When the riots in Paris are reported, the most commonly mentioned factor is race. The implication is that this is a cause of the violence. No doubt racial conflict adds to the problem. There is also mention of people being poor.
But I suspect something different lies behind it all. The report in the Telegraph on Thursday by Henry Samuel referred several times to the places in which the riots took place:
The riots first broke out on the Chêne-Pointu council estate. Last Thursday, two adolescents from the estate died when they scaled the 8ft wall of an electricity substation to dodge police and were electrocuted.....Chêne-Pointu typifies the problems of many of the urban ghettoes that surround Paris and other large French cities: a high immigrant population, soaring unemployment and drug dealing.
...."We're not dumb. Sarkozy has declared war on suburban youth," said Karim, 23. "Unless he apologises for the way he has treated us, then he can expect 40 nights of violence," he said.
But others around the estate back Mr Sarkozy. "What he says may be crude, but he's right. Drug runners and petty criminals have had it good too long around here.
....In the neighbouring Bosquet estate, Traore Gounedi, a 27-year-old worker in a local social centre, is incensed. "Ten years ago, Clichy was a real no-go area. But in recent years we had built up sports clubs and other associations and it had become calm...."
As night fell at Chêne-Pointu, sirens heralded the approach of two fire engines that positioned themselves in front of the estate awaiting the flames.
Notice the appearances of the word
'estate' in these excerpts. To what extent could the violence be due to alienation and criminalisation in council estates with high proportions of unemployed and never-married lone parents? In other words, not really race or being poor.
It is impossible to be precise, of course. But it is interesting to note the way council estates seem to be the hubs of the riots. Of course, many will take the word 'estate' to be merely an indication of 'social deprivation' and conclude that the people in these estates need to be given more. But there are poor people all over the world, yet the riots are taking place in a rich country where people are living on state-provided property and many are living on state-provided hand-outs.
Meanwhile we also know, as background, that many council estates have become crime-ridden in both France and Britain. We also know that the unemployed and children of unmarried mothers are more likely to turn to crime. There is also plenty of evidence that unemployment and unmarried, lone parenting is encouraged by welfare benefits (see The Welfare State We're In. The unemployed and the never married tend to be concentrated in council estates which, in their turn and of themselves, appear to have an alienating effect on those who live in them.
From this it does seem possible, to put it modestly, that the root cause of the violence in these Paris council estates, lies in welfare benefits and state-provided housing in damaging combination. In short, the cause of the riots could be the French welfare state.
Posted by James Bartholomew • Indexed in Behaviour & Crime • Housing • Parenting
Comments (5)
TrackBack (10)
Comments
I wonder - Is the human race not predisposed to gathering in flocks of "birds of a feather"?
Posted by: Ruth Sherwin at November 6, 2005 12:40 PM
"To what extent could the violence be due to alienation and criminalisation in council estates with high proportions of unemployed and never-married lone parents?"
I'd hazard: attibutable to never-married lone parents to no extent at all in this case. The rioting in France is largely the work of young Muslim men. How many do you think were born to unmarried mothers? I think you're overlooking the elephant in the middle of this particular living room.
Posted by: Yaffle at November 6, 2005 01:25 PM
Sup thewelfarestatewerein!
I've been thinking. The biggest opposition to ending welfare is that it would cause poverty. Why not give poor people a minimum wage and not tax it and tax those on low incomes less than everyone else? How can you expect anything other than welfare to prevent poverty if people are taxed into the ground?
Posted by: Flint Ironstag at November 6, 2005 05:57 PM
The French social model and technocratic architects in the mould of Le Corbusier are certainly part of the problem. Read Theodore Dalrymple's essay, "The Barbarians at the Gates of Paris" for a clear account of what has gone wrong in the world of "La Zone", as these vast estates in France are collectively known. It's in his new book, "Our Culture, What's Left Of It", but he wrote it back in 2002. The riots have been a long time coming, and no one can say they weren't warned, by Dalrymple and anyone who was paying attention. What shocks me is how many people seem pleased that France has as bad/even worse social problems than the UK. When the cities of a great European country are in flames for two weeks, we should all be horrified. But our comfortable lives have blinded us to the fragility of civilisation. Now its breakdown is seen as a source of entertainment, because we assume everything will go back to normal. But why should it? Hobbes said the war of all against all IS normal. To me these riots read like something out of Gibbon. When a disaster like this can have been predicted for years and still have happened, our civilisation is losing the ability to maintain itself.
Posted by: Sancho's Ass at November 7, 2005 03:12 PM
Warning: file(http://63.247.138.2/~bartholo/randomquotes.dump) [function.file]: failed to open stream: No route to host in /home/bartholo/public_html/archives/2005/11/what_is_the_cau.php on line 316
Warning: implode() [function.implode]: Bad arguments. in /home/bartholo/public_html/archives/2005/11/what_is_the_cau.php on line 316
Agreed, the welfare state is the cause of the mayhem and not only in the direct sense that you describe. I refer to the corrupt, insane, Common Agricultural Policy, which has done so much to impoverish Africa. The result of French protectionism of its agriculture (and textiles and clothing) has been reluctant immigration into France and the rest of Europe. Reluctant immigration is exactly what nobody wants. But France's insistence on subsidising agriculture, and the gutless politicians in the rest of Europe who've gone along with it, have kept Africans poor and desperate to come to the west. Leaving their culture behind has been their only chance of a half-decent living. We can't expect them to be grateful.
Posted by: Ronnie Horesh at November 5, 2005 05:21 PM