The situation in France is terrifying: burning and explosions throughout the night; crying children unable to sleep; an army of police officers fighting against their own citizens. The suffering of the French working class is now visible to the world. As Martin Luther King jr famously said: “A riot is the language of the unheard.”
The French working class complain police are using their power ”in a way they shouldn’t”, particularly against black men.
Riots were triggered by the shooting of a teenage boy, Nahel M, who was murdered by a police officer. A boy with no criminal record was shot in the chest during a traffic stop without justification. Officers gave a misleading account to cover their own backs, but this was contradicted by camera footage. They claimed the car drove straight at them, but the car was stationary when an officer said: “You are going to get a bullet in your head,” so Nahel attempted to escape and was shot.
Such murders are all too common in France. Thirteen people were killed during traffic stops last year, and worryingly, the French do not collect data on ethnicity so racially-motivated violence cannot be accurately monitored.
Nahel’s mother believes the police officer “saw an Arab face, a little kid, and wanted to take his life”.
An ambulance man launched into a tirade against a police officer, explaining he knew Nahel like he was a little brother, later explaining to reporters: “He never raised a hand to anyone and he was never violent.”
While Nahel’s character was assassinated on social media, the president of the association that ran the rugby club he played for said: “He was someone who had the will to fit in socially and professionally, not some kid who dealt in drugs or got fun out of juvenile crime.”
The people who were quick to assassinate this 17-year-old’s character were telling on themselves. They were showing the world what they think of kids of Algerian descent and how they feel it’s okay to treat them.
"Police violence happens every day, especially if you're Arab or black," one man told the BBC.
At the root of the problem is a culture in France that protects police officers. One law bans people from sharing images of police officers online. An even worse law (introduced under the guise of tackling terrorism) gives police the power to shoot anyone who fails to comply with an instruction. While some might say this law has gone wrong, others would suggest it’s working exactly as intended, that the goal is to make the working class and minorities terrified of police.
A common attitude seems to be this is how things should be, that these groups have it coming, that people have no right to protest. Some knuckle draggers have pointed out horrible crimes on social media and asked why the rioters never cared about those. Where were the rioters when a Muslim raped a girl is the type of question you see quite often.
What these geniuses fail to understand is protest is a response to authority. Prosecution is a response to criminality.
A protest against someone who is not in authority would be absurd. No one gets out onto the streets to protest a criminal because they know that criminal will face the wrath of the law, the system will apply justice.
When police officers violently suppress the population, that’s a different matter, and while French authorities have condemned the killing of Nahel, this goes way beyond one incident. You’re talking decades of repression. France is still looting its former colonies, treating its immigrant population like dirt and taking rights away from the working class. The killing of Nahel was the match that sparked the flame.
The family of Nahel did not want his death to spark riots. No one wants riots, not even the rioters, but when a GoFundMe for the officer who murdered Nahel raises more than €738,718, you can see why protesters feel agitated. There are many people in France and around the world who feel minorities should be excluded, violently suppressed and jailed or killed.
A riot is a way of saying if we’re not included in your system, we’re not complying with the rules of your system. You want us to comply, you had better include us.
You should get used to this picture because it’s a symptom of late capitalism and it’s only likely to get worse. The riots have spilled over into Switzerland and Belgium - and authorities have two options: quell dissent through violence and intimidation (fascism) or deal with capitalism.
If your only concern is that riots are unfair on business owners, you haven’t learnt anything at all. Until you address the unfair treatment of minorities and the working class, this kind of unrest will continue, and if your only solution is to violently repress people with a militarised police force, you are a fascist.
Functioning states do not need to send 45,000 police officers and armoured personnel carriers to quell unrest. Functioning states create a situation where there is no reason for unrest.
Of course some protesters will go too far. Of course bad groups will exploit unrest for their own political ends. Of course we don’t want to see destruction, but we also don’t want to see structural unfairness.
By all means get mad at people who are stealing, but these are people who’ve never had anything their entire lives. Were you mad when their employer was stealing from them? Or is it only wrong when poor people steal? What is the bigger injustice here? That poor people stole a TV or that they’ve been stolen from their entire lives?
The mayor of Marseille announced €2 million compensation for business owners. You see how readily they use the state to protect capital? Capitalists can’t be left to go without, but the working class must always go without.
It’s important to understand the anger comes from a very real place. If you quell dissent without addressing that, you’ve not solved the problem, you’ve stopped people from highlighting the problem. Tell us what solution you’re proposing, how you intend to fix the system, how you’re going to make police accountable. If your solution to violent police is more violent police, how do you think people are going to react?
When I was growing up there were riots in my hometown. They were called the Meadow Well riots and are regarded as some of the worst riots in British history. The riots were scary. We didn’t know if the rioters were going to come our way. Youth centres, health centres and other buildings were burnt down; shops were looted; police were pelted with bricks; and although we condemned those actions, we knew perfectly well why they were happening.
Some of those involved in the riots were horrible people. Some were racists who wanted to “burn the p*kis”, but there was so much more at play. We lived in an unemployment blackspot, a town that had been left to rot by the Thatcher government. If your analysis of civil unrest boils down to “rioters are bad”, politics is probably not for you.
The riots were triggered by the deaths of two youths who were fleeing police officers. This kind of thing happens all too often. One of the lads I went to school with sadly died in the same way at just 21 years old.
It was said at the time the rioters were “gripped by a hatred of the police”, but no one seemed to consider why there was such hatred. Later, Meadow Well received government funding which alleviated some problems, but the underlying issue - the lack of employment was never tackled. The real problem was never rioting, it was inequality, and that problem has never gone away.
All across the world, this problem seems to be getting worse and inequality creates a breeding ground for rioters. Would you rather violently suppress riots when they inevitably happen or stop them from happening in the first place? If you want to do the latter, you can’t let a handful of people hoard all the money while the planet dies and demand everyone else stays silent.
Incredibly cogent- thanks. Also - coming to the U.K. when @uklabour are elected and things get worse - not better - because that’s the only way Labour will appease their billionaire corporate backers.
Excellent look at the riots, Ricky. Riots are a message not heard .