On the one hand, it is necessary to control the influx of immigrants, radically limiting the number of migrants and those claiming asylum. This explains the harsh measures against those entering France illegally – measures that have sparked mass protest, particularly within the "san papiers" movement, which has existed since 1996.
On the other hand, the government seeks to improve the living conditions of immigrants, eliminate social discrimination, combat the unequal position of foreigners in the labor market, and fight manifestations of racism. In addition, the right to citizenship has been repeatedly reformed to simplify the naturalization of foreigners.
Today, every child of immigrants born in France automatically becomes French upon reaching adulthood. Undoubtedly, these measures have helped improve the material situation of immigrants, but they have not been able to eliminate xenophobia. Moreover, the National Front (FN) has managed to secure a lasting place in French politics precisely through its prolonged propaganda of hostility towards foreigners. One reason for the failures in integration policy is that most democratically oriented politicians have for twenty years treated this topic as a "problem," a source of "difficulties," and even a "threat."
In French public opinion, this has significantly contributed to forming a negative image of immigrants. Despite the fact that a third of France's current population is of foreign origin, the diversity of their origins is still ignored. There is still no "place of remembrance" where the great contribution of immigrants to the economic, social, and cultural development of the country could be acknowledged. School textbooks also do not devote sufficient attention to this issue.
Another aspect of the republican tradition that has contributed to the formation of a negative image of the immigrant stems from the ambiguity that has existed since 1789 in understanding the relationship between nationalism and universalism. French culture is considered fundamentally universal, so all cultural practices brought into the country by immigrants are seen as "particularisms" that should be fought in the name of integration.
Foreign observers who criticize Jacobinism and its assimilating logic often misunderstand this issue. The Republic never fought against cultural diversity. But for a long time it tried to reduce other forms of life and cultural practices to the level of the "private sphere" (la sphere privee), so that religion, ethnic or geographic origin would not become a threat to the cultural unity of the nation. In past years, public opinion rejected Islam because the mass media, reporting on Islamic fundamentalism, convinced many that Islam represents a "threat" to national identity, as Islamists do not recognize the principles of secular life.
Debates on immigration have already lost their former intensity. However, discussion of this issue is reactivated in connection with debates on the boundaries and internal contradictions of the republic. The question arises about the forms of discrimination that the state practiced and encouraged – with regard to gender relations, regions, and colonies. A critical perspective is all the more necessary because European integration and globalization require that France adapt its institutions and political procedures to new historical processes.
Gerard Noiriel,
Professor, Director of the Ecole des Hautes
Etudes en Sciences Sociales in Paris.