It’s been a really busy week. Monday, I had a deadline for my CSM column for this week. I started out writing something about the Middle East, and at around 11:30 a.m. realized I’d far prefer to be writing about the riots in France. So that’s what I did. It’s in today’s paper. (Also, here.)
Tuesday, I had to work on the editor’s suggestions for revisions of a piece I have in the January-February issue of Foreign Policy magazine. FP is a classy mag published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. I haven’t published there since, oh my gosh, 1983. So this is a nice thing to do. The piece is basically a wrap-up of some of the big conclusions of my book on Transitional Justice in Africa. The darn thing is, though, that originally it was meant to be in the current (Nov.-Dec.) issue. So I went final on the text sometime in August. And actually, quite a bit has happened since then– especially regarding the International criminal Court (ICC) which issued its first indictments last month.
Well, I guess I’m glad they delayed running the piece by two months. They did it to accommodate late-breaking hurricane-related items. At least this way, my piece will also address these “pioneering” ICC indictments. But trying to give it, basically, three months’ worth of updating was more work than I expected.
Most of which concerns Uganda, by the way. If you want to find out more, read this post I put up on the Transitional Justice Forum blog last week.
Anyway, that’s a good part of why I’ve been feeling busy this week. Couple of other reasons, too.
And then, so much has been happening in the world this week! Where to start? Ahmad? Judy? Jordan? Syria? Iraq? Palestine? Cheney? Torture?
I guess one definite trend I’m seeing is the retrenchment of Blair’s political power inside the UK system, and that of Cheney’s power in this country. It’s slow. But it looks steady. Let’s see how broad we can make the agenda of the current “re-thinking”…
11 thoughts on “CSM column on France (and Europe)”
Comments are closed.
That’s a pretty good piece Helena, succint but thourough. The only other connection I would make if I were French would be between this resonant integration failure and the prospect of admitting Turkey into the EU. If my car was burning down on the streets I would be asking my politicians why exactly we want to bring in a flood of Turks next.
David
What I would like to know about this David is 1, How old is he? and 2, Given his racist views, what exactly does he want here on the Just World News site?
excellent article Helena…you touched all the important bases…you recognize the heart of the problem is the exclusion felt by the banlieuers and the need for a “deep new national dialogue over what it means to be ‘French’ today.”
My only disappointment is that as an American yourself and writing for an American audience, you certainly have standing to look at the American model of assimilating immigrants and share your thoughts on whether it has application to the French. For all its faults, America may have something pertinent to teach them about secularism, affirmative action, economic opportunity, reducing social barriers and the “Melting Pot” (at least as an ideal) approach to absorbing immigrants and turning them into national assets.
On a personal note, I interview high school seniors for an Ivy League university and I am always astonished that so many of my interviewees are children of first generation Americans. They largely see themselves as Americans although in many cases they maintain a strong connection in one way or another with their cultures of origin.
This is from Peter McLaren’s site on critical pedagogy: “Culture: Culture is used in its broadest, anthropological sense as including all that is humanly fabricated, endowed, designed, articulated, conceived, or directed. Culture includes products which are humanly produced, both material (buildings, artifacts, factories, slum housing) and immaterial (ideology, value systems, mores), as well as materially derived products such as social class and the socio/political order.”
This is the only possible meaning of the word culture. The common sense that Hammurabi attaches to the word is nothing to do with culture and everything to do with racism. To use studies of culture as a means of discriminating between “groups” of people defined in such terms is racism. It is the very definition of racism.
It is rather depressing but not surprising that someone with Hammurabi’s view of the world should be charged with interviewing “for an Ivy League university”.
Dominic,
Why do you attribute me racist views? Because I observe that after failing to integrate African immigrants it may not be wise to attempt the same with a massive influx of Asians? All countries have immigration policies. These are generally for the benefit of their citizens, and sporadically to pursue secondary goals.
How does my age matter?
David
“This is the only possible meaning of the word culture. “
It is rather depressing but not surprising that someone with Hammurabi’s view of the world should be charged with interviewing “for an Ivy League university”.
Given his racist views, what exactly does he want here on the Just World News site
Dominic maybe you should re-visit Helena’s posting guidelines.
Dominic
You can be sure that I have zero interest in the ideological proclivities of my interviewees…Intellectual curiosity, articulateness, passion and insightfulness are what I’m looking for.
“Intellectual curiosity, articulateness, passion and insightfulness are what I’m looking for.”
Unless they’re a legacy, right?
Just kidding 😉
John
yes, that surely factors in…but not at my level.
Hi, Hammurabi.
I apologise for the sharp personal tone I seem to have adopted. The phrase that rocked me in your case was “cultures of origin” and to a lesser extent the idea of being American (or being French).
This idea of “cultural” discrimination (on top of the more usual ethnic and confessional kind) fills me with dismay.
I do believe that as far as you pursue an understanding of “culture” down this road, so far will it become more and more obscure.
For example, as I think John C is wryly pointing out, your four criteria could be seen as thoroughly “cultural” in the same sense that you use the word, and you would have no basis to say they were “culturally” neutral.
That is why I insist that the definition given by Peter McLaren, quoted above, is the only one that can be cashed reliably.
The free development of each should be the condition for the free development of all. This formulation of Karl Marx’s, from the “Manifesto”, reconciles the individual with the humanistic social body in a way that transcends all sectarian categories.
Culture is used in its broadest, anthropological sense as including all that is humanly fabricated, endowed, designed, articulated, conceived, or directed….
I think that you should look again carefully at “designed, articulated, conceived and directed as aspects of culture”. I think that these concepts are fully in line with aspects of culture that have to do with things such as language, beliefs and values and their effects on social structure.
As to age, I often wonder how old you are.