Posted: Fri 18 Nov 2005 20:05 Post subject: France 'needs ethnic statistics'
(A couple of years ago, Ward Connerly and friends wanted to strip California's government of being able to record racial statistics. Supposedly, by doing away with them, institutional racism would go poof. Welcome to Ward Connerly's perfect world: France.)
BBC NEWS
France 'needs ethnic statistics'
French Equal Opportunities Minister Azouz Begag has urged the government to overturn a ban on collecting data based on ethnicity or religion.
Government bodies and private companies are barred from gathering such data - which is deemed potentially divisive.
But Mr Begag told Le Figaro newspaper it was important to assess the presence of minorities in various professions.
Job discrimination was a key complaint voiced by many youths who rioted in immigrant suburbs in recent weeks.
"We need to see France's true colours," Mr Begag said.
"To do that, we need to measure the proportion of immigrant children among the police, magistrates, in the civil service as well as in the private sector."
The place of birth of the parents and grandparents could give us a basis for action
Azouz Begag
Mr Begag stressed such surveys could be used to overcome racial discrimination, which he said lay at the root of the rioting.
He said he hoped to see more politicians from ethnic groups elected into parliament in 2007.
At present not a single member of parliament from mainland France is of African or Arab origin - although an estimated 10% of people are.
"The place of birth of the parents and grandparents could give us an idea of this diversity, and a basis for action," Mr Begag told Le Figaro.
Posted: Sat 19 Nov 2005 11:55 Post subject: Re: France 'needs ethnic statistics'
triguy wrote:
A couple of years ago, Ward Connerly and friends wanted to strip California's government of being able to record racial statistics. Supposedly, by doing away with them, institutional racism would go poof.
As I recall, the goal of eliminating government-enforced "racial" classification was not to eliminate "institutional racism" (whatever that is), but simply to stop the government, with all of its brutal coercive powers, from enforcing the color line.
Eliminating "racism" is impossible because no two people agree on what "racism" means. To take a simple example: many members of this discussion group sincerely believe that stopping loving couples from intermarrying was a "racist" U.S. social policy. At the same time, many other members of this same discussion group sincerely believe that allowing intermarriage is the worst form of genocidal "racism." And so, while most Americans agree that "racism" is bad and must be stopped, they work at cross purposes and deliberately sabotage each other's efforts because everybody means something different by the term.
Posted: Sat 19 Nov 2005 19:23 Post subject: France does not need 'ethnic statistics'
triguy wrote:
(A couple of years ago, Ward Connerly and friends wanted to strip California's government of being able to record racial statistics. Supposedly, by doing away with them, institutional racism would go poof. Welcome to Ward Connerly's perfect world: France.)
Anglo-phone news media, principally the BBC, I think, are suddenly the self-appointed sociological instructors of France. The conventional wisdom they are pushing on France claims to know all about France's problems with the Islamic youth rioters. These news reporters, now self-anointed sociological "experts," declare France must adopt our U.S. census system of classifying individuals in biologically "different races"; then with the data impose cloying U.S. style "races"-based Affirmative Action. I don't buy it.
Not being a news reporter, I don't claim knowledge of everything French. I suspect France already has enough data about her own population. There may be deficiencies in France's use of accessible data, however.
As other old European countries, I think the one thing France does census is religion. The U.S.A. does not census religion. Instead the U.S. censuses "races." Consequently our U.S. social dysfunction turns on "races" (the thing our govt. classifies persons in). The commonality in France shared by her youthful rioters (Arab & North African) is religion -- Islam. I theorize that rioting in France reflects religious discrimination, not U.S. skin pigmentation discrimination. We obsess about melanin, which we divide into "races." France's position at least since the First World War has been official skepticism that "races" exist.
France may have admitted too many immigrants too fast to assimilate them. Of the world's religions, Islam seems among the hardest to digest. Not the least of this indigestion is Islam's plenary nature -- being a religion which commands a cradle-to-grave culture -- in fact, its devout practice is totalitarianism. (See Jonah Goldberg discussing writings of Bernard Lewis.)
http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldbergprint092801.html
I think that France has followed a version of Multiculturalism, contentedly letting Muslims accumulate in enclaves -- there condoning their social isolation and festering resentments. And I would not be surprised if outside ties turn up, in the French rioters, to Islamic extremism.
There may be useful analogy to Mexican-Americans in Texas, who, in places, suffered semi-racial discrimination during the Jim Crow years. They were officially classified "white." Discrimination that they suffered, nonetheless, apparently targeted their ethnicity (re speech, customs, religion, etc.); it probably picked out Latino brown complexion, too. In other words, non-Hispanic "white" Texans doubtless practiced some unofficial racial discrimination against the Hispanic "whites" (& before this terminology existed). Something similar may be happening in France. The youth (all, uniformly ?) describe their feeling discriminated against. It is unclear to me that Texans all were "color blinded" following the 1970's "of color" re-classification of Hispanic, "who can be of any race." Nonetheless, racism in Texas clearly waned. How can we be sure A.A. caused racism's wane if we have no experimental control?
As for Ward Connerly's unsuccessful Proposition 54, its main content for California's Constitution was simply this:
Proposed Prop 54 wrote:
(a) The state shall not classify any individual by race, ethnicity, color or national origin in the operation of public education, public contracting or public employment.
There were several exceptions to the scope of the ban, including one for housing and one allowing "(f) Otherwise lawful classification of medical research subjects and patients ...." Prop. 54 would not have prevented the state recognizing ethnic communities on a map, for instance. Neither would it have prevented the state from having statistical grasp of its citizens in the racial sense of skin color. Nothing would have prevented state sampling (e.g., by "paper bag test" for skin "color") which did not classify any individual. After all, "races" are inherently "groups," aren't they? When you think about it the U.S.'s ODR "blood" pedigree-based Affirmative Action scheme is deeply flawed by "color blindness," given that racial discrimination (inequality) mainly works off of the sight-based first impressions of discriminators. A.A. presently cannot grasp multiracial persons or racial blends. The scheme depends on ODR-hypodescent attributing notions of "races."
France, 'till now, has tried to propagate general disinterest in the individual's racial phenotype; and specifically rejecting the notion of "different races" somehow dividing humans. Some strangely organized rioting by Islamic youth at this particular time does not convince me that France needs to become a U.S. clone, classifying [North] African-Americans (French ones). Let France examine her own internal matter.
George
I think that France has followed a version of Multiculturalism, contentedly letting Muslims accumulate in enclaves -- there condoning their social isolation and festering resentments. And I would not be surprised if outside ties turn up, in the French rioters, to Islamic extremism.
A version of "multiculturalism"? Where's your proof?
All news items constantly state the same message that discrimination in employment and racism in daily life were the major causes of the riot. Ten percent of the country are ethnically non-French who are second to fourth generation French citizens. Up until recently, there has never been a "black" or North African newscaster in a country of 6 million blacks and Arabs. Advertisement in France still feature stereotypes of blacks and bananas. To imply that "multiculturalism" caused France's dilemna shows no regards to the facts.
Moreover, there has been no indication that "Islamic extremism" had any influence on the rioting. The rioting was started after two boys, one black African and the other North African, were electrocuted while fleeing from an ID checkpoint because one child had forgotten his ID at home. ( This isn't about religion, this is about perceived race. France does not see Africans or Arabs as white. You may also want to review what happened in France in October of 1961.)
Haven't there been a number of riots like this in the U.S. when an innocent person dies and there is police involvement?
Given that virtually all reports coming from France, whether sourced from the BBC or U.S. media, discuss the gross economic and cultural divisions. All reports discuss France's problems with racism and discrimination. It's convenient of you to dismiss these complaints and turn the problems into one of immigration. The so-called immigrants are second to fourth generation CITIZENS.
Even more sad is your bigotted statements about Islam. The riots weren't religious based. What separates your generalization of a group of people from the typical racist comments made about "blacks," "Latinos," "Irish," or any other group of people? In the nineteenth century U.S., the same things were said about Mormons and Catholics (along with statements that Eastern and Southern Europeans would never integrate and would mongrelize the "white" race).
There are hundreds of thousands of muslims in the United States who live here peacefully. You have just insulted all of them.
Good grief. I'm a Christian, but I know how many thousands of people have died because of Christian extremists, and still do. Crusades anyone? The Irish "Troubles"? The Spanish Inquisition? The pogroms? Hell, the Holocaust?! Some would say that the devout practice of Christianity is totalitarianism. Wasn't there a reason that the founders of the United States wrote the Constitution to separate Church & State? Didn't this have something to do with the history of religious persecution practiced in Europe?
As for pulling up a quote Goldberg of the "National Review," you must be kidding. Goldberg? The "National Review"? Wow, as if we wouldn't expect an anti-Muslim screed from the Right-wing. What about a study from a country like Singapore that's multi-racial?
France's system is broken. Unless it's willing to make a change, things won't improve. Will the cure be affirmative action? Who knows? However, collecting data on the place of ethnic and racial minorites in society hurts no one. Facts are facts. Moreover, pretending that people are color/race-blind when they aren't makes no sense. Race and ethnicity matter in France.
Frank, Ward Connerly's foundation was found to have been primarily funded by the far-right billionare Richard Scafe. Thus, Connerly's organization was not a grass roots movement, but the cynical use of race.
Therefore, although many people may have believed sincerely that removing classifications might "stop the government...from enforcing the color line," others were more concerned with creating a wedge issue to further the use of the Southern Strategy's divide and conqueror techniques.
Posted: Mon 21 Nov 2005 07:01 Post subject: French riots
Quote:
France asks: why aren't there more women like Audrey?
President Chirac blames violent unrest on a lack of ethnic minority representation in the media
By John Lichfield in Paris
Published: 20 November 2005
The Independent
Like hundreds of young French journalists, and would-be journalists, Fatima Sadouki is looking for a job. Since the spring, she has written dozens of applications to newspapers and radio stations for full-time posts or temporary "piges" or "strings".
She has obtained a few offers of short-term work but nothing permanent. "Sincerely, I'm not prepared to say it's because of my name and my background," said Fatima, 27, whose parents are Algerian.
"I know dozens of other young journalists who are looking for work. If anything, the attitude at the newspaper or radio offices where I have worked is more often, 'great, you're from an Arab background. We need more people like you.' But that's a trap too. I don't want to be some kind of standard-bearer or token. France adores standard-bearers. They're usually an alibi for failing to solve the real problems. I want to be just accepted for what I am. A young, French journalist who wants to prove herself."
French people, of the right and the left, of good faith and bad faith, have been thrashing around looking for explanations, or excuses, for the 20 days of violent unrest in the country's deprived "banlieues" or suburbs. Unemployment? Large, polygamous African families? Radical Islam? Thirty years of hiding behind the ideal of a single, secular, colour-blind Republic and ignoring the unspoken discrimination against people - including many French citizens - of Arab or African backgrounds?
In his rambling, belated 13-minute speech to the nation last week, President Jacques Chirac offered another possible explanation. He singled out the failure of the French media, especially television, to hold up a mirror to the variety of races that now make up the French nation.
For foreign visitors or residents used to the recently acquired ethnic mixture on British or American TV, French screens are surprisingly monochromatic. Equally, French newspapers, both national and regional, have few reporters with Arab or African-sounding names.
Audrey Pulvar, a young black woman from Martinique, now reads the early-evening news on the France 3 public TV channel. There are some ethnically Arab or black reporters or presenters on cable channels. The mainstream news and current affairs programmes - and most French TV soaps and detective shows - are the almost exclusive preserve of white faces.
"It is also true of the advertising," said Fatima Sadouki. "On the rare occasions that I see a brown or a black face on a TV ad or on a poster, I am almost shocked myself. Television is important. Symbolism is important. For the young people in the suburbs, who feel severed from French society, it would make a big difference if they saw more people like themselves on TV."
In truth, this is a problem that has been recognised by both newspapers and mainstream television channels for several years. In this, and other parts of his speech, President Chirac seemed to be waking up from 10 years as a Rip Van Winkle president.
The French public TV channels, France 2 and France 3, already have a "Positive Action Integration Plan" to try to recruit more reporters and presenters from ethnic minorities. Other French stations are also offering sponsorship to would-be young journalists of Arab and African backgrounds to help them through costly journalism courses.
According to the heads of these schools, the poor education offered in most deprived suburbs makes it difficult to find sufficient young people from immigrant backgrounds with the language skills needed to thrive in journalism.
Eric Maitrot, director of studies at the highly respected Ecole Supérieure de Journalisme at Lille, said that he would like to have more ethnic variety but admits only two or three students each year (out of 50) who are not ethnically French. "The problem is that the education system of the republic has narrowed down the potential candidates long before they come to us," he said.
Radio France is now sponsoring a tutorial scheme to try to help aspiring journalists from African or Arab backgrounds before they take the entrance tests for Lille and other journalism schools. Fatima Sadouki welcomes such initiatives, even if they will take a long time to have much impact.
"The problem will be to avoid tokenism, the employment of one conforming, conscience-saving, brown or black face," she said. "In Britain now, I have the impression that it is becoming accepted that reporters and presenters can be from all kinds of races, bringing their own personalities and approaches. That's what we must aim at in France."
Like hundreds of young French journalists, and would-be journalists, Fatima Sadouki is looking for a job. Since the spring, she has written dozens of applications to newspapers and radio stations for full-time posts or temporary "piges" or "strings".
She has obtained a few offers of short-term work but nothing permanent. "Sincerely, I'm not prepared to say it's because of my name and my background," said Fatima, 27, whose parents are Algerian.
"I know dozens of other young journalists who are looking for work. If anything, the attitude at the newspaper or radio offices where I have worked is more often, 'great, you're from an Arab background. We need more people like you.' But that's a trap too. I don't want to be some kind of standard-bearer or token. France adores standard-bearers. They're usually an alibi for failing to solve the real problems. I want to be just accepted for what I am. A young, French journalist who wants to prove herself."
French people, of the right and the left, of good faith and bad faith, have been thrashing around looking for explanations, or excuses, for the 20 days of violent unrest in the country's deprived "banlieues" or suburbs. Unemployment? Large, polygamous African families? Radical Islam? Thirty years of hiding behind the ideal of a single, secular, colour-blind Republic and ignoring the unspoken discrimination against people - including many French citizens - of Arab or African backgrounds?
In his rambling, belated 13-minute speech to the nation last week, President Jacques Chirac offered another possible explanation. He singled out the failure of the French media, especially television, to hold up a mirror to the variety of races that now make up the French nation.
For foreign visitors or residents used to the recently acquired ethnic mixture on British or American TV, French screens are surprisingly monochromatic. Equally, French newspapers, both national and regional, have few reporters with Arab or African-sounding names.
Audrey Pulvar, a young black woman from Martinique, now reads the early-evening news on the France 3 public TV channel. There are some ethnically Arab or black reporters or presenters on cable channels. The mainstream news and current affairs programmes - and most French TV soaps and detective shows - are the almost exclusive preserve of white faces.
"It is also true of the advertising," said Fatima Sadouki. "On the rare occasions that I see a brown or a black face on a TV ad or on a poster, I am almost shocked myself. Television is important. Symbolism is important. For the young people in the suburbs, who feel severed from French society, it would make a big difference if they saw more people like themselves on TV."
In truth, this is a problem that has been recognised by both newspapers and mainstream television channels for several years. In this, and other parts of his speech, President Chirac seemed to be waking up from 10 years as a Rip Van Winkle president.
The French public TV channels, France 2 and France 3, already have a "Positive Action Integration Plan" to try to recruit more reporters and presenters from ethnic minorities. Other French stations are also offering sponsorship to would-be young journalists of Arab and African backgrounds to help them through costly journalism courses.
According to the heads of these schools, the poor education offered in most deprived suburbs makes it difficult to find sufficient young people from immigrant backgrounds with the language skills needed to thrive in journalism.
Eric Maitrot, director of studies at the highly respected Ecole Supérieure de Journalisme at Lille, said that he would like to have more ethnic variety but admits only two or three students each year (out of 50) who are not ethnically French. "The problem is that the education system of the republic has narrowed down the potential candidates long before they come to us," he said.
Radio France is now sponsoring a tutorial scheme to try to help aspiring journalists from African or Arab backgrounds before they take the entrance tests for Lille and other journalism schools. Fatima Sadouki welcomes such initiatives, even if they will take a long time to have much impact.
"The problem will be to avoid tokenism, the employment of one conforming, conscience-saving, brown or black face," she said. "In Britain now, I have the impression that it is becoming accepted that reporters and presenters can be from all kinds of races, bringing their own personalities and approaches. That's what we must aim at in France."
There's a BIG difference between someone from Martinique and an immigrant from an Arab country.
Good God! You're using Steve Sailer as a source? And first-cousin marriage has been common in Europe for 1000's of years. It's not illegal in most Western countries. Heck, it's legal in several states in the U.S.
Not that it's saying anything, but the royalty of Europe married their first cousins constantly. As for polygamy, what does that say about the folks in Utah who gave up the practice just before statehood. Are you saying that Mormons have faulty genes lurking about because of their great parents? Moreover, although polygamy is outlawed in the West, some men have always carried on extramarital affairs or marrying in a serial fashion (like Henry VIII) creating a virtual polygamous community. Noted Conservatives Newt Gingrich and George Will cheated on their first wives, for instance.
(Did I say: Steve Sailer??!! Please!)
That said, what's the difference between a human being from Martinique and a human being from North Africa or Southwest Asia? Are you saying that all humans considered Arab are genetically inferior to those from Martinique? Given that you have written that some Arabs are mixed-race people, what does that say about yourself or the rest of us? (Do you know what your genetic legacy is? Have you had your DNA sequenced? Just how "white" are you? Is it your "white" genes that grants you your intelligence? Is there even technology today that can determine that?
Aren't there Arabs with white skin and blue-eyes like the berbers? Aren't there others with brown skin? How many millions of people compose the Arab world? Are you saying that all those people are genetically or culturally the same?
What exactly are you trying to say? More importantly, are you a follower of Sailer, Rushton, the "American Renaissance," Pioneer Fund, and others of that ilk who believe in a genetic basis for race, genetic superiority or inferiority of groups of humans? If not, why do you persist in using Sailer's work (fruit from the poisoned tree..)? Haven't you also decried the "Bell Curve"? If so, doesn't it seem strange to use Sailer's work? Just curious..
So, that we're clear, here is a list of Arab Americans. Are you saying that these people shouldn't/couldn't succeed in France because of their DNA?
http://www.aaiusa.org/famous_arab_americans.htm
Doesn't Sailer also say that Africans and Native Americans are genetically inferior to Caucasians? There are websites devoted to debunking Sailer. You might want to read some of them before spreading his hateful lies.
Steve Sailer as a source? Especially after the things he wrote during the events that followed hurricane Katrina? Didn't Sailer express a dim view of New Orleans creole/mixed-race leadership? In the context of Sailer's work, why do you think that he might feel that way?
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
