Liam redux

French Parliament votes for Islamophobia

This is unbelievable. The French Parliament, on the eve of Bastille Day, voted 335 in favour of preventing Muslim women wearing a full face covering veil in public. There was only 1 dissenter . Le Monde reports that the new law was strongly supported by the right. The gutless Socialist, Communist and Green Parties while…

Liam
1–2 minutes

image This is unbelievable. The French Parliament, on the eve of Bastille Day, voted 335 in favour of preventing Muslim women wearing a full face covering veil in public. There was only 1 dissenter . Le Monde reports that the new law was strongly supported by the right. The gutless Socialist, Communist and Green Parties while being “resolutely opposed” to the wearing of the niqab and the burka abstained. The Socialist Party’s big objection was that the legislation is a “gift for fundamentalists”. Maybe. Mostly it’s a gift for every racist Islamophobe in Europe.

Anyone who chooses to wear a face covering on religious grounds now faces a fine of 150 Euros  or a citizenship course. The law does not come into effect until spring 2011 to allow a period of “pedagogy”.

As if there were not enough there’s a year in prison and a fine of 30 000 Euros for anyone forcing a woman to wear a veil, a penalty which is doubled if the “victim is a minor”.

This bit of legislation is ostensibly to “liberate” the 2000 women in a country of 60 million who cover their faces. The one thing that is absolutely certain is that this law will encourage many thousands more women to start covering up as their way of telling the state that it has no right to tell them what they should or should not wear.

The Daily Mail and the English Defence League will be cracking open the champagne tonight.

A bit more on this here and here.

26 responses to “French Parliament votes for Islamophobia”

  1. Alasdair Avatar
    Alasdair

    Any idea who the one dissenter was?

    Like

    Reply
  2. jim jepps Avatar
    jim jepps

    Raaaaagggggeeeeee!!!!!!!!

    I will not swear, I will not swear, I will not swear… I do not agree.

    Anyway, it took me bloody ages to find out who voted against but it was a guy called Daniel Garrigue. He is a UMP member who no longer takes the whip… ie a renegade Tory.

    I know nothing else about him so don’t know why he turned his back on the UMP.

    Like

    Reply
  3. Eddie Truman Avatar
    Eddie Truman

    Colin Falconer reports;
    “The only French MP to vote against the law banning the burqa in public places is a right-winger close to Dominique de Villepin, Chirac’s prime minister. He based his argument on defence of civil liberties. At least he had the courage of his convictions. The left abstained or in a few cases voted in favour. A sad day for the French parliamentary left, though the radical left is little better, and in some cases worse.”

    Like

    Reply
  4. jim jepps Avatar
    jim jepps

    OK – I know a little more about him.

    He left the UMP in 2008 over their tax plans, lack of internal debate in the party and because he was opposed to NATO.

    He is very pro-European and set up a group called “French for Europe”

    You can read his blog here;

    http://www.danielgarrigue.com/blog/blog.html

    If I’m right he appears to be saying that he’s happy for their to be laws against people who force others to wear the veil and for a law to prohibit the veil on the grounds of security in particular places – but in general he sees it as a restriction of liberty, which it is.

    He believes there is a climate of racism growing across Europe and this law will legitimise the National Front.

    However, I stopped studying French at 14 and I wasn’t very good at it even then.

    Like

    Reply
  5. jim jepps Avatar
    jim jepps

    I think Colin is unduly offish about his arguments. I think this is pretty clear;

    “Hélas, je constate aujourd’hui dans tous les pays d’Europe un climat de racisme, une montée du populisme liée à la crise économique et au vieillissement de nos sociétés. ”

    If you want to see who voted for or abstained you can go here

    http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/scrutins/jo0595.asp

    Like

    Reply
  6. Infantile and Disorderly Avatar
    Infantile and Disorderly

    “As if there were not enough there’s a year in prison and a fine of 30 000 Euros for anyone forcing a woman to wear a veil, a penalty which is doubled if the “victim is a minor”.”

    Clearly it should be illegal to force a woman to wear a veil… Or to force a woman to wear anything for that matter.

    Like

    Reply
  7. Eddie Truman Avatar
    Eddie Truman

    @Jim, can you expand on your comment that Colin is “unduly offish about his arguments.”
    I’m afraid I don’t know what you mean by that.
    Also I can only apologise for being unable to understand a word of French.
    All the best.

    Like

    Reply
  8. jim jepps Avatar
    jim jepps

    Sorry Eddie, I hadn’t meant to be obscure – my fault.

    I just mean the guy talks extensively about the rise of racism across Europe and that this law feeds both racism and the National Front.

    Colin dismisses his attitude by saying “He based his argument on defence of civil liberties.” which actually isn’t true – Garrigue does argue that the veil is an authoritarian restriction of liberty as well, but to say he restricts his opposition to the new law on that basis makes it appear that he’s simply some sort of libertarian and writes out of history his clear concern about racism.

    I assume Colin wants to distort the guy’s arguments because he’s a centre-right politician (although he can’t be that close to the prime minister because he flounced out of the UMP saying it undemocratic) but I don’t think it does any of us any favours not to give credit where it’s due.

    Like

    Reply
  9. Eddie Truman Avatar
    Eddie Truman

    Cheers Jim.
    I wouldn’t want to get bogged down in arguing over someone else’s characterisation of the politics behind the only French MP to vote against the ban.
    By far the bigger issue I’m sure you’ll agree is the situation that the French left now finds themselves in.
    I remember reading Frantz Fanon’s ‘Studies in a Dying Colonialism’ in the years leading up to when we founded Islamophobia Watch in 2005 with it’s descriptions of French colons dragging Muslim women into town squares and tearing off their veils to shouts of “Vive Le Republic!”.

    Like

    Reply
  10. jim jepps Avatar
    jim jepps

    Totally agree.

    Oh God, I remember that description – horrifying. I guess Fanon isn’t as big on the French left as I’d assumed.

    Like

    Reply
  11. Liam Avatar
    Liam

    According to this report the Syrian Ministry of Education has sacked 1200 teachers for wearing the niqab. It still doesn’t make the French law any better.

    http://www.lepoint.fr/monde/syrie-1-200-enseignantes-portant-le-niqab-exclues-du-secteur-de-l-education-13-07-2010-64653_24.php

    Like

    Reply
  12. alf Avatar
    alf

    The rise of Islamaphobia in Europe has set a challenge for many on the Left. In defending democratic rights of all and opposing the rising tide of racism. The Left has to make a stand on this across Europe.

    It is for Muslim women to decide if they wish to be covered or not, as part of their religious and cultural rights being upheld.

    The arguements that it is anti-secular to put this position has reduced the ability of some on the Left to recognise where the real threats come from and enabled the far right to set the pace.

    There must be no retreat on this. In defending secularism we must never deny others their religious rights,which includes the right for women to chose to wear Muslim dress.

    The challenge is for international solidarity with all Muslim women across Europe to express their full religious and cultural needs, without fear of attack from the State or others.

    If we fail to do this then we give legitimacy to the xenephobes and fail in our duty to defend of all from racism.

    Like

    Reply
  13. Doug Avatar
    Doug

    Alf is spot on. To think some people consider the French Left as some sort of role model! They should go down in infamy for what they’ve just done.

    Like

    Reply
  14. martin ohr Avatar
    martin ohr

    Liam,

    I’m suprised by this “As if there were not enough there’s a year in prison and a fine of 30 000 Euros for anyone forcing a woman to wear a veil, a penalty which is doubled if the “victim is a minor”.”

    Surely if -as you claim- you believe that women are chosing to wear this shit, then you should either support the 30K fine or regard it as irrelevant.

    That’s not to imply I support the law, altough I’d note that France is not england and translating such legislation to create your own internal mental outrage as such is a bit silly; anyway it is my understanding that at present very few women and children in france are veiled -something we should all be pleased about.

    Like

    Reply
  15. alf Avatar
    alf

    Martin do you take the same position re chassidic men making women wear hair coverings. If the women chose to then that is their right. We also defend those women if they refuse to have it imposed on them.
    Socialists fight for self-determination in every respect, free from oppression. Equally we will defend those women who chose not to wear the veil or any other covers.
    The issue is they must be allowed to be free to chose and not have the State or men force it on or off them.

    Like

    Reply
  16. martin ohr Avatar
    martin ohr

    Alf, not sure what you’re asking me or why. I don’t think I took any position on anything there. I’m against anyone being forced by superstitious practice to do anything. (As an aside, it is wise for men with balding heads to wear hats in the sun though -on a personal note, I notice a bald patch developing in exactly the size and shape and position my ancestors would have worn a kippah; it’s either further proof of evolution, or proof that rabbis simply knew basic health precautions)

    My question is why does liam object to the state preventing women and children being forced by others to be covered up?

    I agree with everything you wrote though- not sure why you are trying to manufacture an argument with me. But I’ll re-iterate the other point I made. France isn’t Britain, parliament passing such a law in Britain could be construed as Islamophobia, in france I think that charge doesn’t hold water.

    Like

    Reply
  17. skidmarx Avatar
    skidmarx

    Surely if -as you claim- you believe that women are chosing to wear this shit, then you should either support the 30K fine or regard it as irrelevant.
    I have seen reports in the media that many of the women who do so are converts, and are very much choosing to wear it. Doesn’t mean I think it’s a symbol of empowerment, but I would have thought that in the present atmosphere any man associating with a burka-wearer is likely to be at risk from such a law, whether he has encouraged the wearing of a burka or not.
    parliament passing such a law in Britain could be construed as Islamophobia, in france I think that charge doesn’t hold water.
    Because the French are better at hiding the anti-Islamic intent behind a republican justification?

    Like

    Reply
  18. Jane Kelly Avatar
    Jane Kelly

    I suspect the ‘republican justification’ and references to ‘secular state’ cover up France’s past and present colonial relationship to Algeria rather than anything else.

    I think those women and men in France who defend a woman’s right to choose what they want should all dress up in burkas and parade through the streets – just to see how many can get arrested.

    That and take any cases to the European Court of Human Rights where I imagine the French law could be overturned.

    Like

    Reply
  19. SOCIALIST UNITY » FRENCH PARLIAMENT VOTES FOR ISLAMOPHOBIA

    […] by Liam MacUaid […]

    Like

    Reply
  20. John Gray Avatar
    John Gray

    http://grayee.blogspot.com/2010/07/la-liberte-guidant-le-peuple.html

    a view.

    Like

    Reply
  21. John Mullen Avatar
    John Mullen

    The real aim of the law is to encourage people to hate muslims instead of fighting back against the ruling class’s many attacks. The section on big punishments for people forcing women to wear such a garment is purely political. It would be almost impossible to prove someone had forced a women to wear a veil. The main aim is to reinforce and legitimize stereotypes “I knew muslim men were all macho bastards – look, the government even needs to pass a law about them now, the problem is so serious”.

    Worse than the Left, the far left is infested with islamophobia. A good section of the NPA is against islamophobia, but not enough to get the organization to *DO* anything at all about it, because of the islamophobic minority, and the very large number of comrades who think that the issue should be avoided because it’s divisive.

    Like

    Reply
  22. alf Avatar
    alf

    Martin says ” I’m against anyone being forced by superstitious practice to do anything. ”

    Well the ban is based on superstitious fear and xenephobia, and as Jane points out, more to do with unfinished business re French colonialism.

    Just as it was important for the Left to take a stand on colonialism now we must all take a stand on attempts to impose a Eurocentric and oppressive approach re the rights of Muslim women.

    It may appear “safe” to hide behind secularism but in fact this makes it harder to win people over to Socialism if the Left fails to challenge institutional and cultural racism.

    Like

    Reply
  23. alf Avatar
    alf

    Martin says ” France isn’t Britain, parliament passing such a law in Britain could be construed as Islamophobia, in France I think that charge doesn’t hold water.”

    As internationalsts we must recognise that racism is racism. France like Britain, has a hisory of colonialism and racism. This is an international issue.

    The far right has laid down a challenge over the past year across Europe and governments of the right, left and centre are caving in under the pressures of the social and economic crises, desperate to save themselves .

    Just as social democrats failed to oppose the call for imperialist war in 1914, so now the “popularism” of Islamaphobia is leading a rise of reaction to divert social forces from challenging those responsible for the present economic crises of Capitalism.

    This is not an abstract debate about some idyllic lefty secular progressive France of the past that does not exist. It is about attacking and scapegoating Muslim women. Who will be next if we do not make an international stand.

    Like

    Reply
  24. Jodley Avatar
    Jodley

    Martin, the rabbis dictated that the head should be covered in order not to offend and to demonstrate fear of G-d. (Talmud, somewhere or other).

    Moreover, there is no mention of a kippah specifically in Talmud. Kippot are a post-Talmudic ‘token’ headcovering made necessary where other more substantial headcoverings are not worn habitually. So, the coincidence of your bald spot and the size/shape of the kippah is just a coincidence, nothing to do with some inspired ancient meditarrean public health campaign. Besides, what’s a man with recession at the hairline meant to do? Get himself a couple of horns? (Come to think of it – that may explain Moses’s look).

    Like

    Reply
  25. Jodley Avatar
    Jodley

    mediterranean, even

    Like

    Reply
  26. John Mullen Avatar
    John Mullen

    On September the 13th, the law banning women wearing a niqab from walking the streets in France will pass before the Senate. Small left wing organizations, and many muslim groups, as well as the Association of Moroccan workers and the Jewish Union for Peace have quickly signed to support a rally in front of the Senate on this day. Tragically the main far Left and antiracist organizations have not so far signed, and most will probably refuse to do so.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Eddie Truman Cancel reply

Trending