Socialism and Urban Violence

Riposte Laïque, the website of a group of French leftists whose eyes were opened to the dangers of massive immigration and Islamization, has done a good job of reporting on the riots in England. Here, one contributor, Roger Heurtebise, takes on journalist Christophe Barbier point by point. Barbier, editor-in-chief of l'Express, a left-leaning weekly journal, made a short video (above) in which he reveals that he is suffering from amnesia. The nice thing about having amnesia is that you don't know you have it, so in all sincerity and innocence he hopes France never has to face riots like those in England.

In italics are the words of Christophe Barbier, followed by the replies of Roger Heurtebise:

- Who can be sure that the riots, which at this very moment, are ravaging London and its surroundings, could not happen in France, notably in the neighborhoods of Ile-de-France that no urban reforms have succeeded in rescuing from the shadows?

- As I said, Christophe Barbier has forgotten 2005 and everything else…

- We are not exempt from it because we have the same non-integrated youth, the same unemployed youth, the same youth that are victims of the crisis.

- And there we have the first semantic hoax bordering on the social excuse. It has escaped no one in London in 2011, as in the Parisian suburbs in 2005, that the rioters came mainly from the mass of North African and sub-Saharan immigration. They are the ones who are "not integrated", while "unemployment" and the "crisis" affect many ethnic Frenchmen (or ethnic Englishmen) or ethnic European immigrants, from la Creuse to Liverpool, but they are not about to turn their cities into blood and flames.

- Nothing can shield us from such incidents. Wait, there is a difference. The English communitarianism that created areas that are even more ghetto than our own ghettos, does not exist in France.

- Not much it doesn't... Do you take us for fools? We know the lawless zones, (where the Mafia and Islam make the law) in some 1000 "Sensitive Urban Zones" throughout France… and even elsewhere.

- We have conserved the ideal of the republican melting pot, the ideal of integration. I said "the ideal" because we have not preserved the reality. We are incapable of ensuring a future of integration, of ensuring that the social ladder will be available to these young immigrants.

- Ah! Finally Christophe Barbier cites the "young immigrants", admitting that the problem is partially specific to them. But he hammers away with the "we", meaning that it is "our" fault, we, the French people, and not the fault of our politicians or of the immigrant populations. We find ourselves back to the notion of self-hatred, so frequent in official discourse, which is an open door to even more demands and violence on the part of these "young immigrants". Christophe Barbier takes the blame for us. We will not follow him on this path.

- During the next presidential campaign, we must speak, we must find new solutions. It would probably be best to monitor immigration, all kinds of immigration. Illegal, of course, but also economic immigration. We probably also need new regulations on family reunification.

- That is the most courageous statement in his report… except that instead of saying "it would probably be best", he should have said "it probably would have been best" or "we probably should have". These tardy regrets can hardly excuse thirty years of laxness both on the Right and the Left… that l'Express did not denounce. It isn't too late to do some good, but still one has to make honorable amends for one's past errors.

- But we must first ensure an economic future for all young people, they must all have jobs. Even if we have to start with public jobs, and jobs created by local collectivities, before placing them in the normal economy.

Note: I like his reference to the "normal economy", which seems to imply that public welfare is "abnormal". But a welfare program for the French people who earned it is one thing, and a system of generous hand-outs to anyone who strides across the border with impunity is something else.

- Once again he returns to the social excuse of the farcical Left. So, we should create fictitious jobs paid for by the taxpayer in order to keep the "young people busy" at games or non-productive ethnic-centered activities? And Christophe Barbier is totally wrong to think that employment - with or without assistance - will solve the problems of communitarianism and non-integration. One has only to re-read the Denécé Report, or the story of a veiled woman working in a government program, paid for with our taxes.

Note: The Denécé Report revealed the powerful growth of Islam in the world of French businesses. It was a counterpart to the Obin report that described the impact of Islam on the French school system. Both reports were carefully hidden by the French government. The veiled woman in question was a volunteer in what the French call "service civique", a type of social program similar to our Americorps VISTA.

- No job, no integration. No integration, no assurance that there will not be any riots soon in France.

- We've come full circle. All we have to do is give the young vandals a job (even a fictitious one) and everything will be OK. As if the vandals want to work!

No, Christophe Barbier, the problem is cultural. I have worked with Muslims and Africans, in France and abroad. They are excellent workers and managers… as far as the work is concerned (because social work is not rigorous…). The results of their work were irreproachable and they worked very hard. But the fact remains that they were still attached to cultures and life styles incompatible with my own, and probably with yours.

And in the case of the rioters in France in 2005 and in England in 2011, we have no inkling of a desire to integrate into the workplace.

Just a little more effort, Christophe Barbier, so that we can be grateful to you for abandoning official thought.

As Roger Heurtebise shows that culture, not economics is at the root of urban violence, a right-wing Israeli website Samson Blinded points out the harm done by a generous welfare State. I believe that what he says applies to France and other countries as well:

After barely suppressing this week’s urban riots, the British government is working on rescinding some of the austerity measures it introduced in the wake of the economic collapse of its quasi-socialist economy.

In the politically correct world, the riots are being blamed on economic hardship. Nonsense. Dirt-poor Jews in Eastern Europe did not riot in the nineteenth century. Poor Jews in present-day Israel do not set up tent camps—but relatively affluent leftists do.

Which answers the question of what caused the British riots. The immigrants are suddenly affluent compared to their previous standard of living. They do not have to work for living, but are content with subsidies. They have plenty of leisure time. Combine that with youthful radicalism and the lack of liberal traditions in their ethnic and religious cultures, which creates a feeling of impunity—and you have riots.

But instead of admitting that those immigrants are a culturally foreign element, that they are economic spongers who have to be repressed or evicted, the government contemplates more subsidies for them—which will only whet their appetites.

Note: In other words, if a particular form of Socialism is the cause of the riots, then that Socialism cannot be the cure.