Month: March 2009
The Equality Myth
Here’s the thing. France is the land of human rights. Not to mention Equality. It is therefore illegal here to gather data on the basis of a person’s race or ethnicity. How, then, without statistics to enable analysis, does she address the very real problem of discrimination in her society? This very sensible question has only recently been taken seriously here. Why? Because Sarkozy, in thrall to the Anglo-Saxon social model, has set up a new commission, headed by a businessman of Algerian origin called Yazid Sabeg, in order to measure and promote ‘diversity’. The English-speaking world is busy applauding on the sidelines while most French intellectuals on both left and right band together in fierce opposition. What are these guardians of the republican model afraid of?
Three things:
1) The Past: the last time the citizens of this nation were invited to provide information on the basis of their racial origins was under Vichy’s ruthlessly efficient anti-Semitic regime.
2) The Present: if France gives in to this initiative and starts openly gathering data on her ethnic minorities, she will have to face the reality of how truly elitist and non-egalitarian her society actually is. (There is basically no black middle class in this country.)
3) The Future: If France allows herself to debunk the myth of equality by acknowledging the day to day reality of her immigrant populations she will have to do something about it, maybe even start considering such terrifying proposals as affirmative action. Should this happen, it will only be a matter of time before her highly elitist National Education system and with it, all the vestiges of her aristocratic traditions that have survived so well since her revolution, crumble and die.
I’m not too worried, though. Sarkozy’s measures so far are only posturing. France has plenty of data about her immigrant communities. To get around the law she simply asks, Where were you born, where were your parents born, and your grandparents? She already has all the stats on her first, second and third immigrant generations. She simply doesn’t want to wash her dirty laundry in public. Is that too much to ask?
On Liberté

The PS Cries Freedom
The French Socialist Party (PS), in an attempt to claw back some attention, respectability and perhaps even a little grandeur, recently organised a rally in Paris called (impressively) “The Spring of Freedom“. Chaired by the First Secretary of the PS, Martine Aubry (Photo:Left) the meeting followed Ségolène Royal‘s equally grandiose “Rally for Fraternity“, which was held last September. This time, though, it seems that, in the face of the rather dingy realities of today’s economic climate, the abstract noun – usually so effective in drawing French crowds – is losing some of its magic. Only about 1500 militants showed up in a venue built to house twice that.
Liberté, égalité, fraternité or (lest we forget) Death.

Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, Or Death
Working its way through the potent nouns that make up this country’s national motto – indeed, its very identity – the PS is attempting to lay claim to France’s revolutionary heritage and at the same time, draw the political discourse away from the pragmatics of the economy and towards more abstract territory, where it feels safer.
“Our struggle,” Aubry announced yesterday. “Is to make sure that equality and liberty go together.” («Faire rimer égalité et liberté, c’est cela notre combat») To help enlighten those who may be baffled by the intangibility of this objective, the PS recently published a book entitled, “La France en Libertés Surveillées” (“France: Liberty Under Surveillance), which condemns the Sarkozy government’s perceived attacks on civil liberties, within the domains of parliament, the police, the judiciary, immigration and the media.
Those looking for some hard facts may be a little disappointed by this 166 page document. The opening sentence, a quote from Montesquieu‘s “L’ Esprit des Lois” (The Spirit of Laws) sets the tone: “To prevent the abuse of power ’tis necessary that by the very disposition of things, power should be a check to power.” («Pour qu’on ne puisse abuser du pouvoir, il faut que, par la disposition des choses, le pouvoir arrête le pouvoir.») Ségolène Royal, who is quick to point out in her blog that she did not help to write this pamphlet, admits that the freedoms in question “are still there but…they are slowly being taken over (“mise sous tutelle”).
What emerges from all this is not so much a conflict of policy but of philosophy. We are seeing here the opposition between two notions of freedom, one being pushed by Sarkozy and his like and the other being defended by his detractors. In his work “Two Concepts of Liberty” Isiah Berlin defined these opposing notions as “positive” and “negative” liberty. Put simply, the idea of positive liberty is the possibility for an individual to attain the goal that he/she has set or to pursue his/her desires unhindered. In this view of the world, the individual is empowered and liberty is a form of power. The other concept of freedom is the provision of a space in which the individual may thrive without being bothered by others. It is simply the absence of coercion or molestation. France has a long and entrenched attachment (which predates the Revolution) to the idea of positive liberty, while in the Anglo-Saxon world we champion the rather less glamorous version. Paradoxically, it was an eighteenth century Frenchman who best formulated the differences between the two: “The free man is the man who is not in irons, nor imprisoned in a gaol, nor terrorized like a slave by the fear of punishment … it is not lack of freedom not to fly like an eagle or swim like a whale.” Claude Adrien Helvétius.
So it is that when his enemies refer to our Sex Dwarf as “Sarko the American”, they are not only alluding to his shameless materialism and his philistinism, but also to his dangerous susceptibility to the Anglo-Saxon vision of what it means to be free.
Reve General

Non, non et non.
France by Numbers
78… % of French people back today’s strike (according to an IFOP poll).
8… trade unions are calling for the strike (the CGT, the CFDT, FO, CFE-CFC, CFTC, Solidaires, FSU and Unsa).
219… demonstrations across the country attended by…
1,08 million… demonstrators, according to police estimates and…
2,5 million… demonstrators, according to the unions.
14,100… jobs to be cut in research and education as part of Sarkozy’s proposed government spending reforms.
300 – 400 million… euros is the estimated cost of a strike day like today’s, according to Finance Minister, Christine Lagarde.
2.6 billion… euros: the cost of the package secured by the unions from Sarkozy after the last general strike on 29th January.
The Address of Shame

Former headquarters of the French arm of the Gestapo. Known as 'La Carlingue' (cabin) the address also served as a brothel.
93 rue Lauriston, 75016, Paris, is an address known to most of France (at least those vaguely aware of her history) as the headquarters of the French Gestapo from 1941 – 1944. It is not, it would seem (however expensive the real estate in this particular part of Paris) an address that is desirable to its potential tenant, former Foreign Minister to Chirac, Monsieur Herve de Charette. The MP recently asked Claude Goasguen, the good mayor of the sixteenth arrondissement (by far the Nazi’s favourite quartier), to ask his council members if they could possibly change the address…From No. 93 to No. 91a, rue Lauriston!
“The past associated with the address was embarrassing to me,” the former minister has since explained, by way of justification. “Particularly since I’m responsible for a Franco-Arab* organisation. My request was well-intentioned: to get rid of the address of shame. I didn’t know I was going to trigger all this controversy.”
Obligingly, Mayor Goasguen (a fellow member of Sarkozy’s UMP party) put it to the vote. Significantly, 8 out of his 12 councillors abstained but no one dared to vote against his motion, which was quite simply absurd. Not revisionist, as some have claimed, not fascist, but plain mad.
The mayor, who has rather clumsily described his position on the subject as “neither for nor against”, has since dropped the matter. (The matter, though, has not dropped him.)
It all reminds me of the suggestion, made a few years ago, by the MP Gérard Charasse, that a law be passed to prohibit any assimilation of the Vichy regime with the town of Vichy (one of the key towns in his constituency). Article 4 of his law (which thankfully has never seen the light of day) states that “Shall be considered an imputation causing prejudice to the honour and reputation (of Vichy)…any designation tending to assimilate the name of the town or its inhabitants with treasonous behaviour, capitulation, or offense to republican values.”
When will this country ever recover enough from the trauma of the Occupation to stop wanting to forget it?
France: the badboy of the free market bites back
I love The Economist. It’s so smug and so uniform in its outlook, as though all the articles were written by that same, reassuringly ‘authoritative’ hand. This morning, though, on reading the piece about France’s infuriating proclivity towards statism, Back in the Driving Seat: The Return of Dirigisme, I detected a touch of self-doubt.
A devotee, as you would expect, of Anglo-Saxon, free market capitalism, the author of the piece could not help but acknowledge that France’s bizarre economic model, with its record of shameless statism, conservative banking and lavish public spending, has left her far better equipped to deal with the financial crisis than her more observant partners in the global economy.
The French economy is used to high unemployment, which is currently pushing 8.3%. America, whose unemployment rate in February was 8.1%, is not. The social consequences of joblessness in France (where the poor have access to decent schools, health care and welfare) and in the United States, are not the same at all.
France is constantly being rapped on the knuckles for her high public spending. Two years ago, this accounted for 52% of her GDP, compared with 45% in Britain. I have long been puzzled by the argument that it is permissible to encourage massive personal borrowing (the average owed today by every adult in Britain, including mortgages, is £30,450) and be so censorious of state borrowing. Now, of course the French budget deficit (running this year at 5.5% of her GDP) is well below that of Britain (7.2%) and America (12%).
Now, all you Anglo Saxon capitalists out there, could we please see a little more humility?
Sarko, L’Americain

Clemenceau, a proto anti-American
France is back in NATO. Why does it matter that more than four decades after de Gaulle slammed the door, Nicolas Sarkozy is to bring France back into the Alliance’s integrated command? The gesture – for it is more potent as a gesture than as an action – is Sarko’s most radical move to date. Not because it will change much on the ground: France is the fourth largest provider of troops to NATO and has led NATO missions to Kossovo and Afghanistan but because,
a) it will put an end to decades of hypocrisy: all through the nineties, French foreign policy required that any arrangement which put French forces at the disposal of NATO, had to be agreed in secret (Daniel Vernet, Le Monde 24/6/08)
b) it undermines the sacred cow of anti-Americanism and thereby strikes at the heart of the nation’s identity.
Because despising the Americans – for their materialism, their consumerism and their perceived philistinism, in short for their quintessentially un-French value system – has been an acceptable national pastime ever since May ’68. And even before that, as far back as the First World War, the French ruling classes, who were learning to resent the emerging superpower, felt entitled to the kind of savage remarks made by Georges Clemenceau (who happened to be married to an American):
‘America is the only nation in history which miraculously has gone directly from barbarism to degeneration without the usual interval of civilisation.’
Feminine…In my mind…
Here is the first issue of France’s brand new women’s magazine: ‘Causette’, or chatter (dangerously homonymous with Victor Hugo’s eternal victim, Cosette?) No, announces the editorial: “Just a bit of enriching chatter with a healthy dose of humility and quite a lot of irony (mordant)”. Hmm. And inside, a beauty contest for homeless women in Belgium, France’s new hot, black actor, Jacky Ido (in the nude), a bit of literature and a spot of fashion. ‘Causette’, we are told, is “feminine in the brain” – meaning what exactly? Doesn’t matter. I’m loving it. Especially if we’re spared the psycho-analytic twaddle, pioneered by Elle and common to most women’s magazines in France, which all seem to have their resident Freudian analyst, answering all your woes from sporadic orgasm, to coping with your child, to dealing with your lover…
Vive La Femme!
Yesterday (Sunday, March 8th) was International Women’s Day (IWD)
I can’t help smiling at the differences between the French woman’s celebration of this global event and that of their Anglo-Saxon sisters. You only have to look at the two websites devoted to the IWD in French and in English, to spot the huge disparity in tone, ethos and conception.
Started in 1911 by Clara Zetkin, the German Socialist and Women’s Rights campaigner (confidante of Rosa Luxemburg) the idea of the IWD was to set aside a day every year – in any country that was at all interested in the idea of women’s rights – in which to celebrate women and provide a platform on which to press for their demands.
Today, the IWDs English web page claims to celebrate “the economic, political and social achievements of women past, present and future”. The French home page, on the other hand, is a shamelessly sentimental jamboree celebrating a rather quaint idea of femininity. It features an open letter, written by one of this year’s participants in the Journee de la Femme (JDF) 2009 Beaux Texte (Beautiful Prose) Competition. The entry is a “message in a bottle” tossed into the “tempest” that is the fight for female equality.
The text begins like this: “Will this world one day unite in its masculine and feminine sides? For what is there that is more magnificent than the mystery of the meeting of a man and a woman?” Est-ce qu’il sera un jour ce monde uni dans son masculin et son féminin ? Car qu’y a-t-il de plus grandiose que le mystère de la rencontre d’un homme et d’une femme ?
And ends like this: “A reunion through the fusion of souls, the explosion of bodies in the hope of the redeeming flowering, through the conception of a child, daughter and son alike, who will bring with them the best (of all possible worlds).” Réunion dans une fusion de leur âme, dans l’explosion de leur corps avec l’espoir d’une éclosion rédemptrice dans la conception d’un enfant , fille ou fils tout confondu, porteur du meilleur.
I could not hope to find a better illustration of French idealism v. Anglo Saxon pragmatism than these two readings of the IWD and the JDF.
In mitigation…Here is a a popular song called Je Suis Une Femme (I am a Woman), written to celebrate this year’s JDF by the two very gifted – and mercifully ironic – French loons, Clément Marchand and Alexandre Castagnetti.

Beauty and Genius are a big help to integration in France
The controversy rages on about whether or not France should start openly gathering statistics about her ethnic minorities. (My guess is that it is one of those national distractions that must come as a boon to our sex dwarf.) It is also a completely ridiculous and hypocritical debate (see previous post). Surely the question is this: instead of eternally stigmatizing individuals born in France with the migration of their parents, why not come clean and ask them their ethnic origins? In this way, France can at last offer the possibility for these citizens (whose parents may have been born Algerian or Senegalese) to claim an extra layer of selfhood? There is a serious gap in this culture between the ideal of ‘ethno-solidarity’ (sustained by the universalism inscribed in French law) and the rather more pressing need to reduce very real inequalities. The fact is that if you’re French and Black or Muslim you’d better be either Zinedine Zidane or Patrick Viera because France’s natural intolerance towards mediocrity becomes particularly ferocious when it comes to her minorities.