
The Other France - footpath
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/08/31/the-other-france
======
Mikeb85
As interesting as this would be on another occasion, the fact is, its not
poverty which leads people to commit terrorism.

The problem of les banlieues is a social problem for France, but ghetto youth
are more interested in girls, drugs, and otherwise acting out than in
terrorism.

As Osama Bin Laden and others show, you can be given every opportunity in life
and still choose terrorism. You can be well educated (many Daesh members are)
and choose terrorism.

The elephant in the room that many refuse to address is that terrorism exists
anywhere Islam does, there are insurgencies in nearly every country where
Muslims are a sizeable minority.

A little anecdote - my wife comes from a very poor country, from a Muslim
region. The poor kids aren't the ones growing up wearing hijabs, aren't the
ones committing terrorism. Terrorists have been apprehended from her village
trying to get into the west - the one thing they had in common - they went to
a local madrassa funded by a Gulf state.

A similar comparison can be made in the US. Ghetto youth don't go around
committing mass shootings. They don't join Daesh. It's the middle class,
outcast white kids that are doing mass shootings, or newly
converted/radicalized middle class youth that join Daesh.

Anyhow, it is a brilliantly written piece, but on this occasion I'm not sure
its particularly relevant.

~~~
arnsholt
Terrorism is not the sole property of Muslims. There is terrorism motivated by
religion, including Islamic terrorism, but also Christian (the Ku Klux Klan,
people blowing up abortion clinics in the US), Hindu (Indian Hindutva
nationalists killing Muslims), Jewish (attacks by fundamentalists on Arabs in
modern-day Israel), Sikh (the assassination of Indira Gandhi), and so on. Or
you have non-religious terrorism such as the nationalism of Anders Behring
Breivik, or eco-terrorism.

The reason for terrorism is extremism in all its forms, not Islam.

~~~
tomohawk
I think you have to be careful when attributing violent action to a religion.
Religions are often used to provide a sheen of respectability to otherwise
disreputable organizations, such as the KKK.

How to know if a religion is the source of an action or not? One way is to
look at the founder of the religion. Would the founder perform the action? Did
the founder use violence and coercion to achieve goals? Did the founder
encourage their followers to do such things? If not, then it is likely that
the claim is not valid.

If we look at the founder of Christianity, there is no advocacy of using
violence to achieve ends. So, the claim of that KKK and other violent groups
are Christian doesn't hold much water. This is not to say that an individual
who espouses a certain belief will not be violent, just that the religion is
not the source of it.

If we look at the founder of Islam, we see something else. We see violence and
coercion used and advocated by the founder.

~~~
DanBC
> there is no advocacy of using violence to achieve ends

Please explain the harrowing of hell. My local cathedral has stained glass
(14th century) of Christ in full armour, with big sword, going to hell to
release the righteous (but not the damned), conquering hell in the proces.

[http://vidimus.org/issues/issue-04/feature/](http://vidimus.org/issues/issue-04/feature/)

(Possibly not quite hell, but the bit before that.)

There is a long tradition of Christians using their bible to justify violence.
There's plenty of violence in the bible. But, when pointed out, Christians
start saying that those bits don't count, or those bits have been
misinterpreted, or that you need to read that other bit as well.

I have you saying that the quran is violent, and I have hundreds of millions
of muslims telling me that it's a book of peace.

~~~
ern
The Koran is ambiguous, as is the Bible, and the US Constitution. Indeed any
meaningful statute passed by a legislature has some measure of ambiguity.
Reconciling these ambiguities by means of textual interpretation is a large
part of the reason why there are theologians, rabbis, muftis and Supreme Court
justices.

Based on what I've read, in the case of Islam there has been a huge amount of
exegeses and there are complex rules of interpretation that govern the meaning
of texts. Trying to CTRL-F a translation of the Koran for "slay" as someone
suggested elsewhere is a bizarre way to try to figure out the meaning of a
text which has been pored over by great minds for centuries. I think it is a
result of the fact that those of us with technical backgrounds tend to be
dismissive of the humanities, uncomfortable with ambiguity and prone to
literalism.[1]

The interesting thing is that discarding exegesis is exactly the approach
taken by the Salafist/Wahabist tradition of the Saudis, and of ISIS and Al-
Qaeda. 1400 years of scholarship is replaced with a literal textualist reading
of the Koran and Hadiths, and thus justification is found for the most henious
of crimes. There is a Latin phrase that describes this approach of discarding
precedent entirety in favor of novel readings of a text, but it escapes me for
now.

The Koran, or the Bible are not "violent" books not are they "peaceful", they
are merely collections of words that need to be interpreted by their readers.
It is unfortunate that the intellectually bankrupt literalist interpretation
of the Koran is on the ascendant in the Middle East because of Saudi oil
money, and that it presently lends itself to the justification of terrorism
(even if the Saudi regime itself opposes terrorism).

[1] This could be a reason why terrorist jihadism, buttressed by literalist
readings attracts a disproportionate number of engineering types.

~~~
acqq
> The Koran, or the Bible are not "violent" books not are they "peaceful"

The Koran is directly violent and intolerant. It contains direct instructions
that are such. The Sunnah describes the violent actions of the violent person
claiming to be prophet of the god (which was invented earlier) and his
followers. The Old Testament describes the actions of the violent god (an
invented being by his believers) and his believers trying to win and control
the Canaan territories. The New Testament describes the violent action of
authorities who try to keep the order by crucifying the person claiming to be
the prophet that brings the end of the world, then contains a lot of briefs of
his followers and then one apocalyptic vision.

And not a single one of these texts holds any scientific truth. All are based
on myths and superstition.

At the time of the "last revelations" already 800 years passed since Greeks
measured the circumference of Earth, the size and distance of Moon and the
size and distance of Sun. But the supposed god of the supposed prophet instead
spends the energy to leave the message that the uncle of the supposed prophet
will burn in hell. He cares about the priorities, you see. In the Old
Testament the god actually comes through the house door to his favorite
believer and shares a meal with him. Or strolls through the garden. You know,
gods have to eat too. Oh, and god also has rest for one day after making the
whole world in six.

Read them all and compare.

------
mvdwoord
For anyone interested, La Haine (Hatred) is a fascinating film about a day in
the life in the Paris suburbs anno 1995
[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113247/](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113247/)

This quote has stuck with me ever since I first saw it:

"C’est l’histoire d’un homme qui tombe d’un immeuble de cinquante étages. Le
mec, au fur et à mesure de sa chute se répète sans cesse pour se rassurer :
jusqu’ici tout va bien, jusqu’ici tout va bien, jusqu’ici tout va bien. Mais
l'important n’est pas la chute, c’est l’atterrissage."

Which loosely translates as:

"This is the story of a man falling from a fifty-story building. The guy,
during his fall reassures himself by constantly repeating: so far so good, so
far so good, so far so good.

But the important thing is not the fall, it's the landing."

~~~
lifeisstillgood
Good quote, but seems fairly applicable to ... Well, everything.

What's the context if I have not seen the film?

~~~
mercurial
It's a way of saying the movie doesn't end well. Great film, anyway.

------
jacquesm
I note that the first indications about who was behind this indicate that at
least 3 of the people carrying out the attack were from Belgium (a suburb of
Brussels to be precise) and that one entered the EU through Greece somewhere
in October. I don't know anything about the rest of the attackers and that
does not detract from the points made in the article but it is worth noting
that this is not an issue confined to France but pan-European even though
France has some unique elements that definitely factor into all this.

~~~
paol
Even if none of them turn out to be from the banlieue the issues will be
conflated, like they always are.

Just as, if none turn out to have been part of the immigrant wave, it will be
conflated with that and the open borders issue.

Politics can be irrational even at the best of times, and this isn't the best
of times...

~~~
TeMPOraL
Already in my Facebook feed I'm quoting information from 'slau because people
are saying that the attackers are definitely immigrants because Syrian
passport, while carefully ignoring the "French and the fingerprints" angle.

~~~
guard-of-terra
Is this french person Muslim? With immigration background?

If both answers are "no", you are right about selective blindness. If not, it
is you who are ignoring an angle.

~~~
nightspirit
Technically, this comment is factually correct and also it is spot on. Some
people trying to defend some ethnic groups in this thread are hypocrites.

------
agumonkey
Didn't read the whole article yet, but being close to such places since birth,
I'm often thinking about it. From immigration, post-war building efforts,
architectural and urban paradigms[1], the new technologies that make these
projects possible.

From a distance it can look as governments just wanted to park immigration,
and that was part of it, but they also believed, if you look at the ads of the
60s, they were opening the gates of heaven. Which was partly and honestly true
since at that time many populations lived in ghettos. The idea of having a
place to sleep with a modern electric kitchen even (the average family still
had countryside way of life), with parks and services under your window ...
isn't far from a dream.

Unfortunately nothing went as planned. Failed integration, failed approach to
urban planning[1], ... hard to say what was the real problem.

[1] Often blame has been put onto people like LeCorbusier, but his ideas have
also been stretched too thin for socio-political purposes.

------
notsony
Social and economic deprivation is not the root cause, otherwise explain why
educated students, doctors and engineers are joining IS?

~~~
hackuser
> educated students, doctors and engineers are joining IS

How many are? Do we have any good information on this? I doubt IS releases the
professinal and educational backgrounds of its hires!

Generally, my impression is that historiclly the middle class has provided the
idealogues; the theory is thhat if you're living hand-to-mouth you have more
immediate worries and less time to study such things, and if you are
illiterate you have other obstacles. That's just one possible but commonly
repeated hypothosis: I don't know what basis there is for it.

------
d3rhstar
The article makes an important point. It points out that those drawn to
Jihadism in the west tend to be woefully ignorant of the teachings of Islam.

Whenever there is an attack, both the snark about the "religion of peace" as
well as the claim that Muslims don't condemn these acts both resurface. The
fact is that both terrorism and ISIS have been roundly condemned by large
panels of Islamic scholars.

It would not surprise me that, once the religious background of these
terrorists is examined, that it is proves to be very flimsy.

The challenge, in my mind, and as a Muslim is that Muslims need to figure out
how to prevent the brainwashing of impressionable young people in an era of
instant communication.

~~~
jacquesm
> The fact is that both terrorism and ISIS have been roundly condemned by
> large panels of Islamic scholars.

If the media would act as good as a lens for those instances as they do for
the terrorist acts themselves it would be splendid.

~~~
ern
The more fair-minded outlets do seem to try, but even then, they seem to be
the exceptions that prove the rule:

[http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-
is-...](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-is-an-
offence-to-islam-says-international-coalition-of-major-islamic-
scholars-9756255.html)

[http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/17/saudi-
clerics-f...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/17/saudi-clerics-
fatwa-declares-terrorism-heinous-crime-sharia-law)

[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/24/muslim-scholars-
isl...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/24/muslim-scholars-islamic-
state_n_5878038.html)

------
Gys
'Are the suburbs of Paris incubators of terrorism?'

If true then this might be the case for most poor suburbs in many countries.
People with nothing to loose who want to make a point.

~~~
guard-of-terra
Yet we don't see terribly much christian terrorism, buddhist terrorism or
agnostic terrorism.

All kinds of people are impoverished but we only see extreme violence from one
background. This rules out poor suburbs as prime cause.

One can argue mass shootings of US of A is another example, but it doesn't
seem to exist much outside of USA.

~~~
giaour
That is absolutely false.

[http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/03/25/deadly-violence-
betw...](http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/03/25/deadly-violence-between-
myanmar-buddhists-muslims-spreads-to-3-more-towns-in/)

[http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/opinion/the-other-
terror-t...](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/opinion/the-other-terror-
threat.html)

~~~
guard-of-terra
Your second link makes sense, it's actually very similar profile to Charlie
Hebdo attack. First one, not so much. Ethnic tensions are not terrorism.

We can add right wing to the list.

~~~
jacquesm
> Ethnic tensions are not terrorism.

That is a matter of perception for many. When someone attempts to burn down a
Mosque or a Synagogue for some that is 'ethnic tensions' for others those are
acts of terrorism. It's not clear-cut at all and the whole
freedomfighter/terrorist duality makes it even harder to determine which label
to apply and when.

------
atmosx
As always great content from the New Yorker (one of the few worthy
subscription magazines IMHO) but extremely long article.

------
SixSigma
The Battle of Algiers, in French

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-7j4WVTgWc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-7j4WVTgWc)

I watched it in French and I don't speak French. The story is easy to follow.

~~~
mercurial
Haven't seen it, but unfortunately, I'm told it was pretty close to reality.
That said, it's not particularly relevant.

~~~
hackuser
> it's not particularly relevant

I disagree. (If it's the film I'm thinking of) it shows brutal oppression
perpetrated by the French on Algiers. It might inform an understanding of
current relationships between France and Islam.

~~~
mercurial
The French oppression in Algeria was real, and there was a bloody episode
right after WWII, and then the Algerian War of Independence was extremely
brutal. But this doesn't have much to do with Islam. The Algerian FLN was
mostly a nationalist/left-wing group. In fact, Algeria was the theater of a
bloody civil war in the 90s between the FLN dictatorship and Islamic
extremists.

------
sz4kerto
what a fantastic read, thanks for submitting. I planned to read something on
my phone until the kid falls asleep, then stayed in the room for 1.5 hours. :)

------
briandear
A suprisingly good and nuanced look at the French situation. Very high quality
writing this one!

------
brandon272
Did the article randomly jump around as you were trying to read it? Incredibly
frustrating.

------
andrewclunn
It lost me somewhere around paragraph 12.

~~~
jacquesm
Try harder. It is an excellent piece. The only false note are the cartoons
alongside it which do not contribute at all and seem totally out of place.

~~~
valm-
New Yorker cartoons aren't meant to comment on the articles they appear with.
They are just distributed throughout the magazine (a tradition they have
maintained on the web).

------
shitgoose
I wonder is Charlie Hebdo is going to come up with one of their taseful
caricatures this time.

------
guard-of-terra
> ...where the police dare not enter ...

Here, I've pinpointed the precise moment where their troubles began.

~~~
shitgoose
So we all grew up as law abiding citizens just because police was able to
enter our neighbourhoods?

~~~
guard-of-terra
Basically, yes. And it's not about us personally, it's about who they take
away thus freeing us from being affected by bullying, crime and bad influence.

Maybe they only have to take away one in hundred, the bad seed.

~~~
jacquesm
> And it's not about us personally, it's about who they take away thus freeing
> us from being affected by bullying, crime and bad influence.

Where I grew up the police was free to come and go as they pleased. That did
not stop plenty of bullying, lots of crime and a ton of bad influences being
readily apparent and I credit my parents (even though they were divorced), the
teachers in my school and my interest in technology for not going down some
dumb path (most likely not to be a murderer though).

A friend of mine who grew up much the same _did_ in fact end up in a different
situation and had none of those advantages that I had, otherwise our
situations are mostly interchangeable.

~~~
guard-of-terra
Looks like police, walks like police, doesn't scare criminals away? Is not
police!

I mean, it is solvable. Firse, you enter the place. Then, you arrest
criminals. Then, you rinse and repeat.

There are communities around the world which, while being very poor, only have
petty crime. You just avoid nurturing crime tolerance.

------
djyde
Need you in Paris, Bruce Wayne.

------
wangii
Good read, thanks! I'd like to thank uBlock even more: after finishing the
article, it has blocked something I don't like for 221 times.

