How Far Can Culture Bend Before It Breaks
It is said that necessity is the mother of invention but lately, in France and other proudly progressive countries, it is the begetter of repentance. From economic participation in the EU to taxes to foreign policy, the French government is holding its nose and doing the right(-wing) thing. President Francois Hollande, responding to political setbacks in European parliamentary elections, has now put into place a program to reduce the taxes (that he raised) and streamline social programs (that he had expanded). Getting passionate blowback from his own Socialist party, Hollande sees few other options available to him, his cherished desires notwithstanding. One of Hollande's lieutenants offered this by way of explanation: "He says he has nothing left to lose."
The victory of the Front National Party (FN) in local elections for European Union delegates demonstrates a telling fact: when things get bad enough, what was previously unthinkable becomes in fact tolerable. FN has garnered a reputation for hard line nationalism, suspicion of greater Europe and advocacy of restrictive immigration policies. For years considered outside the mainstream of French political and cultural thought, FN achieved a victory in May of 2014 less for its own reputation and more as a repudiation of the elitism and incompetence of the present movers and shakers of the EU. Similar votes were seen in Austria and Denmark. The issue of immigration was prominent among the campaigns.
The French government is guided by the following philosophy in terms of making immigration laws:
"Since the Second World War French immigration policy has been, in principle, shaped by two broad main principles: equality (same rights are accorded to all, with no distinction on the basis of nationality religious, racial or cultural characters); and integration (immigrants are presumed to be in the condition to fully integrate, socially, and legally in the mainstream French society)." (From the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights)
Integration, then, operates on the assumption that immigrants are capable of assimilation. Reasonable enough. Yet presumption of capacity to integrate becomes presumptuous when willingness to do so is also inferred. The French experience with successive waves of North African immigrants, in fact, gives lie to that presumption. Fleeing the poverty, violence and oppression of Middle Eastern governments, Muslims migrate to Europe, where their own customs and practices are viewed by natives as vestiges--if not forerunners--of those same medieval dictatorships. The International Journal of Peace Studies observes:
"The French Muslim population is facing strong opposition to the observance of certain of their religious traditions and rituals. Muslim cemeteries are under pressure to open their doors to the dead of other religious groups as well. In some incidents, Muslim cemeteries have been desecrated (Dawn, 24 November 1991, Karachi). The Islamic practice of sacrifice that involves animals has come under fire. For example, Brigitte Bardot issued a strong statement in 1993, saying "I am revolted and outraged by this barbaric custom from the Dark Ages" (The News, 1 July 1993, Karachi). Now it has become an annual tradition for Ms. Bardot to criticize the tradition of Abraham on the eve of Eid al-Adha, the Festival of the Sacrifice, every year. This year she has threatened to leave the country because France has too many Muslim immigrants" (The News, 27 April 1996, Karachi).
Until recently, Brigitte Bardot was not associated with prejudice or xenophobia. An actress and super-model of the 1950s and 1960s, she followed the progressive path to environmentalism and animal welfare. Needless to say, the Muslim religious ceremonies where animals are killed hit a raw nerve with her, and she spoke her contempt in no uncertain terms. For her zeal, she has been indicted and fined multiple times on the charge of inciting hatred. While some lefty outlets condemn her, the rank-and-file French are more ambivalent, as though they are rooting for her while fearing the slightest accusation of intolerance. It all goes to prove a time-tested point. Cultures do not have infinite boundaries: even the most self-consciously enlightened reach a point of this-far-and-no-farther. When somebody dares to plant the flag on that boundary, there will always be a peanut gallery ready with catcalls and boos.
In Europe anyway, the ranks of the flag-planters are swelling while the gallery shouts in protest, as is evidenced by the growing support for what were previously seen as fringe groups. Are they all stupid and ignorant? Reason suggests otherwise. Just one election cycle ago, many of these voters were supporting the French Socialists or the Union for a Popular Movement (UMP). The Financial Times quotes political scientist Pascal Perrineau, who says that these two major parties have lost their political virility:
"'There is a particular malaise in France, a political malaise that reflects a national anxiety over the opening up of the economy that has fixed on the FN,' he says.
"The two main parties have been the victims, 'stuck in their internal scandals, incapable of renewing themselves, disconnected from society and petrified by the scale of the economic, social and democratic crises', Luc Bronner wrote in Le Monde.
"By contrast, the FN is now brimming with confidence. 'The FN looks like a political movement in battle order. It has a chief, a plan and it is united - three elements missing in the other parties,' says Prof Perrineau."
As mentioned above, France is not alone in the sense that cherished cultural norms are disappearing in the name of diversity. An Oxford University study of British attitudes demonstrates that 75 percent of British citizens favor reductions in annual immigration numbers. To ascribe all of this to racism and hatred is the intellectually lazy path to resolving a problem. A healthy concession to cultural chauvinism, on the other hand, does not deny rights to immigrants, but rather shows respect for the history and traditions of the host countries. This is a good lesson for EuropeâEUR¦and for Americans, too.
Cultural chauvinism denotes favoritism, yes, but one of a benign and open variety. Immigrants can be welcomed without having every aspect of their culture affirmed. Respect runs both ways when it comes to immigration and any "reform" legislation should reflect that. Governments that try to impose cultural neutrality in contempt for their constituencies invite the suspicion and xenophobia they say they oppose.
The victory of the Front National Party (FN) in local elections for European Union delegates demonstrates a telling fact: when things get bad enough, what was previously unthinkable becomes in fact tolerable. FN has garnered a reputation for hard line nationalism, suspicion of greater Europe and advocacy of restrictive immigration policies. For years considered outside the mainstream of French political and cultural thought, FN achieved a victory in May of 2014 less for its own reputation and more as a repudiation of the elitism and incompetence of the present movers and shakers of the EU. Similar votes were seen in Austria and Denmark. The issue of immigration was prominent among the campaigns.
The French government is guided by the following philosophy in terms of making immigration laws:
"Since the Second World War French immigration policy has been, in principle, shaped by two broad main principles: equality (same rights are accorded to all, with no distinction on the basis of nationality religious, racial or cultural characters); and integration (immigrants are presumed to be in the condition to fully integrate, socially, and legally in the mainstream French society)." (From the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights)
Integration, then, operates on the assumption that immigrants are capable of assimilation. Reasonable enough. Yet presumption of capacity to integrate becomes presumptuous when willingness to do so is also inferred. The French experience with successive waves of North African immigrants, in fact, gives lie to that presumption. Fleeing the poverty, violence and oppression of Middle Eastern governments, Muslims migrate to Europe, where their own customs and practices are viewed by natives as vestiges--if not forerunners--of those same medieval dictatorships. The International Journal of Peace Studies observes:
"The French Muslim population is facing strong opposition to the observance of certain of their religious traditions and rituals. Muslim cemeteries are under pressure to open their doors to the dead of other religious groups as well. In some incidents, Muslim cemeteries have been desecrated (Dawn, 24 November 1991, Karachi). The Islamic practice of sacrifice that involves animals has come under fire. For example, Brigitte Bardot issued a strong statement in 1993, saying "I am revolted and outraged by this barbaric custom from the Dark Ages" (The News, 1 July 1993, Karachi). Now it has become an annual tradition for Ms. Bardot to criticize the tradition of Abraham on the eve of Eid al-Adha, the Festival of the Sacrifice, every year. This year she has threatened to leave the country because France has too many Muslim immigrants" (The News, 27 April 1996, Karachi).
Until recently, Brigitte Bardot was not associated with prejudice or xenophobia. An actress and super-model of the 1950s and 1960s, she followed the progressive path to environmentalism and animal welfare. Needless to say, the Muslim religious ceremonies where animals are killed hit a raw nerve with her, and she spoke her contempt in no uncertain terms. For her zeal, she has been indicted and fined multiple times on the charge of inciting hatred. While some lefty outlets condemn her, the rank-and-file French are more ambivalent, as though they are rooting for her while fearing the slightest accusation of intolerance. It all goes to prove a time-tested point. Cultures do not have infinite boundaries: even the most self-consciously enlightened reach a point of this-far-and-no-farther. When somebody dares to plant the flag on that boundary, there will always be a peanut gallery ready with catcalls and boos.
In Europe anyway, the ranks of the flag-planters are swelling while the gallery shouts in protest, as is evidenced by the growing support for what were previously seen as fringe groups. Are they all stupid and ignorant? Reason suggests otherwise. Just one election cycle ago, many of these voters were supporting the French Socialists or the Union for a Popular Movement (UMP). The Financial Times quotes political scientist Pascal Perrineau, who says that these two major parties have lost their political virility:
"'There is a particular malaise in France, a political malaise that reflects a national anxiety over the opening up of the economy that has fixed on the FN,' he says.
"The two main parties have been the victims, 'stuck in their internal scandals, incapable of renewing themselves, disconnected from society and petrified by the scale of the economic, social and democratic crises', Luc Bronner wrote in Le Monde.
"By contrast, the FN is now brimming with confidence. 'The FN looks like a political movement in battle order. It has a chief, a plan and it is united - three elements missing in the other parties,' says Prof Perrineau."
As mentioned above, France is not alone in the sense that cherished cultural norms are disappearing in the name of diversity. An Oxford University study of British attitudes demonstrates that 75 percent of British citizens favor reductions in annual immigration numbers. To ascribe all of this to racism and hatred is the intellectually lazy path to resolving a problem. A healthy concession to cultural chauvinism, on the other hand, does not deny rights to immigrants, but rather shows respect for the history and traditions of the host countries. This is a good lesson for EuropeâEUR¦and for Americans, too.
Cultural chauvinism denotes favoritism, yes, but one of a benign and open variety. Immigrants can be welcomed without having every aspect of their culture affirmed. Respect runs both ways when it comes to immigration and any "reform" legislation should reflect that. Governments that try to impose cultural neutrality in contempt for their constituencies invite the suspicion and xenophobia they say they oppose.
Source...