Detailed analysis from France of the cause of the riots
france / belgium / luxemburg |
community struggles |
opinion / analysis
Tuesday November 15, 2005 21:05 by Anarkismo Editorial Group - Anarkismo
This is the first detailed analysis of the riots to be translated into English. It's from the anti-fascist No Pasaran network which includes libertarian communists.
The fuse is lit!
Police State = Murder State
Capitalism is suffering and war!
In Clichy sous Bois, Zyad and Bounna, 17 and 15 years old, died as a
result of police harassment; of a police force that chases young
people and caries out more and more ID checks for no reason. It does
not matter whether or not they were actually being chased; that young
people are so afraid of the police that they are willing to risk
their lives to get away from them says all that needs to be said
about the relationship between the people and the police in these
neighbourhoods. Over the past years, the heavy police presence has
led to many run-ins with locals. Most of the time, the young people
are simply objecting to being treated like subhumans, and yet more
and more they find themselves charged (and often convicted) with
contempt and rebellion. These are not mistakes or "errors" that need
to be condemned, but rather the results of a law and order policy
that has been developed over the past twenty years. The
stigmatization and contempt towards young people from the suburbs
simply makes them hate this society - which lets 20% of the
population rot in ghettos - all the more. This is not some random
accident, but the result of political and economic choices.
And so the (supposed) availability of low-income housing for
immigrants over the past thirty years has been based on a system of
segregation whereby only some neighbourhoods were open to them,
generally worst ones, which were badly located and/or most run-down.
It is still the case that those responsible for low-income housing
consider the arrival of immigrants to be a sure sign that an area is
going downhill: so this "disqualifying" demand is funneled into what
are already the worst programmes. Worst still, the debate on social
diversity has entrenched and legitimized this segregation, to the
point that areas of social housing where these people were supposed
to be able to live are closed off to them in the name of social
diversity: a diverse population must be encouraged in the housing
projects, and so immigrants are not allowed, especially if they are
poor! The fact that people have no control over their own lives just
exacerbates the tensions of people who are already trapped in a
social category or in a neighbourhood. Isn't it true that this anger
is a result of keeping families stuck in areas which are experienced
as economic, social and residential dumping grounds, without any way
of getting out?
There is nothing new about social apartheid. For almost fifty
years now entire populations of workers and immigrants who - let us
not forget - built and rebuilt our roads and our buildings, have
themselves been warehoused in these ghettos. The "riots" are the
result of the neo-liberal policies that have been enacted by both the
right and the left, which have been especially devastating for the
suburbs over the past thirty years. Yet today this poverty is
spreading throughout society.
We have not signed any social contract. We are not "citizens" of
this society. Our interests have nothing in common with those of the
capitalists, the bosses, the neo-liberal governments of the right and
of the left. The referendum, the regional elections, the pensioners
movement, the SNCM .. none of this has changed anything. The riots
have proven one thing: you have to be as violent as possible in this
shit society if you want to break through the social apathy.
This violence is nothing compared to the violence of capitalism.
Police violence that targets poor people, youth, immigrants; the
violence of poverty and isolation, due in part to the disappearance
of any real pubic services; from the garbage of the media to that of
the government, we are constantly surrounded by an anti-social
environment. The young people of the suburbs are united in screaming
out that this society offers no hope. Even those playing the
education game know that it won't do them much good: knowledge is of
very little use in a consumerist society; at best it will prepare
them to be exploited by McDonalds or the BTP (alongside white French
people!). And so the example of big brothers and sisters) doesn't
really encourage one to play the legal game!
The government has called on the April 3rd 1955 law to
re-establish order, declaring a State of Emergency. Giving all power
to local agents of the executive branch, the prefects and the police,
it reinforces the law and order side of social apartheid: the popular
classes, whether they work or not, are dangerous, and so they should
get a special treatment. The same for supposed equality before the
law: for those who rebel, billy clubs and rubber bullets reveal the
absurdity and illusory nature of any dialog between classes.
Worst still, re-applying this law is part of a process of
racializing social relationships. A process that has been playing out
on a global level for many years now, and which in France is basing
itself on colonial ideas that some wish to bring back. This decree
has only been used twice before: in Algeria and New Caledonia. Using
it now is a way of presenting the present situation as one of
warfare, of cultural and ethnic minorities breaking up the country
(like the "lost territories of the Republic" that all kinds of
patriots moan about). This is a clear message: if not legally so,
then the suburbs are at least de facto colonies, due to their "ethnic
makeup" which supposedly makes them unable to be integrated into
French society. The most obvious example of the different ways that
neighbourhoods with different ethnic groups are managed is the
attempt to create mechanisms of government social control via
religion and the CFCM. The important thing is to keep control, even
if to do so the younger generations must be handed over to religious
authorities. If need be, the "Islamic danger" that they will have
built from scratch will then serve as an excuse for more repression.
From the February 2005 law on the benefits of colonization to the
anti-immigrant talk and actions by way of the stigmatization of young
people from the neighbourhoods that must be cleaned with Karcher, the
immigrants and their children have become public enemy number one for
the de Villepin government. They are the enemy within that allows the
de Villepin to unite the majority around the one thing they have in
common: their [French] ethnicity. And the Socialist Party doesn't
object at all, which just goes to show that if they were in power
they would do the same thing. In fact, wasn't it the Socialist Party
that, at its Villepinte Congress in 1997, agreed to make law and
order a priority for the "left", already playing for support on the
National Front's territory? Julien Dray, spokesman for the Socialist
Party and a supporter of "zero tolerance," voiced his support for
Sarkozy during the debates on the Internal Security Law in March
2003. You had better not forget it. For all of the political parties
that wish to manage capitalism, the racial struggle is supposed to
replace the class struggle: divide and rule.
The curfews can only remind us of the worst chapters of our
history. Is this why the National Front and other far-right groups
are applauding these measures? Or is it simply because they know that
people always prefer "the real thing" instead of some knock-off? The
riots will certainly push a section of the population &endash;
encouraged by the government's law and order policies, fed up of
seeing the few fruits of their labour going up in smoke - into the
arms of the far right. Riding on this wave of xenophobia, Sarkozy has
announced that foreigners convicted of participating in the riots
will be deported, never mind the legalities. Not wanting to lose
ground to De Villiers, who intends to replace Le Pen as Mister
"France Love It Or Leave It", Sarkozy had brought back the
double-penalty. The No Pasaran network will be there to protest this,
as we have in the past. But we cannot stop there. Social issues must
be placed in the forefront and this means doing away with this shit
individualism that divides workers, the unemployed, poor people,
private sector/public sector workers, the elderly and youth.. all
divided by identity politics that simply play into the hands of those
in power by keeping the people divided by their ethnic origin, their
culture, their sexuality, anything but their class!
Each and every one of us should abandon this single-issue
approach: everyone out for themselves, or everyone out for their
community, where social issues and common political perspectives
disappear. Because young people have no future, they have nothing
left but self-destruction. And so in a suicidal logic they attack
that which surrounds them: other people, institutions (schools,
etc.), material objects (cars, etc.)
Points of unity should be proposed and fought for in every
struggle and at every meeting and we should do everything we can to
combat individualistic and identity politics. Dividing our demands up
into separate categories leaves us powerless. We would not be in this
dire situation if more connections and unity had been created,
instead of being destroyed. The social movement is in a bad way, it
will only be possible to set things right if a maximum number of
people wish to do so, and at the moment this is unfortunately not the
case, as everyone is busy with their own issue, competing in their
victimization and letting the State continue to play its Welfare role
and so keep its legitimacy. Don't wait for permission from your
organizations, collectives or trade unions to build unity! Today
unemployment insurance is being renegotiated and of course the rights
of the unemployed will be whittled away a bit more; for better or for
worst the conflicts in Marseille to protect public services for all
are likely to continue; the workers who are being exploited and
reduced to poverty in training programmes are fighting back; the
undocumented immigrants are refusing to be the most oppressed.. but
the self-imposed isolation and ignorance of what others are
experiencing prevent these separate movements - often infected with
corporatism - from becoming a political movement.
But building unity also means including what others are doing into
our actions and texts, going to support people on strike in your
area, opening up and maintaining collectively run spaces.
We should not stay with our eyes glued on the riots, on what is
spectacular, like a deer caught in headlights. Another reason why
things have gotten so bad is that there is not enough activism which
is open to others and centered around everyday issues. First and
foremost, resistance comes out of everyday life, from regular
activist work on the ground, resistance in the neighbourhoods,
cultural and social innovation outside of the grip of the public
"powers", re-appropriating public space as well as our lives.
Only by carrying out this primary activity will we be able to give
a common orientation to the different struggles, to the rebellions
and strikes, and thus finally form a real social front.
We should be able to find a strong basis for unity in these
demands, that we should share regardless of where we come from or
what we are doing, which we should use to multiply our common actions
and demonstrations:
- repeal of the 1955 decree and of the security legislation,
starting with the recent laws passed by Perben, Sarkozy and
Chevénement
- against all deportations (against the return of the
double-penalty); all undocumented immigrants should have their
situation regularized
- suppression of all repressive forces, especially the BACs
(so-called Anti-Criminality Brigades)
- a guaranteed wage whether or not one is employed: to sever the
tie between a salary and a job, the latter being more and more
rare, and just as alienating as ever.
- making those public services which are actually beneficial to
the public (energy, health, transportation, education…) democratic
and free of charge: we should all have equal access to all of the
public services in their entirety. Politics should not be left in
the hands of parties of distinguished gentlemen who shake their
heads. We should put an end to this aristocratic system which does
not listen to us. We should organize outside of it and create a
direct democracy in all of the places where we live, from the
level of the neighbourhood to that of the country, with control of
the mandates and the power to make real decisions about society's
future.
POLITICIZE YOUR WORRIES, YOU WILL WORRY THE POLITICIANS!
CAPITALISM WILL NOT FALL BY ITSELF!
LET'S HELP IT!
AUTONOMY FOR ALL!
No Pasaran, November 10th 2005
Réseau No Pasaran
21ter rue Voltaire
75011 Paris
FRANCE
Translators note: Please note that the above text about the past two
weeks of riots in France comes from the No Pasaran network in France
and was translated by yours truly (
kersplebedeb). I
have a "fast and loose" translation philosophy, meaning that when
there is a choice between readability and the original phraseology i
tend to favour the former, provided that the meaning stays the same.I
admit that this was a particularly difficult text to translate, buit
i believe got it all right! The original document can be
seen in French.
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (3 of 3)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3The French original of this article is here
An Italian translation is here
This article's point of view is not very neutral. The affirmations made are almost ridiculous to me. «Young kids run from police therefore police are brutal and vicious.» I don't think so. This is not a reliable source.
Hi Aquarelle,
we make no pretense to being a 'neutral' news site whatever that might be. Rather we publish articles that agree with our goals and editorial statement (see About Us in the top bar).
We do hope the articles are factually accurate (a different thing from neutrality) and to provide a check for this we allow users like you post comments in which you could challenge factual aspects of the articles.