Thread: Paris riots model for U.S. social unraveling

http://www.sbsun.com/news/ci_3184448

In Paris, the suburbs are being burned and looted by Arab and North African immigrant youths. The French police seem helpless to stop them.

As the United States faces its own immigration problem, it is tempting to note the French spectacle before returning one's attention to the immigrants dying in our deserts, or the violent gangs swelling their ranks through illegal entry, or the impact of mass immigration on native wages.

But it is equally important that we discern and learn from France's mistakes. The United States need never suffer through rioting from disaffected immigrants if we heed the mistakes. Repeat such, however, and civil unrest will be a matter of when, not if.

The Paris riots are particularly frightening because the French have firmly insisted on assimilation for the mostly Muslim immigrant-participants. The law considers them to be Frenchmen often race statistics aren't even kept for that reason and the primacy of the secular state is underscored by laws like the ban on head scarves in schools (as opposed to the multiculturalism practiced in the Netherlands and Denmark, where Muslim youth have also rioted despite subsidies for Islamic culture).

Yet, France is discovering that assimilating immigrants is easier said than done.

French attitudes are partly to blame many native French conceive of citizenship in ethnic terms even if official policy doesn't reflect their prejudices. Thankfully, most Americans view citizenship as a statement of shared values, a boon that we must protect vociferously to avoid France's fate.

More troubling is the French bureaucracy, particularly its welfare programs and constant interference in the economy. Overly generous welfare diminishes the need for immigrants to adopt the native language, skills to support themselves and behavior amenable to a workplace environment. There is also less need to leave immigrant enclaves for economic opportunity a job in another region, which would be attractive if not for monthly welfare checks, suddenly isn't worth the effort of moving away from one's cultural ghetto.

High unemployment caused by France's highly regulated economy exacerbates the problem, particularly laws that make it difficult to fire employees. A Frenchman who is somewhat distrustful of immigrants and many Frenchmen unfortunately are will be less likely to give them a shot at a job if once hired they cannot be dismissed. Meanwhile public housing projects and zoning laws segregate Muslim immigrants into the very immigrant enclaves that stunt their assimilation, particularly among the second- and third-generation immigrants who are now rioting. France has abandoned these suburbs to lawlessness, tolerating crime and violence there that would draw outrage if it occurred amid the broad boulevards near the Eiffel Tower or the quaint lanes of the Latin Quarter.

Immigrants in the United States are different from France's immigrants both culturally and circumstantially. Yet the seeds of France's mistakes are planted here and growing.

U.S. bilingual education and social welfare with insufficient work requirements undermine the assimilative effects that economic necessity has historically imposed on immigrants. A guest worker program would only exacerbate our problems, giving rise to an institutionalized underclass of citizens who lack any loyalty to the United States save the paycheck it provides them. As guest workers have children born as U.S. citizens to parents who are expected to leave the country it isn't hard to anticipate the very crisis in identity, fueling some misbehavior among rioting Parisians.

In the United States today, the most problematic enclaves are those where crime has been allowed to run rampant.

Black Americans and immigrants suffer through crime that wouldn't ever be tolerated in white neighborhoods, a phenomenon that can be blamed partly on black and immigrant leaders whose sometimes understandable mistrust for the police has undermined support for law enforcement beyond what is deserved, and partly on the leftist stereotype that casts criminal gangs and rioters as understandable reactions among minorities to discrimination. Instead we must lay blame on criminals themselves, casting lawlessness as unacceptable behavior that hurts immigrants and minorities most by subjecting the honest majority to the lawlessness of a few.

The French are correct that assimilation, not multiculturalism, makes for domestic tranquility. Their subsequent failure to assimilate immigrants should teach Americans that European-style economic programs and social attitudes though seemingly tolerant and compassionate ultimately prove incompatible with treating immigrants as equals who will integrate into society.

"The French are right that assimilation, not multiculturalism, makes for domestic tranquity."

Right. Uh Huh.

So does enforcing US Immigration, US Labor and US Civil Rights Laws.

Right. Uh Huh.

So does protecting, defending and preserving the national interest of the United States and the American People above all others.

Right. Uh Huh.

So does complying with your Oath of Office, Mr. Wackident, to ensure a nation of citizens with common goals, common objectives, and a single allegiance to the United States and their fellow Citizens.

Right. Uh Huh.

Get it yet?

If there was only some way, we could get the Wackident to sit down with Judy for 30 minutes of uninterrupted talk.

All of our worries and problems would be over AND we could call him the president.

May I ask how the word "Wackident" came into being? I must have missed the discussion on that one. I've been seeing it used frequently on the forum lately in reference to Bush but was curious how it got started.

Yes, Brian. "Wackident" is another name for the President of the United States, which seems to have evolved sometime last week. It's pretty self-explanatory. It means wakey President and then you just merge it together and you have the "wackident".

The purpose of calling the president such silly, derogatory names is to :

A. Make a point of how fed up we are.
B. Stress reliever
C. Try to bring his ratings down even further, so as to possibly get him to wake up and do the right things for our country.
D. Be as disrespectful to him as he is to the American people.
E. Lighten up with a pinch of humor the stressful battle we face everyday trying to have our immigration laws enforced.

Note: It gives most activists no great pleasure to use these names, but using them from time to time has proven to be useful on occasion for the reasons which are stated above.

If you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to post them.

added to homepage

http://www.alipac.us/article853.html