By Rachel Marsden
Wednesday, December 18, 2013
A new report commissioned by the French Socialist
government to make recommendations on how France can better integrate its
residents of foreign origin has been described by former French Defense
Minister Gerard Longuet as "organizing apartheid by inciting each
community to affirm its difference," according to the French newspaper Le
Figaro.
I figured that had to be gross exaggeration -- until I
read through the hundreds of pages myself. As a native Canadian, I couldn't
help but notice that the French experts who compiled the report referred to the
separatism-plagued French-Canadian province of Quebec as a "country"
unto itself -- as in, "other countries, like Quebec." Why endeavor to
import to France the kind of separatist turbulence that Canada has historically
struggled to overcome? The agenda of social division permeating the report is
something to behold.
The irony is that French President Francois Hollande is
trying to assist balkanized countries like Mali and now the Central African
Republic, while at the same time having to distance himself from those within
his own party who suggest that the solution to France's integration problems is
simply increased division under the guise of cultural plurality. That a report
meant to help foster integration ended up recommending division exemplifies the
utter insanity of socialist thinking.
Hollande's biggest handicap is that he's a pragmatist
stuck with the socialist label and the ideological base that goes with it.
France didn't want to elect a socialist; it wanted to elect someone who wasn't
hyperactive and flashy like former center-right President Nicolas Sarkozy. But
just try explaining that to the socialists in power.
In France right now, there is a significant difference
between the big "S" Socialist party name -- a large ideological tent
-- and the small "s" socialist ideology that it's supposed to
incarnate. Hollande is caught between those two entities. Maybe the Socialist
Party should address the divisions within its own ranks before tackling
divisions within French society at large.
So what kind of solutions for improved integration did
France's government-convened experts generate? Well, one of the few things on
which all French parties seem to agree is the ban on Muslim headscarves in
schools. The report recommends overturning the ban -- even though Socialist
Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault, who commissioned this taxpayer-funded
exercise in political masochism, voted in favor of the ban on headscarves
himself.
The report also suggests adopting the very best aspect --
and by "best," I mean worst -- of the American judicial system, by
introducing class-action, anti-discrimination lawsuits into the French system
and "significantly reinforcing" the damages paid to plaintiffs in
anti-discrimination cases.
It also contends that "France should assume the
'Arab-Oriental' dimension of its identity and drop its post-colonial
attitude." The report recommends that France "develop Arab education
... by introducing it in the best schools across the entire country."
Further, it recommends college-level education of African language -- in one of
the dominant tongues, such as Bambara, Dioula, Lingala or Swahili. The
rationale is that "we forget that immigrants, who we expect to 'speak
French well,' often already speak several languages." Right, and so they
should speak decent French -- because they're moving to France. A
nationalization of mass foreign-language learning should be driven by some kind
of pragmatic impetus that extends beyond mere historic guilt. It's hard to
imagine how prioritizing African languages over those that dominate the
business world would ultimately benefit France.
Later in the same report, "Creole" is
recommended as yet another language to be widely taught. Which variation of
Creole? All of them, I guess. Or maybe just the French Creoles -- of which
there are about 17. It's enough of a challenge for kids to express themselves
in a single language besides text-messaging and emoticons.
The experts call for a shift in language to underpin a
new policy, suggesting that "the term 'integration' isn't appropriate to
represent this public policy." You don't say! How unfortunate that your
rather straightforward task was to actually make integration recommendations.
Here's hoping that your paycheck fails to integrate into your bank account.
Not to belittle months of worth of work by a reported 250
people to produce five sections ranging from 32 to 93 pages each, at what was
no doubt a massive cost in human capital. But as an immigrant to France myself,
fitting in really isn't rocket science; it's an individual responsibility. The
real challenge is convincing socialists to stop using immigration and
integration as a pretext for shredding the fabric of their own country.
No comments:
Post a Comment