not union members?
Do you have any idea whether or not the high school protestors are attending school during the day?
|
|
|
Post by lagatta on Apr 8, 2016 23:58:38 GMT
Thanks! I remember "rêve général" (rather than "grève générale") here. I don't know whether that was imported from France or cropped up independently. The students used that here in 2012.
|
|
|
Post by mich64 on Apr 9, 2016 0:31:28 GMT
That is what this reminded me of as well Lagatta! I remember watching the students on our news.
Thank you for explaining the purpose and process Kerouac. Is the Government still discouraging large groups of people from congregating or do they feel the threat level has gone down enough for public safety?
I have to say I remember on my first trip to Paris I stopped at one of those candy stands and looked in awe at the selection of chocolates and candy and it took me some time to select something because it all looked so delicious!
|
|