Posthegemonic Comments
The Fall 2005 riots in France were described by many a French politician and media outlet as the work of non-French "scum" out to cause trouble. Just today the Prime Minister tightened immigration to "control" the situation.
A complex systems view of the situation suggests the reverse is true: the riots were a very French means for a segment of French society to express need for a social correction in a proper French way. Indeed the parallels between the riots in the banlieue and the multitude of truck, rail, service, etc workers strikes willingly endured by French society are many. What was different was the look of the rioters - not their language (actually better than most strikers), their education (ditto), or satisfaction with their living conditions (ditto again).
What the riots exposed were two dangerous underbellies in both France and the rest of Europe - racism and a lack of economic integration. The historic French response was to deny that the issues even existed. As a result the problems simmered and then exploded.
Denial is not a long-term viable option. So what are the alternatives?
Michael, thanks for your contribution. I'll let Jeremy (far better informed than I) respond directly.
My question for Jeremy is more abstract: Jezzer, I'm intrigued that you seem to be posing early Bourdieu against late: the Bourdieu of Distinction (on the youth whose hopes are cruelly raised and then dashed through the educational system) against Bourdieu the defender of Republican universalism. I'd be fascinated to hear more....
(As you know, this goes back to our very first conversation back in the Prince of Wales, oh, six or seven years ago.)
Michael, I wonder about what you refer to as the parallel between the strikes in transport and public services and the recent events in the banlieues. Are you thinking about the Autumn 1995 strikes, here? If so, my problem with that earlier movement was precisely its inability to move beyond the language of French republicanism & of defence of the existing system. I'm thinking particularly of the "Bourdieu petition's" reference to "defending the most universal gains of the Republic". I'm with Etienne Balibar on this, himself a supporter of the 1995 strikes and signatory of the Bourdieu petition, who later pointed out that the problem with the 1995 movement was its "blockage at the level of the nation". If I were being provocative, I might say that the recent riots in the banlieues provided ample evidence of the failure of social movements in France to escape that blockage at the level of the nation & engage with some of the most deprived groups in France, notably the young unemployed and ethnic minorities, who are precisely excluded by republicanism. My feeling is that, ultimately, appeals to the republican nation contribute to this problem (which is not to say I wouldn't have supported the 1995 strikes, like Balibar did). I agree absolutely that denial isn't an option but neither, I think, is the constant fixation on the republican tradition, the French model, French exceptionalism or whatever you want to call it. We've got to move beyond this fetishisation of national traditions and cultures.
Jon, as for Bourdieu, I was really thinking about him at all - or at least I didn't think I was.....
It's in your blood now, Jezzer.
Commenting by HaloScan
