Guns Guns Guns, Now Paris!

[gadjo_dilo]

If you bring in a minority with a totally different culture, which is too large or resistant to integration, or both, that's a recipe for trouble. .

Sounds familiar.....

[Big Ben]

I wouldn't call myself religious mostly because I don't like organized religions. Like in almost any kind of organization, in a church or whatever form of organized religious group some will try to impose their views on others in one way or another. I don't like that because it's always the most dubious characters that try to rise on top of the others. Like it's been said, "the trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt". I have my faith though.

I don't really think atheism is the answer and I certainly don't appreciate it much the way some preach their atheism from their really high horses. In the end, like it or not, it may not be a religion, but atheism is definitely a faith and convinced atheists are nothing but just another type of fundamentalists because with all their condescending pretended love for reason their entire belief system is so so strongly based on something that isn't and can't be proven, just a very personal and subjective opinion, pretty much like any other faith. But for some unknown reason they are reasonable and the others are unreasonable.

I'm a Romanian. Over here atheism was all but the official religion for half a century and boy what an enlighten society we were. The communists really took the idea and ran with it. They treated us as nothing but just another species of animals and after 50 years some of us are more animals than human beings.

So Robinho, please tell us more about this beautiful atheism and completely disregard any personal variations it may take. In the real world we really live the consenquences of Lenin, Stalin and Ceausescu, some of the finest NoGod apostles.

[Rudy Tamasz]

we really live the consenquences of Lenin, Stalin and Ceausescu, some of the finest NoGod apostles.

In other parts of the world they would add Mao and Pol Pot to the company.

[gadjo_dilo]

I'm a Romanian. Over here atheism was all but the official religion for half a century and boy what an enlighten society we were. The communists really took the idea and ran with it. They treated us as nothing but just another species of animals and after 50 years some of us are more animals that human beings.

But even in the communist period the official cults were recognized and I remember that at least the patriarch of the othodox church and the rabbi of Romania were memebers of MAN ( the institution that represented the legislative power in the state ). Officially the cults weren't banned but were forced to keep a low profile. At the same time a campaign of atheist education was largely sustained and every form of “mystical” manifestation was ridiculised. In reality people still remained religious and even chiefs of communist party secretly followed the rites. I also remember that Ceausescu himself called priests at the funerals of his parents. I also heared of kids that were christened at home, in the tub. It was all about fear. Nobody could ban you from entering a church but it was “suggested” that you'd better don't. cos somebody could have seen you and told this to a certain institution. That could have been an impediment for those who were members of the communist party and wanted to have a career. But I repeat, it was a sort of secret agreement, it wasn't a secret that people were religious but it was pretended that they're not and on different stages most of us ate some sh*t ( some more, some less ) trying to display an atheist attitude at the organized official meetings.

[Malbec]

Seriously, though, democracies work best when they have a certain degree of homogeneity, when you have a core of the society that stays on the same page, more or less. There might be class divisions and conflicting interests, but everybody plays by the rules. If you bring in a minority with a totally different culture, which is too large or resistant to integration, or both, that's a recipe for trouble. I'm not sure there's a ready made solution for the problems of the French, but then they are a resourceful people who have survived worse situations.

I disagree with that analysis. The USA is a case in point. The overwhelming majority of Americans are descended from migrants who have only been there four centuries. Each wave of migration has been bitterly opposed by the wave before, whether it be Protestants opposing Catholic migration, Sephardic Jews opposing Ashkenazi Jewish migration or latterly opposition to Middle Eastern, East Asian and Hispanic migrants. Each brought completely different cultures, each deemed to be a threat to the fabric of American society in some way or other. Yet democracy in the US and economic development has been enriched by the diversity there, not weakened.

The French have got a long way to go, taking steps to actually acknowledge that racism exists would be good.

[Rudy Tamasz]

I disagree with that analysis. The USA is a case in point. The overwhelming majority of Americans are descended from migrants who have only been there four centuries. Each wave of migration has been bitterly opposed by the wave before, whether it be Protestants opposing Catholic migration, Sephardic Jews opposing Ashkenazi Jewish migration or latterly opposition to Middle Eastern, East Asian and Hispanic migrants. Each brought completely different cultures, each deemed to be a threat to the fabric of American society in some way or other. Yet democracy in the US and economic development has been enriched by the diversity there, not weakened.

The French have got a long way to go, taking steps to actually acknowledge that racism exists would be good.

All of the groups you've mentioned ended up merging into an all-American middle class, which was and still is the backbone of the country. The cultural differences mattered less than the common values (law obedience, work ethic, respect for property rights, freedom of speech etc.). Everybody was covered by the principles set by the Founding Fathers and people at large accepted those. Same thing happened in France with the principles of liberty, fraternity and equality. Now it faces the problem of its own citizens, which denounce those basic principles in favor of their reinvented or even carefully constructed cultural identities. I wonder how much the attitudes and practices of these self-proclaimed rejects will actually enrich the diverse culture of France.

[Malbec]

All of the groups you've mentioned ended up merging into an all-American middle class, which was and still is the backbone of the country. The cultural differences mattered less than the common values (law obedience, work ethic, respect for property rights, freedom of speech etc.). Everybody was covered by the principles set by the Founding Fathers and people at large accepted those. Same thing happened in France with the principles of liberty, fraternity and equality. Now it faces the problem of its own citizens, which denounce those basic principles in favor of their reinvented or even carefully constructed cultural identities. I wonder how much the attitudes and practices of these self-proclaimed rejects will actually enrich the diverse culture of France.

There isn't any point in offering fraternity and equality if in practice this isn't the case, just as proclaiming that they are a democratic republic doesn't make North Korea a democratic republic. I don't think its fair of you to put the entire blame for the racial problems in France on the migrants and ignore the role of the French population and government in causing it too.

The US has gone through a lot of turmoil with its waves of migrants whether it be the racial segregation of blacks, reduced rights for East Asians on the West coast culminating in internment of Japanese Americans during the war or the current debate about Hispanic migrants and harassment of Muslims, however over time the American government has shown willingness to accept previous errors and correct them. This is the difference between France and the US, the French have simply refused to acknowledge there is a problem at all let alone go about correcting anything.

[Rudy Tamasz]

In a way, France is a more modern society than the U.S. With its welfare system it offered migrants way more than they could hope for at home from day one. For the second generation it must have been even easier. They got the level of freedom and the standard of living head and shoulders above than that in their cultural motherland. They got French passports. Even on the lower steps of the social ladder they were doing way better than their brethren in Algeria or Mali. They still didn't integrate. Who's to blame?

[Starter]

The US has gone through a lot of turmoil with its waves of migrants whether it be the racial segregation of blacks, reduced rights for East Asians on the West coast culminating in internment of Japanese Americans during the war or the current debate about Hispanic migrants and harassment of Muslims, however over time the American government has shown willingness to accept previous errors and correct them. This is the difference between France and the US, the French have simply refused to acknowledge there is a problem at all let alone go about correcting anything.

Let's not forget that a large (some would say essential ) part of the American population didn't achieve legal equality until the early 1900's -- women.

[Starter]

In a way, France is a more modern society than the U.S. With its welfare system it offered migrants way more than they could hope for at home from day one. For the second generation it must have been even easier. They got the level of freedom and the standard of living head and shoulders above than that in their cultural motherland. They got French passports. Even on the lower steps of the social ladder they were doing way better than their brethren in Algeria or Mali. They still didn't integrate. Who's to blame?

There's your problem. The welfare system. It is NOT a good thing to make sure people have just a little more than enough to get by. You have taken much of the incentive to learn, be productive and advance yourself out of the equation.