Posted by
Patrick Dufour on
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/re-the-French-and-Furriners-tp7585975p7585979.html
The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
[hidden email]>
writes:
>Dear Friamers,
>
>As we tried to cope with the week’s events this Friday, we found
>ourselves in disagreement about the degree to which the French, in
>particular, had endorsed multiculturalism. In that connection, I found
>myself humming the following passage from the French national anthem:
>
>Aux armes, citoyens!
>Formez vos bataillons!
>Marchons! Marchons!
>Qu'un sang impur
>Abreuve nos sillons!
>
>The English is …
>
>To arms citizens Form your battalions
>March, march
>Let impure blood
>Water our furrows
>
>When I visited the French countryside many years ago, there were
>billboards with blond babies and messages like “keep france
>strong”. Not sure, if I were a brown person, how comfortable I
>would feel in a crowd of a million people singing those particular
>lyrics. Funny how these little antiquated expressions of solidarity can
>get out of hand.
>
>Whuf!
>
>Nick
>
>PS Just to further the irony, the daily show (yes, yes, I know) reports
>that the day after the “Je Suis Charlie” rally for freedom of
>expression, the French police arrested a blogger for expressing anti
>semitic sentiments. In short, because of their history with Algeria, I
>am afraid the French have a problem as profound as our own.
>
>Nicholas S. Thompson
>Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>Clark University
>[
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/>]
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/>
Nicholas know
The Marseillaise has been written and composed in 1792!!! Different
context both cultural and political. The idea of modifying or editing the
national anthem comes regularly from the fringes (i.e. the version by
Serges Gainsburg) but never seriously.
I don't see any contradiction between the freedom of expression against
concepts and beliefs (such as religions) and the expression of hate speech
against people. A concept should be powerful enough to be believable and
avoid criticism (or defamation if you are a believer). Expression of hate
against individuals can lead to violence. Example of this noticeable
difference:
On 4 June 2010, the French Minister of the Interior was sentenced by the
High Court of Paris, for "breach of non-public insult towards a group of
people because of their origin." He said at a political meeting about a
supposed person of Arab origin: "It's good to have one of them attending.
When there is one, it's okay. But the trouble start when there are many of
them." Two weeks later, on 19 June 2010, the anniversary of the
announcement of the abolition of slavery in Texas, a dozen American white
supremacists, members of neo-Nazi group Aryan Nations, gathered at
Gettysburg to denounce endangerment of white America by the "black sheep"
and "Jewish media" and offer "teach a lesson to monkeys (...) with
strings." The police were there to separate anti-supremacist activists
present and enable them to exercise their right to free expression.
I don't know when was your visit in the French countryside but it may have
been during Sarkozy's campaign for the presidential election "pour une
France forte" (and indeed white and Catholic). Those billboards where a
clear message (I can do the job) to the members of the extreme right
party.
The problem you are outlining is in my view a global effort (culture?) to
refuse diversity and the resulting complexity. Nowadays a "good"
politician seems like a CEO. Barer of a one goal only program (so called
development).
Kind regards,
Patrick Dufour
107 College Street
South Hadley, MA 01075
ph: 413-538-5569
www.linkedin.com/in/patrickdufour
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com