Two Sides of the Same Coin

French Riots and Hurricane Katrina.

By Raffaello Pantucci
Monday December 19, 2005

For all the animosity that pervades the tone of discussion between France and America, there are things that both nations have in common, and lessons that both can teach each other. The recent rioting in Paris’ banlieues (suburbs) provides a counterpoint to the disaster wrought in Katrina’s wake in New Orleans that leaves lessons to be learned by both sides. And unfortunately, both governments’ responses, so far, suggest they have not done so.

Katrina exposed the sad truth to the world about American inner cities: many are filled with poor, disenfranchised African-Americans, with few prospects of escape, and no protection from either the elements or the brutal side of capitalism.

In the same way, the world watched as the dark underside of Paris’ beauty was uncovered. Vast, already ungovernable tracts of French city suburbs were inflamed by the deaths of two youths running from the police, which came to symbolize all that is unjust about the French system that marginalizes and excludes its 6 million (representing almost 10% of the population) Arab and African Muslim populations, leaving them in ghettos that circle the major cities.

While there is no comparison between the human misery wrought in each situation, there is an argument that both disasters exposed the flaws within their respective national economic models, as well as remarkably similar deep seated societal issues.

On the one side, Katrina exposes the “unacceptable face of capitalism,” revealing to the world the inequality of the American economic model, with people so poor that do not even have the means to flee in the face of natural danger and a government that has demonstrated little interest in trying to rectify such gross disparities.

On the other side, the French riots have exposed a section of society that France has long ignored. Originally set up to house immigrants from Algeria and Tunisia brought to France to fill labor shortages, the banlieues of most French major cities have now become no-go areas, filled with unemployed and bored young men and women, surviving on a combination of welfare benefits and petty crime.

Each of these situations is ultimately the product of a societal environment, and differing economic social models.

The American “Anglo-Saxon” economic model offers its citizens little protection, leaving workers exposed to the economic vagaries of globalization, while depriving them of a safety net when they become hurt or find their trade obsolete. Free trade takes no prisoners.

The French “Social” economic model is instead excessively restrictive, with legislation protecting short working hours and rigid labor laws that make it nearly impossible for employers to fire people. And when legislation is not enough, the French government will weigh in with harassment, as in the recent case with Hewlett-Packard, which met with stiff resistance from the government when they proposed job cuts in France. The result is that employers are unwilling to risk hiring people, and necessary outside investment is scared off. Thus the economy is unable to create jobs for its immigrants and their children.

On top of this, there are the deep social ills that still plague both nations. Color and creed differences remain an unspoken issue in the United States that occasionally rear their ugly head. The French record on race and religion is one of absolute denial, acting on the premise that integration is a natural part of the liberté, egalité, fraternité (liberty, equality, brotherhood) that is as essential an element of the French way of life as “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is to the American. Sadly, this does not take people’s brute ignorance into consideration.

Either way, the last few months have shown us the flaws in both systems. The “Anglo-Saxon” model has created an underclass of “have-nots,” for whom escape is a difficult and cruel road, while the “Social” model permits no entry.

On the other side of the coin, there are reasons why each has chosen their respective system, and benefits within them.

The “Anglo-Saxon” model may be unforgiving, but it has the capacity to offer flexibility for small and large industry, fostering economic growth. Market forces can be a force for good, driving towards innovation and adaptation.

The “Social” model, on the other hand, concentrates on protecting the individuals within society. While it is impossible to create the perfect socialist system, it does at least offer some protection to the “have-nots,” and hopefully protects them from the more savage side of the capitalist model.

A perfect mélange would capture the element of the safety net, while remaining flexible enough to harness the vicissitudes of the free market. To address the racial and religious divergences raised by the disasters, governments need to tackle the issues head-on, and not expect them to simply work themselves out.

The immediate repercussions from both disasters will be political, as culpability for such disasters plays through electoral cycles. But it seems like Katrina’s wake has passed with alarmingly little introspection. The government initially made grand promises, but some have questioned the usefulness of simply creating vast trailer parks to house displaced families, which seems to be the current strategy. The poor displaced by Katrina are going to be even more unable to lift themselves out of poverty now that their meager savings have been destroyed, so there is every chance that they will simply be forgotten about until the hurricane season next year sweeps through the region.

In France, there are glimmers of a national discussion on the societal implications of the riots, with Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin (with the support of his political patron President Jacques Chirac) announcing a dramatic raft of measures focused on educating (or re-educating) the young, and trying to integrate them into society through greater inclusion in the school system. The problem with these measures is that they act like extensions of the current system, and will merely integrate people if society around them is willing to accept them. This does not bode well for a nation where people named Mohammed have learnt that they must give themselves more traditional sounding French names if they even want to get an interview for a job.

The lessons learned are that neither nation has really tried to address the underlying questions raised by these massive failures of their respective systems. The sad truth is that both nations have faced exactly these questions before. The Los Angeles riots in 1992 after the Rodney King trial were a brutal demonstration of inequality in American inner cities, while French cities have been blighted by such violence since the 1990s. Just as this is not the first time, it almost certainly will not be the last.

Raffaello Pantucci is a research associate in the Europe Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. He graduated from the University of Manchester in his native land of England with a spurious, but highly enjoyable, BA in Literature.