Why "migrant riots" do not lead to a May 68.... A view from Belgium
s | 18.11.2005 10:56 | Analysis | Migration | Social Struggles
This article was orginally written by two women from the feminist network NextGENDERation (Nadia Fadil, Sarah Bracke en Meryem Kanmaz) and titled "Why "migrant riots" do not lead to a May 68...". The intervention is originally written is Flamish and published as an opinion piece in the major Flanish dailiy de Standaard.
Why "migrant riots" do not lead to a May 68...
It seems as if things are calming down in the banlieues of Paris and
other cities. The last two weeks we have witnessed the impressive
spectacle of burning cars, schools, companies... and the confrontation
between young people and the police and other forces of law and order.
The French minister of Internal Affairs made it perfectly clear that he
would not move an inch, and while the Prime Minister was preoccupied
with assuring his PR (proclaiming anti-discrimination measures) it was
announced that all those without French citizenship among the young
people arrested during the riots will be deported.
It so happens that almost three years ago something similar befell our
'peaceful' little monarchy. Do you remember those so-called riots in
Borgerhout (which resemble more of a pacifist demonstration compared
with the events in Paris) following the racist murder of the teacher
Mohamed Achrak? Those in positions of political responsibility were very
quick to seize the opportunity to show their teeth: 'no-go' zones would
not be tolerated, we were warned, and there were deliberations to change
the law' if it were not possible to outlaw the identified insurgent of
the day - the Arab European League (AEL). Subsequently Dyab Abou Jahjah
was arrested, only to be released a few days later because of lack of
evidence.
To hear those same political leaders, three years later, condemn the
"provocative" statements of Sarkozy borders, to say the least, on the
surreal. Belgian politicians seem to agree whole-heartedly that it won't
come to French situations here in Belgium and that the French government is taking a particularly hard line. While three years ago many of them did not have the slightest hesitation to trample on the principle of the seperation of powers. France does not need to take lessons from anyone in this respect, especially not from neighboring countries like Belgium.
The repression which presently characterizes countries such as France
and Belgium is symptomatic for a political shift that is taking place in
Western-Europe since a number of years. Under the motto "the breakdown of multiculturalism" an increasing number of unacceptable violations of elementary political and economical human rights is taking place. The political establishment is in fact unable or unwilling to come up with a political respons to the multi-layered and difficult problems that
confronts West-European states: economical crisis, a lack of jobs, the
dismantlement of the welfare state and social services, the changing
composition of the population... The most easy solution thusfar is to
put "all the sins of Israel" on the back of migrants. The facts are:
poverty in Flanders hits 15% of the population, a major structural
unemployment which in first instance targets (young) migrants, the rate
of educational drop-out is enormous, and all of these conditions are
fortified through visible and invisible discrimination throughout the
whole of society. But none of these abusive conditions are met with the
kinds of insightful structural approaches they are begging for. Up till
now it has mostly been swearing by the magical "integration" formula: if
"they" learn the language and shup up then all will be well... But what
exactely would it take to make it clear that we're not dealing with a
"lack of integration", that the young people rioting on the streets
today speak the language perfectly well (in many cases they have
actually unlearned their "mother"tongue!), and that they perfectly know
the ins and outs of the society in which they live. At stake is poverty,
social exclusion, discrimination, unequal power relations, closed
political channels and all of this drenched in neo-colonialism and
racism which continues to position these young people as the "eternal
other".
A commentator in the French newspaper "Le Monde" suggested that all this protest could be a start of a "May 68" of the banlieues. How much we
would like to agree with him, we must observe that this is not the case,
and we blame it to a large extent on the lack of solidarity with the
protests. Only a few among many politicians, opinion makers,
researchers, trade unions and political organisations considered the
events in France as a legitimate political protest. A more general
tendency was one of condemning of the "violence" in France and taking
distance from the "agitators". The frustration was legitimate, we were
told, but this kind of protest would "go nowhere". These kinds of
frustrations need to be politically organized, according to the left's
advise. What falls so easily into oblivion is that the politically
organized protest of the past was systematically knocked off with
repression or disapproval - as the criminalisation and marginalisation
of the French Mouvement de l'Immigration et des Banlieues (MIB), or the
AEL in our country, demonstrates.
How much longer are history's lessons bound to remain in vein? The riots
in France are not the first of this kind, neither in France nor in the
rest of Europe. But time and time again we are forced to observe that
they meet with repression (the right's favorite card) or paternalist
disapproval (by the left). Only social protests that make it into the
history books as such, or that are represented in films such as "La
Haine" can count on the approval of the left, so it seems.
May 68 knew many confrontations between the forces of law and order and young people. A fundamental difference between today and May 68 is that the "agitators" of that time could fall back on the solidarity of other
political groups and intellectuals. But what to expect, a colorful mix
of (white) university students and workers is something else than
(migrant) "trash" [racaille] from the banlieues....
The events of the last weeks in France do not stand isolated, nor
in history, nor for the whole of Western-Europe. They are inscribed in a
larger landscape of many attempts to put up political resistance when
other channels appear totally insufficient or closed. And to the extent
that those other channels remain closed, these protests become more grim and marked by powerless rage. That such protests - whether they take place in Clichy or Borgerhout, Creil or Bradford - time and time again
are met with nothing more than repression and disapproval, is a very
bitter pill to swallow. We already see who will be paying the heaviest
price: the young people themselves. But then again, what can be lost if
you have nothing more to lose?
Nadia Fadil, Sarah Bracke en Meryem Kanmaz
14 November 2005
----------------------
dear all,
okay, since a number of you insisted i should translate the opinion
piece quickly, here it is, i'm sure with many mistakes, no time to check
the language now...
but some comments, as i'm not sure if some things translate well. as
mentioned before, it is not a text on the events in paris but an
intervention in the belgian public debate (and the way the discussion on
the events in paris is shaping up here):
1/ we refer in particular to the unsettling racist murder of mohamed
ashrak three years ago (on november 26 it will be three years ago),
subsequent 'riots' (in borgerhout) and political responses at that time,
followed by intense marginalisation of a strongly political migrant
movement (AEL -the most political we had up till date)
2/ we don't go into it in the piece, but a translation needs this note,
i'm sure: we use "migrant riots" in the titel, because this is how the
events are very often called in the flemish press [migrantenrellen] -
which is symptomatic in many ways i guess for a conceptual framework
surrounding debates of citizenship and multiculturalism that differs
greatly from the french one (and the french-speaking belgian one for
that matter). i mean, i could not imagine that 'les émeutes des
immigrés' or something of that kind would become a common reference in
france for what is happening now...
and then we got pissed with discussions with leftie friends and
not-so-friends whether or not burning cars was political, especially
cause these discussion seemed a bit for discussion sake or at least had
no slightest impulse of actually trying to organize something, and that
combined with our memory of (the left's) reactions to the AEL...
anyway, responses are very welcome.
kisses, s.
It seems as if things are calming down in the banlieues of Paris and
other cities. The last two weeks we have witnessed the impressive
spectacle of burning cars, schools, companies... and the confrontation
between young people and the police and other forces of law and order.
The French minister of Internal Affairs made it perfectly clear that he
would not move an inch, and while the Prime Minister was preoccupied
with assuring his PR (proclaiming anti-discrimination measures) it was
announced that all those without French citizenship among the young
people arrested during the riots will be deported.
It so happens that almost three years ago something similar befell our
'peaceful' little monarchy. Do you remember those so-called riots in
Borgerhout (which resemble more of a pacifist demonstration compared
with the events in Paris) following the racist murder of the teacher
Mohamed Achrak? Those in positions of political responsibility were very
quick to seize the opportunity to show their teeth: 'no-go' zones would
not be tolerated, we were warned, and there were deliberations to change
the law' if it were not possible to outlaw the identified insurgent of
the day - the Arab European League (AEL). Subsequently Dyab Abou Jahjah
was arrested, only to be released a few days later because of lack of
evidence.
To hear those same political leaders, three years later, condemn the
"provocative" statements of Sarkozy borders, to say the least, on the
surreal. Belgian politicians seem to agree whole-heartedly that it won't
come to French situations here in Belgium and that the French government is taking a particularly hard line. While three years ago many of them did not have the slightest hesitation to trample on the principle of the seperation of powers. France does not need to take lessons from anyone in this respect, especially not from neighboring countries like Belgium.
The repression which presently characterizes countries such as France
and Belgium is symptomatic for a political shift that is taking place in
Western-Europe since a number of years. Under the motto "the breakdown of multiculturalism" an increasing number of unacceptable violations of elementary political and economical human rights is taking place. The political establishment is in fact unable or unwilling to come up with a political respons to the multi-layered and difficult problems that
confronts West-European states: economical crisis, a lack of jobs, the
dismantlement of the welfare state and social services, the changing
composition of the population... The most easy solution thusfar is to
put "all the sins of Israel" on the back of migrants. The facts are:
poverty in Flanders hits 15% of the population, a major structural
unemployment which in first instance targets (young) migrants, the rate
of educational drop-out is enormous, and all of these conditions are
fortified through visible and invisible discrimination throughout the
whole of society. But none of these abusive conditions are met with the
kinds of insightful structural approaches they are begging for. Up till
now it has mostly been swearing by the magical "integration" formula: if
"they" learn the language and shup up then all will be well... But what
exactely would it take to make it clear that we're not dealing with a
"lack of integration", that the young people rioting on the streets
today speak the language perfectly well (in many cases they have
actually unlearned their "mother"tongue!), and that they perfectly know
the ins and outs of the society in which they live. At stake is poverty,
social exclusion, discrimination, unequal power relations, closed
political channels and all of this drenched in neo-colonialism and
racism which continues to position these young people as the "eternal
other".
A commentator in the French newspaper "Le Monde" suggested that all this protest could be a start of a "May 68" of the banlieues. How much we
would like to agree with him, we must observe that this is not the case,
and we blame it to a large extent on the lack of solidarity with the
protests. Only a few among many politicians, opinion makers,
researchers, trade unions and political organisations considered the
events in France as a legitimate political protest. A more general
tendency was one of condemning of the "violence" in France and taking
distance from the "agitators". The frustration was legitimate, we were
told, but this kind of protest would "go nowhere". These kinds of
frustrations need to be politically organized, according to the left's
advise. What falls so easily into oblivion is that the politically
organized protest of the past was systematically knocked off with
repression or disapproval - as the criminalisation and marginalisation
of the French Mouvement de l'Immigration et des Banlieues (MIB), or the
AEL in our country, demonstrates.
How much longer are history's lessons bound to remain in vein? The riots
in France are not the first of this kind, neither in France nor in the
rest of Europe. But time and time again we are forced to observe that
they meet with repression (the right's favorite card) or paternalist
disapproval (by the left). Only social protests that make it into the
history books as such, or that are represented in films such as "La
Haine" can count on the approval of the left, so it seems.
May 68 knew many confrontations between the forces of law and order and young people. A fundamental difference between today and May 68 is that the "agitators" of that time could fall back on the solidarity of other
political groups and intellectuals. But what to expect, a colorful mix
of (white) university students and workers is something else than
(migrant) "trash" [racaille] from the banlieues....
The events of the last weeks in France do not stand isolated, nor
in history, nor for the whole of Western-Europe. They are inscribed in a
larger landscape of many attempts to put up political resistance when
other channels appear totally insufficient or closed. And to the extent
that those other channels remain closed, these protests become more grim and marked by powerless rage. That such protests - whether they take place in Clichy or Borgerhout, Creil or Bradford - time and time again
are met with nothing more than repression and disapproval, is a very
bitter pill to swallow. We already see who will be paying the heaviest
price: the young people themselves. But then again, what can be lost if
you have nothing more to lose?
Nadia Fadil, Sarah Bracke en Meryem Kanmaz
14 November 2005
----------------------
dear all,
okay, since a number of you insisted i should translate the opinion
piece quickly, here it is, i'm sure with many mistakes, no time to check
the language now...
but some comments, as i'm not sure if some things translate well. as
mentioned before, it is not a text on the events in paris but an
intervention in the belgian public debate (and the way the discussion on
the events in paris is shaping up here):
1/ we refer in particular to the unsettling racist murder of mohamed
ashrak three years ago (on november 26 it will be three years ago),
subsequent 'riots' (in borgerhout) and political responses at that time,
followed by intense marginalisation of a strongly political migrant
movement (AEL -the most political we had up till date)
2/ we don't go into it in the piece, but a translation needs this note,
i'm sure: we use "migrant riots" in the titel, because this is how the
events are very often called in the flemish press [migrantenrellen] -
which is symptomatic in many ways i guess for a conceptual framework
surrounding debates of citizenship and multiculturalism that differs
greatly from the french one (and the french-speaking belgian one for
that matter). i mean, i could not imagine that 'les émeutes des
immigrés' or something of that kind would become a common reference in
france for what is happening now...
and then we got pissed with discussions with leftie friends and
not-so-friends whether or not burning cars was political, especially
cause these discussion seemed a bit for discussion sake or at least had
no slightest impulse of actually trying to organize something, and that
combined with our memory of (the left's) reactions to the AEL...
anyway, responses are very welcome.
kisses, s.
s
