The inauguration of the Euro zone brought with it high hopes of some idyllic transformation into a peaceful, multistate conglomerate, which would bring riches to everyone.
More than a decade later, the Euro zone implementation has become, in most instances, a cause for impoverishment and taxation, and in some states, for a radical change in the fabric of society, spurred by the multitude of immigrants that landed in Europe.
Now some people are using the multicultural reality in Europe, and especially France with its strong national identity, to sow discord and call for the repeal of the Euro and all the legislation it entails.
In France, far right ideologues are seizing the moment to highlight the results of the Euro zone adoption: unrest and societal strife. They want to point the finger at multiculturalism as the root cause of all of Europe and France's ills.
What, some propose, like philosopher Finkielkraut who has just published a book on the subject, is to do away with multiculturalism and turn back the clock on the changes that have occurred in the past 10 years.
That rapid change has brought with it malcontent and in some cases confusion, no one disputes that. But the likes of Mr. Finkielkraut truly believe that it is foreigners, with their unwillingness to change their ways, that threatens stability, well being, and wealth.
What he in fact is railing against, is the fact that some cultures are so different from the indigenous ones, that they create parallel societies. What he is referring to in particular, of course, is the Muslim people.
He even disputes that immigration is one of elements of French history.
What seems to be missing from the picture that he paints, is the fact that most of the Muslim people in France are actually from countries that were French colonies, and who suffered under that rule. The reason why they are in France, is because they were part of France's colonial empire. They suffered greatly and died in scores during the wars of independence. And yet, now, they are considered strangers. In many cases, especially for right wing ideologues like Finkielkraut, they are a menace.
What he fears, in fact, is the fact that Muslim who have been in France for generations are re-Islamizing themselves. Women are wearing scarves and men praying on the streets.
What this 'thinking' engenders however, is distrust, and further alienation of people who are not choosing to distance themselves from society, but who are already distant because of economic inequalities.
But it is interesting to note, that he does not realize that while in other European country integration is happening, with more or less difficulty, but without strife, in France, the idea that someone does not immediately fall within the French cultural parameters is someone who is intent at destroying the state.
The issue here, is that many people in Europe, like the physolopher, believe that the general chaos caused by the adoption of free borders and the Euro, has instead been caused by unfettered immigration. Although most immigrants are employed by enterprises that seek to undercut salary costs by employing people who do not have the right to labor or are willing to be paid less, no one seems to think that their presence in Europe is legitimate.
Immigrants in some places lives in deplorable conditions, some are treated like slaves and work in abject conditions. And yet, society complains if they roam the street angry, dressed poorly or do not completely conform to the society that surrounds them.
What a lot of people decry, however, and they are usually people on the right, is the 'fall' of the indigenous culture, which also implies that the sub cultures of the immigrants are not worthy of being adopted. But what if our culture is not as appealing as it seems? Aside from the ideals of democracy, who says that our cultures are superior in every way, or that they cannot live side by side, or even mesh gracefully in a new variation that could herald the societies of the new millennium?
What is happening instead, is that we rail against the poor, the immigrants, the non conformist. We rail against the petty criminals, but do not give them work, or even enough money to feel as if they are part of that society that looks down their nose at them.
The idea that nations should be separate, culturally and ideologically, was something that the fathers of the Euro did not reflect upon or at least foresaw as a possible evolution of what was in the beginning a purely economic plan. Europe now have free borders, but in some cases, and countries, they would like nothing more than to see them restored.
Op-Ed
Partial Source : Spiegel International/ 12.8.13
No comments:
Post a Comment