Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

Unemployment rates of immigrants/non-immigrants, sensitive suburbs vs rest of France

by Alex in Toulouse Sun Nov 13th, 2005 at 07:57:18 AM EST

Back from the front page ~ whataboutbob

This is a summary of the differences in employment/unemployment rates, between immigrants/non-immigrants, and also between people in sensitive suburbs vs people from outside sensitive suburbs, at different levels of education and by gender.

Some information was initially found in French on http://www.inegalites.fr, which was only relaying the result of a national study done by the government body INSEE in 2003 (different elements of this study can be found in French on their website, by using the search engine, so that's what I ended up using.


A) IMMIGRANTS vs NON-IMMIGRANTS

Nota bene: this study does not consider French citizens of immigrant origin as immigrants, but only people who do not have a French passport as immigrants. This study cannot therefore be used to interpret job discrimination for French citizens who are of immigrant origin. It's also important to note that non-European immigrants represent about 61% (est.) of all immigrants in 2005 (55,1% in 1999 census, which I've summed up below).



(%)Number of people
Europe44.91 934 144
Spain7.3316 232
Italy8.8378 649
Portugal13.3571 874
Poland2.398 571
Other European countries13.2568 818
Africa39.31 691 562
Algeria13.3574 208
Morocco12.1522 504
Tunisia4.7201 561
Other African countries9.1393 289
Asia12.8549 994
Turkey4.0174 160
Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam3.7159 750
Other Asian countries5.0216 084
Americas, Oceania3.0130 394
Total100.04 306 094


According to this classification, Turkey is in the "Asia" section (!!!)


1) Level of activity (percentage of people with a job):


Nota bene: the figures below show overall active ratios much less than the averages displayed per age group, this is because the overall active ratio means how many people out of all immigrants are active (this includes babies, infants, children, retired people in the ratio, basically anyone from 0 to 25 and 60 and older).


"Active" means "with a legal job". i.e. with social security, unemployment benefits if you get fired etc


Immigrants
Non-Immigrants
Immigrant ratio (%)
Active
Active ratio (%)
Active
Active ratio (%)
Men
1 356 000
64.8
13 420 000
61.8
9.2
15-24 years old
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
25-39  years old
520 000
89.2
5 274 000
94.5
9.0
40-49  years old
373 000
91.6
3 621 000
95.1
9.3
50-59 years old
346 000
78.,4
2 813 000
79.7
11,0
Women
1 012 000
46.0
11 668 000
49.5
8.0
15-24 years old
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
25-39 years old
361 000
59,7
4 546 000
81,8
7,3
40-49 years old
331 000
71,0
3 273 000
84,3
9,2
50-59 years old
236 000
59,3
2 489 000
67,8
8,7
TOTAL
2 367 000
55,2
25 088 000
55,4
8,6

Quick conclusion: immigrant men are more likely to have a job than non-immigrants ([editor's note, by DoDo] see correction in Migeru's comment), but immigrant women are more likely to be unemployed than non-immigrant women. However this doesn't mean much: immigrants men may find it easier to get jobs because they may be doing more menial jobs? Let's find out...


2) Socio-professional category (what kind of job):

Activity of immigrants (%)
Immigrants make up how much of this category overall in France?
Category
Men
Women
Total
Men
Women
Total
Farmers
0.8
0.5
0.6
2.0
1.7
1.9
Self-employed craftsmen, shop owners, company directors
11.0
3.6
7.9
12.2
6.8
10.6
Executives, intellectuals, doctors, lawyers etc
13.2
10.0
11.9
6.6
6.4
6.5
Intermediate Jobs
13.1
12.9
13.0
5.0
3.8
4.4
Regular company employees
12.3
52.9
29.1
8.4
7.9
8.0
Workers
49.6
20.0
37.3
11.5
13.9
11.9
including: Specialised workers
30.8
5.3
20.3
10.0
9.4
10.0
including: Non-specialised workers
15.2
13.0
14.2
14.1
12.6
14.9
Undetermined category
0.1
0.1
0.1
17.7
27.8
21.1
Total
100.0
100.0
100.0
8.5
7.2
7.9

Quick conclusion: either there is discrimination towards immigrants which prevents them from being doctors, lawyers etc, or immigrants have a lower level of education which limits the types of jobs they can do? Or both? Let's find out ...


3) Level of education

Diploma
Immigrants (%)
Non-Immigrants(%)
Entire Population(%)
Masters / Higher University degree (4, 5 or more years after high school)12.511.011.1
Bac+2 (Basic University degree => i.e. 2 years after high school)5.810.910.4
Baccalaureate or equivalent (US High School graduation or English A/Levels)12.916.916.6
CAP, BEP (specialised worker/craftsman diploma)12.825.124.0
BEPC (school up to the age of 16)5.510.910.4
No diploma or only a primary school certificate50.525.227.4
Total (%)100.0100.0100.0
Number of people3 490 00033 955 00039 444 000

Quick conclusion: Indeed, 50,5% of immigrants have no diploma at all. But a larger ratio of immigrants make it to a "higher university degree" than non-immigrants.





B) SENSITIVE SUBURBS vs REST OF FRANCE


1) Unemployment ratio at different levels of education, betwen Sensitive Suburbs and the rest of France


Nota bene: the term in French for a "Sensitive Suburb" is ZUS (Zone Urbaine Sensible). It is estimated that at least 16,5% of residents of these areas are immigrants, others are French (for the latter, again this makes no distinction between French of immigrant origin or French of non-immigrant origin).

Diploma
Sensitive Suburds (%)
Rest of France(%)
Masters / Higher University degree (4, 5 or more years after high school)11.77.6
Bac+2 (Basic University degree => i.e. 2 years after high school)10.86.0
Baccalaureate or equivalent (US High School graduation or English A/Levels)17.78.7
CAP, BEP (specialised worker/craftsman diploma)17.08.6
BEPC (school up to the age of 16)21.610.9
No diploma or only a primary school certificate25.014.8
Total (%)19.69.8



Quick conclusion: there is a blatant gap between these two zones (overall 19.6% vs 9.8%)!! At a similar level of education, people from a sensitive suburb have generally twice more chances of being unemployed (the only category in which they come close is "Higher university degree" but even there it's a 4 point difference). However, it appears that the higher the level of education, the lower the risk of unemployment, and this is true in both cases (i.e. sensitive suburbs and rest of France). This stops being true for higher university degress, as it is harder to find a job when you're overqualified! Let's now find out how this affects men and women ...



2) Impact of Education and differences by gender, between sensitive suburbs and the rest of France

Nota bene: This table uses a Base 100 percentile which represents, in each column, the unemployment level for people in that column with no diploma at all. Therefore, a figure below 100, like 50, means that there are less unemployed people (for 50 it means twice less unemployed people) for that particular category, than if they had no diploma at all.


Sensitive Suburbs
Rest of France
Diploma
Men
Women
Men
Women
Masters / Higher University degree (4, 5 or more years after high school)65.529.250.555.0
Bac+2 (Basic University degree => i.e. 2 years after high school)49.728.636.737.8
Baccalaureate or equivalent (US High School graduation or English A/Levels)67.360.356.150.0
CAP, BEP (specialised worker/craftsman diploma)63.662.957.672.0
BEPC (school up to the age of 16)83.173.065.868.5
No diploma or only a primary school certificate (BASE 100)100100100100



Quick conclusion: there is a big difference between men and women of the Sensitive Suburbs. Men of these Sensitive Suburbs with a Higher University degree, have just one-third more chances of finding a job than if they had no diploma at all and quit school before age 16 (the recurrent question for them would then be: why bother to study at all, then?).

Also, it seems, at first glance, that women from Sensitive Suburbs have more chances of finding a job than their "rest of France" counterparts in 3 categories, and come close in 2 other categories (example: 29,2 vs 55,0 for "Higher university degree"). However this is a wrong assumption,   because the base 100 is not the same for these 2 categories. Indeed, if you look back at the table before this one, you'll see that the national average   ratio of unemployment, at a "no diploma" level of education, is 25,0% for the Sensitive Suburbs, vs 14,8% for the Rest of France. (11-11-05 NEW: found 2004 figure for Base 100, the ratio is in fact 1.61, so figures below are not too far off target, only they should be slightly less). I could find no figures for women vs men, but by using the national average, which is more or less 1.69 times more unemployment at Base 100 for the Sensitive Suburbs (i.e: 14,8 * 1.69 = 25) ...


Adjusted figures (now there is only one Base 100, which is that of Women with no diploma, living outside of Sensitive Suburbs), using the national average for adjustment (which is inexact as we don't know whether women with no diploma at all in the Sensitive Suburbs have more, or fewer, chances than males with no diploma in Sensitive Suburbs, of being employed - ie we don't know if women there are above or below the 25% average for the  "no diploma at all level" in Sensitive Suburbs for both sexes taken jointly ... my money is on women having it better than their male counterparts, which would make the figures below look better for Sensitive Suburbs women. I'll keep on looking for this figure, when I find it I'll update the table below):

Diploma
Women (Sensitive Suburbs)
Women (Rest of France)
Masters / Higher University degree (4, 5 or more years after high school)49.355.0
Bac+2 (Basic University degree => i.e. 2 years after high school)48.337.8
Baccalaureate or equivalent (US High School graduation or English A/Levels)101.950.0
CAP, BEP (specialised worker/craftsman diploma)106.372.0
BEPC (school up to the age of 16)123.468.5
No diploma or only a primary school certificate169100 (BASE 100)

With this uncertain adjustment, we end up seeing that women in Sensitive Suburbs have more chances of employment than their "Rest of France" counterparts at a level of "Higher University Degree", come closer to their counterparts with a higher level than High School, but are distanced at levels below that, and overall are still distanced. This level anyhow provides them with twice as many chances of employment as males from the Sensitive Suburbs, who are far behind their male counterparts from the "Rest of France" (and I haven't even adjusted the figures for men to use the Rest of France Base 100 yet!). The men really have it tough!!

It therefore seems that the stereotype of the morose, menacing "banlieue" (suburbs), in the media and in people's backward minds, is largely focused on male figures.
Also, to close this chapter, it must be noted that unemployment in Sensitive Suburbs, which currently stands at 25%, was at 19% in 1990.

Display:
I do not agree with some framing but a lot of data here is badly needed.

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Thu Nov 10th, 2005 at 03:15:15 PM EST
It's true that data can't show everything. For example, the "Undetermined category" in the socio-professional table ... what is that??

Also, this does not show any sort of distinction between types of jobs (ie part-time or low-salary vs nice and comfortable jobs, temporary vs permanent jobs etc etc).

by Alex in Toulouse on Thu Nov 10th, 2005 at 03:26:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
the "sensitive" stuff... they are just plainly poor, working poor, damned poor.

I like the frame of classes. This is a class fight. It does not matter what is your skin, origin,.... it is a class fight. There were white blonde guys too. They all considered themselves french. So that is why the framing of immigration or sensitive just hurt the eyes (well my frame).

Again, badly needed data. Great diary.

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Thu Nov 10th, 2005 at 03:34:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I totally agree with you. "Sensitive Urban Zones" is a full-blown political euphemism.
by Alex in Toulouse on Thu Nov 10th, 2005 at 03:43:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Quick conclusion: immigrant men are more likely to have a job than non-immigrants
Actually, age group by age group, immigrant men have a lower activity than non-immigrants. However, overall male immigrants are more active than non-immigrants. How is this possible? Because the number of immigrants in the a priori inactive groups (under 25, elderly) is much lower than in the general population. It is harder to immigrate bringing your whole family with you than alone. If you then have children in your host country, they count as non-immigrant by birth. Note that immigrant activity is about 5% lower than non-immigrant activity except in the 50-59 age group. This is because older immigrants are likely to have been in the country for a longer time and hence to have a job.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Nov 10th, 2005 at 04:05:10 PM EST
Very good point, I hadn't actually noticed that the actual activity figures were lower. You're almost certainly right about the reason, too (coming alone rather than with your family). This is what quick conclusions are: hasty!

For the 50-59 group however, it's possible that this has something to do with it being the age group that overall encounters the biggest difficulties in finding a job in France. Since desk clerks executives etc are likely not to be recruited at an age that puts them very close to retirement, with no room for change, this means there is bound to be many more unemployed men of that age in the desk clerk, executive etc population. Which is possibly what enables the immigration population to catch up on the ratio ... because immigrants will continue to work harsh worker jobs, even at age 59. There will always be a need for someone to do a harsh job, regardless of the age (the construction sector in France, for example, is actually looking for workers to employ, rather than plagued with unemployed workers. An undermanned sector.).

by Alex in Toulouse on Thu Nov 10th, 2005 at 04:37:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I noticed the same thing :-)

And a few others - Alex, I did a little clean-up on your post (only significant change: the totals for the "Immigrants make up how much of this category overall in France?" columns in the second table, where I had to find the INSEE original).

I have no time to transscribe it, but while I searched for that table, I found this PDF, in which I feel the last table on the very last page is of importance here.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Fri Nov 11th, 2005 at 01:08:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Hey Dodo, I found the same PDF document just before leaving home this morning, which gave me the actual Base 100 unemployment rate for women in "Sensitive Suburbs" which I was missing (and others on some government website linked by some newspaper that was saying that 2005 stats were available there due to popular demand, can't remember which paper or gov agency, because I was in a hurry - but I can find this again easily)

As a result the end of my entry needs to be totally corrected, but anyhow since 2005 figures are available, my diary entry needs to be totally rewritten (mine has 2003 figures) or erased.

by Alex in Toulouse on Fri Nov 11th, 2005 at 08:34:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Sorry, I edited my comment and interchanged sentences, the women ratio was available in one of the PDF docs on the gov website is what I meant to say.
by Alex in Toulouse on Fri Nov 11th, 2005 at 08:38:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm assuming that you're posting this stuff a propos the riots. Problem is, you seem to be taking the French code word for non-white 'immigre' as if it were actually an accurate description of reality. It isn't. Most immigrants are white. Nobody is genuinely suggesting that France has a serious problem with immigration, but that it has a problem with race. Courtesy of the idiotic French laws, nobody has a clue as to what the social ramification of race are in France and it is illegal to try to find out. For all we know unemployment among non-whites could be fifty percent - or five percent for that matter. Non-whites could be earning 50% or 200% of the French average.  Try to imagine if we did this in America. Are non-whites poorer than whites?  Well New Orleans is poorer than average, NYC is richer and both are majority non-white areas with the US equivalent of the 'sensitive suburbs.'  Or imagine that we tried to figure out the situation for Hispanics based on general stats on immigrants and children of immigrants. As with  the French case the data would be meaningless for the purposes of the question at hand.

We're all whistling in the dark and all we know is that judging by anecdotal accounts there is a lot of resentment and perception of massive discrimination among non-whites in the banlieues. Is that perception accurate - my guess is that it is, but there is no way of proving or disproving it based on statistics.  

by MarekNYC on Thu Nov 10th, 2005 at 05:24:24 PM EST
A couple of years ago, in California, they tried to pass a ballot measure called the "racial privacy initiative" which, on the excuses of "a colorblind society" and "privacy" would have made it illegal for any government body to collect data on race. Social scientists were incensed because, they argued, it would make it impossible to conduct sociological, anthropological or even certain kinds of epidemiological research.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Nov 10th, 2005 at 05:42:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, well, from my perspective French politicians views on dealing with race and immigration are divided between the neocon approach - society should be race-blind so lets just act as if it were, and the paleocon one - a thinly veiled belief that non-whites are bad.  If the French are wondering at the tenor of US media and blog coverage they might perhaps consider that right wing journalists love to bash  the French while left wing ones can't be expected to be sympathetic to what in America is a right wing approach to issues of race.
by MarekNYC on Thu Nov 10th, 2005 at 06:03:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
There is definitely police agressivity in the banlieues, and there is definitely an overall tendency to judge the suburbs as a menacing place. Many people make the lazy association suburbs=crime=arabs/blacks, many people make the association suburbs=morose=anger, and many people make the association suburbs=ugly=unfair, but I have no idea how these 3 preconceptions are represented.

It's difficult to know exactly what everyone in France thinks about this. I've lived and studied in some banlieues, and I can tell you that many people won't even consider visiting! For them it's a no-man's land. But for ever person that won't consider visiting, I can name an equivalent person who at worst considers that the banlieues as ugly and who has never encountered any criminality there at all.

For job discrimination, there have been a few studies. But each time the results are contradictory. Arabic names will not get selected for job interviews as much as non-Arabic, but obese white people or 50 year old white people have even less chances of getting an interview that an Arabic person. In one of these studies, which is being talked about everywhere these days, an Arabic girl who was hardly chosen through her résumé (CV chosen in 9% of cases), was then chosen by 2 out of 3 interviewers (66%) at the interview (while a 50 year old candidate in the same study earned a 6% CV score, and 10% approval at the interview). She was the only candidate in that survey with an address in the banlieues on her CV. It's difficult to imagine that her Arabic name alone was a problem, as when she went on to the interviews, she was picked in 66% of cases, albeit Arabic. So it's probably the address, some address in some suburb ... or perhaps she had an unusual name for even for an Arabic girl, which made the jury think she was a boy.

I'm mentioning boys because I'm tempted to say that overall there is a general fear of male people in the banlieues, but that females in the banlieue are actually respected for working hard and overcoming their difficulties (this also shows in the data above => a girl from the banlieues with a higher university degree has more chances to get a job than her non-banlieue counterpart). So the problem is one of discrimination, sure, and lack of social insertion, but racism? No, I wouldn't go that far. You will rarely if not never see a Punk or Sikh teller in a French bank, unlike in London, where you even get pierced and heavily tattoed Punks working at tellers (but still with suit and tie, of course)! <irony>Sikhs and Punks are so intimidating for poor, fragile customers!</irony>. You see it's not just the Sikhs you won't ever see, but also the Punks ...

Thus from my perspective, the only discrimination in France comes from the fact that France is a conservative society. We claim to be very open-minded but we are in fact deeply conservative as a whole. Things change slowly here. Women for example, are paid less than men on average, regardless of their colour, weight, or age. They're just ALL paid less. A law strictly forbids this!! But it's still done, and no one has the guts to say it's got to stop (unless Segolene Royale is elected in 2007). Why are they paid less? I guess because they have this amazing tendency of spontaneously having babies (<irony>I wonder how they do that and why they do it for the benefit of ALL of society</irony>).

France is basically a country of contradictions, but do not consider too hastily that France has a race problem. If you ever do, then remember that more than 80% of the people voted against Le Pen, and that this cannot be interpreted in a less-than-favourable-for race-mixity way. There were obviously other considerations at play, but racism is racism ... it's hatred of foreigners, and  Le Pen would have been a great opportunity for racists of all sorts to get rid of foreigners. Yet 80% of the population said "no way".

It's a social problem, tinted with some discrimination associated with ethnicity because of the social distribution of those ethnic groups, but it's not a racist problem.

by Alex in Toulouse on Thu Nov 10th, 2005 at 06:19:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Let me just precise that Le Pen friendly people consider foreigners to be non-white, naturally.
by Alex in Toulouse on Thu Nov 10th, 2005 at 06:23:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The "conservatism" is very much my gut feeling too. A lot of the (overhyped) complaints about France by young French who have moved to London (and are quoted in UK newspapers) are about the social strait-jacket that their parents generation seems to live under. My own experience is that a lot of the decline in racism in the UK in my lifetime has come out of general changes in society, which by comparison France seems to have resisited.

I should probably diary this as trying to write it up quickly doesn't seem to be working that well. Do you have a sense of what I mean, though? Would you agree?

by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Fri Nov 11th, 2005 at 03:16:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, I absolutely do.
France is a country of contradictions like I said, this means a society that is bent on permanent revolution while simultaneously holding out to old, conservative values. These opposite desires amplify each other and the result is that nothing trivial ever happens here. Everything that happens is huge ... in the past 3 years alone: Le Pen in 2002, the European Constitution, now the largest riots ever ...

To put it simpler: the problem is that French society wants revolution (this is our leading desire - refuse globalism, flash the finger at superpowers etc) but doesn't want it just now (this is our conservative holding back - we'll deal with globalism later, we'll get to renewable energy sources later etc). Thus many Frenchmen do feel the plight of the suburbs, but don't want to have to deal with it just now (I'm busy, come again later type of attitude).

But about England, which I've also lived in, there I'd say it's the other way around. England is bent on permanent conservatism, but simultaneously tries to remain dedicated to openness. As a result England has already managed to get some of the issues we are currently dealing with out in the open (this is England's 'oppenness' desire, meant to hold back on conservatism - cops in Englands are gentler, minorities are not so angry), but at the same time England seems afraid of making big splashes (this is a product of England's leading desire to remain conservative - keep the pound, resist the metric system, still drive on the left etc), splashes of the "shoot yourself in the foot type" that we French affectionate so much.

Our two countries are thus actually much more similar than you may think (not you in particular, I mean "someone"), they are just two faces of the same coin, seeing how anyhow we're both originally a product of the same culture ... but France has the flip side of the coin, the dark side of the moon.

This is the way I see it. I may be totally dreaming all of this, for all I know!!

by Alex in Toulouse on Fri Nov 11th, 2005 at 03:57:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Just because 80% of the voters were against Le Pen doesn't prove anything. There is a huge range of discriminatory behavior that doesn't reach into the "kick them all out" range. In America, racists like George Wallace only got around 15% of the popular vote, but there were still plenty of racists.

Perhaps this is part of the problem in France: Lack of recognition of how pervasive racial discrimination is. America certainly hasn't solved the problem, but we have been confronting it head on for at least 50 years. France--and the rest of Europe, I'm afraid--has yet to understand how difficult of a problem this is.

by asdf on Fri Nov 11th, 2005 at 08:49:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Indeed it doesn't prove anything, and my "there were obviously other considerations at work" was supposed to account for that (example: people who are racists but do not want to see Le Pen become president, so do not vote for him etc).

But I find it hard to deny the merit that such a score should receive. If this number, and all the commotion caused by Le Pen being at the second round, and all the demonstrations held against fachist Le Pen during the second round campaign count as nothing, then perhaps by absolute abstainance logic for all we know there is no discrimination at all in France and the Mossad is behind the riots, so it's better not to say anything at all then?

Frankly, there is racism in France. I see it everywhere. But I see as much absence of racism as I see racism. I see absence of racism everywhere too. How in the world can I expect to decide which of the two is more present, if I can't use an election score against a man who claims that foreigners are stealing our jobs, are living off our welfare state, and that his priority as president will be to clean up the country?

by Alex in Toulouse on Fri Nov 11th, 2005 at 09:08:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Lack of recognition of how pervasive racial discrimination is.

I don't think that's quite true. The State notes all racist and discriminatory incidents and publishes specific statistics in this respect (of course, most of the time, the usual suspects focus on the "antisemitic incidents" line and not on the "racist" - larger by an order of magnitude, as is the relevant population). The law has been tightened and is now pretty comprehensive on the topic.

Of course, enforcement is another matter, and elimination of casual racism yet another, but I would not agree that there is a lack of recognition of the issue.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Fri Nov 11th, 2005 at 01:54:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The figures you refer to deal with criminal acts committed by private individuals. They don't take into account police abuse, let alone harassment; they don't count discriminatory hiring or rental practices.  Within their rather limited scope the figures are probably underestimating racist crimes against Blacks and Arabs (people less likely to go to the police, though I suspect that there are a lot more minor racist crimes committed than reported in general), but I rather doubt that they are doing so to the extent that you suggest. The problem with the spin given to those statistics in the US press is that they act as if this weren't simply one narrow category of racist behaviour but rather represented the generalized level of racism experienced by Jews in France.
by MarekNYC on Fri Nov 11th, 2005 at 03:00:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The way I see it, is that there is some form of institutional racism in France. The police harrasses Arabs, ok that one we already know. But, less obvious forms of institutional harrasments, are, for example, health etc inspections in kebab joints, which involve a lot of paperwork, and when you're not too familiar with the French language, you are in a state of constant fear of the administration and all its paperwork. And they'll be waiting to nail you on the slightest wrongly filled form! Just because the Mayor is a right-wing prick who thinks kebabs give a bad image of the town (how sad, kebabs joints on the contrary offer a nightly presence in towns that would otherwise be silent and dead at night, i.e. ideal for crime).
But widespread racism in the population? I find that really hard to believe. There is way too much, that's for sure. I just need to listen to my aunt to get a good example of how someone can be so full of hate towards Algerians (when she herself is a pied noir of Spanish origin). But widespread? I doubt it very much.
by Alex in Toulouse on Fri Nov 11th, 2005 at 08:22:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
No, I do refer to discriminatory acts that would not all qualify as criminal acts, or are anonymous, like insults, racist graffiti and other discriminations that are noted by the victims. The proportion of acts brought to be noted is of course lower than those that do take place, but it's a start.

"SOS Racisme" and other associations regularly do "blind tests" of descrimination (i.e. trying to enter in nightclubs using two identically dressed and gendered groups, but one European-looking and the other Maghrebin-looking), and these have been getting a lot more air time in recent years

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Sat Nov 12th, 2005 at 09:56:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]