These two articles -
one in the NY Times and
the other in WS Journal (subscription required) - evaluate some of the causes of unrest in France. They are both worth reading and provide insight or at least ideas on what might be underlying causes. However, what I can't seem to shake is the WSJ author's (Dan Henninger) assertion that it is the French Muslim's refusal to integrate that is partially or largely the cause. Its not that I disagree, but instead its the toss off manner in which he makes the claim without elaboration or substantiation. The claim is contradicted by the NY Times article. Also, if you read carefully, it appears that Henninger believes that French Muslims simply aren't interested in work. Judge for yourself.
Excerpt, NYT article:
"I was born in Senegal when it was part of France," said Semou Diouf before putting the pipe in his mouth. "I speak French, my wife is French and I was educated in France." The problem, he added after pulling the pipe out of his mouth again, 'is the French don't think I'm French."
That, in a nutshell, is what lies at the heart of the unrest that has swept France in the past two weeks: millions of French citizens, whether immigrants or the offspring of immigrants, feel rejected by traditional French society, which has resisted adjusting a vision of itself forged in fires of the French Revolution. The concept of French identity remains rooted deep in the country's centuries-old culture, and a significant portion of the population has yet to accept the increasingly multiethnic makeup of the nation. Put simply, being French, for many people, remains a baguette-and-beret affair.
Excerpt, WSJ article:
I am prepared to entertain the notion that France's second-generation Muslims are burning down those lovely French towns because Muslims can't or won't integrate into European societies. I'm also inclined to believe that if you are 18, male, live in a scuzzy neighborhood and have not much better to do from 9 to 5 than hang with the boys, nothing good can come of it. The solution to the first theory of France's riots is to round up all the young Muslims, put them on trains and ship them "home." Plan B would be for France to output a better 9-to-5 culture than it's got. My guess is the Chirac government would prefer the first solution.
...
But let's take on the idea that France's rioters have little to do with economic enervation, that this is really about France's failed attempts to "assimilate" Muslims who in any event don't want to assimilate. But what if they did? Or what if, instead of Arabs, they were Rome-fleeing Italians or even workaholic Slovakians?
And then Henninger goes on to argue that even if arabs wanted to integrate they couldn't b/c European countries - and France in particular - are too closed and class oriented. So according to Henninger blame can be attributed to all the French: even if French arabs weren't resistent to integration and weren't lazy (ie, if they were ambitious like the 'Rome-fleeing Italians' or the Slovak busy bees) it still wouldn't matter b/c the native-born French won't let them participate.
