Ten Unanswered Questions About the Violence in France

The media coverage of the violence in France leaves many unanswered questions.  Here are 10 of them:

1. How do the 7,000 or so people in France whose cars have been torched in the last two weeks feel about it?  Are they as shaken, furious, and depressed as anyone else would be to find their means of transportation and one of their most important assets destroyed for no good reason?

2. Who is paying for all the destroyed vehicles and other property damage in France?  Who will pay in the long run?  How much will it cost the people of France to replace all the cars that have been torched, not to mention schools, warehouses, retirement homes, stores, and other buildings?  What is this violence doing to property values in France?  What is this doing to France’s whole economy?

3.  Assuming that the media can attempt to rationalize or explain car arson as "rather typically French," how does one rationalize the vandalism of schools and a retirement home, among other acts of violence?

4. Why exactly does anyone in the French government or the mainstream media think it is a good idea to suggest that France must offer more job opportunities and political power to people who have demonstrated a willingness to set fire to valuable personal property of their neighbors?

5. Is it consistent with the Golden Rule to take a can of gasoline and set fire to your neighbor’s car?  Is the willingness of the arsonists to ignore the most basic rules of morality relevant in considering who should be rewarded with greater political power?  Is there a critical distinction between how a nation should respond to peaceful, nonviolent protest and how a nation should respond to violent arson, whether or not accompanied by complaints?

6. How does it feel to live in a country where violence is rewarded with discussions about how to give greater economic and political power to those doing the violence, while nonviolence is rewarded by having your car torched and your family terrified?

7. Does torching thousands of cars, destroying property, and terrorizing a nation seem disproportionate to the original offense of the accidental electrocution deaths of two Muslim teens? In light of this disproportionate response, does it make sense to even consider offering political concessions to those who have demonstrated such a violent temper and lack of fundamental fairness?

8. If failure to integrate minorities in France is part of the underlying problem that led to this violence, does the violence itself seem like a good means to build bridges of understanding?  If not, then is the violence an attempt to gain political power through intimidation?  Is it wise for the targets of violent intimidation to yield to it?

9. Why is everything that the French are doing to try to halt the violence, such as imposing a state of emergency and curfews, labeled "provocation" by the arsonists?  What moral standing do the arsonists have to discuss "provocation"?  Is setting fire to thousands of vehicles "provocation"?  Why on earth are patently absurd claims of "provocation" by the arsonists reported without comment by the mainstream media?

10. Is it right for news media to run stories at this time with titles like "The French Riots: A Political Scorecard" (The New York Times) speculating on who will gain and lose politically in France from the current violence?  Is it right to dwell on political calculations at a time when an arson crisis is holding a nation hostage?  Does gossiping about whose political star may rise or fall at this time seem like fiddling while France is burning? 

These questions are not being answered by the mainstream media at this time.  Most of these questions are not even being asked.  It's a shame, because answering questions like these would add depth and meaning to the coverage of the riots in France.  We might even learn something valuable.

For additional commentary on the mainstream media coverage of the violence in France, check out Captain's Quarters here, here and here; Gateway Pundit; Little Green Footballs; The Anchoress; Theodore's World; Below The Beltway; A Blog for All; Panhandle Pundit; No Pasaran! and Michelle Malkin.

Related posts:

• French Riots Abating? Shhhhh!!! Don't Provoke Them Again!
• Denial Is Not a River in France
• What Do All These Countries Have in Common?
• France: A New Safe Haven for Terrorists?
• "Duh" Headline Du Jour: Riots Seen Hitting France's Image Abroad

Technorati Tags:  Paris; Paris Riots; France

Comments

[Jim Hoft]

That was very good. I am in agreement, totally.

[larwyn]

Great work. I will thank the Gateway Pundit for linking to your terrific post.

I have posed most of your questions in my head - but why no hounding of the victims in this case -
I absolutely missed. It is something I truly hate to see and
would add a montage of LSM stupid questions to victims to the montage of stupid LSMers out in the elements, but I have digressed.

They will not ask the victims of the "youths" for the same reason they don't
ask the parents of blown apart Israelis, or the family members of the victims of the
Iraqi "Freedom Fighters".

On CNN Thursday, the young blonde "correspondent" in Amman assured Wolfless that the bombers could not have anything to do with the Iraqi community made up of those who fled to Jordan before the War.
"They brought their money and invested in businesses and have purchased real estate, their future is in Jordon"
Wonder how many of those that fled with their money to Jordan before we invaded were
Swamp Arabs???
CNN's new Blondie has no conception of who were the only people with money in Iraq. Must have been trained by Easton Jordan and Mrs. Jamie
Rubin.

[arminius]

Very good post. Enjoy your "Instalanche-twice-removed."

Two more questions that occurred to me last night:

1. If these people are rioting because they are so poor, where do all the cars come from? If everybody in your neighborhood has a car, how poor can you really be? In addition, in many of the interviews with the "youths" they speak of how they play video games all day and fight the police all night, and how the "youths" are coordinated via cell phones and blogs. How poor must one be to have ownership of playstations, cell phones, and computers?

2. The "youths" are allegedly "rioting" about unemployment. But a huge percentage of the front line "youths" are as young as 12 or 13. When you were 12 or 13, how much were you concerned about the fact that you didn't have a job? Are the media and French govt. saying that the "youths" are so fore-sighted that they are rioting in 2005 to protest French unemployment rates when they are of age to work, i.e, around 2013? That's some planning!