Strikingly Different
French attitudes to demonstrating are in sharp contrast to our own British approach.
Both France and Great Britain are countries of rich cultural diversities which range from differentiations in regional accent to the general practice of one's daily routine. We ‘Britons’ typically perceive France as a nation of cheese, vineyards and lazy hours spent dining. Nevertheless, it is also a land of Germanic heritage to the east, Basque influence in the South West and huge cultural additions from large communities of predominantly African immigrants. Likewise in Britain, one would scarcely pair together a fierce looking ‘Geordie’ with a mannerly Devonshire farmer. However, both France and Great Britain seem to have developed two radically different political systems which universally function democratically and efficiently, uniting the majority of their civilians.
Although many argue the role of Prime Minister in Great Britain has naturally evolved towards that of a president, Great Britain is not only relatively decentralised but the bearer of a functioning monarchy. France on the other hand is a nation of republicanism, political elitism, a centralised state and a written constitution known as Les droits de l’homme. Born out of these admittedly simplified social diagrams emerge an array of common practices which distinctly illustrate what is acceptable in one country may not necessarily be so in another. There is an ever present conduct to being a citizen which changes depending on what country you find yourself in. Perhaps this is the reason for which British novelist Barbara Cartland said: “France is the only place where you can make love in the afternoon without people hammering on your door.” It is also perhaps the reason Winston Churchill yelled: “What is the opposite of Vive la France” when General de Gaulle’s Free French forces unexpectedly invaded islands off the Canadian coast.
After spending some time in Paris it has become increasingly evident that your average French citizen has an innate duty to consistently demonstrate against anything from changes in the law to changes in supermarket opening hours. It seems the French are happy to assign virtually unlimited power to their state while simultaneously demonstrating against it. In Paris, strikes and demonstrations are common practice. Last year, Paris witnessed strikes on public transport regarding pay increases, demonstrations outside the National Assembly appealing for tougher laws on second time offenders, teachers standing up against an education system which undermines the rights of immigrants and trainees demonstrating against unpaid internships to the applause of many a passer-by. This is to name but a few.
Every week a magazine publishes a list of scheduled strikes and demonstrations. Such practice would seem absurd in Britain. It would be like selling a weekly cricket journal in a French newspaper shop. The difference lies in how we view our state. Seeing as the French give so much to their state in tax they expect to receive a lot back from it.
Walking through the métro this week, I heard the bitter and raucous complaints of a woman as she discovers the escalator has stopped working. In France the roads are spotless, the trains are efficient, I doubt there’s one pot hole in their motorway network. Any sign of this being put into jeopardy the French seem inclined to do something about it.
The British however appear to disengage themselves from such issues; the state will simply take care of itself. The British only tend to demonstrate or strike when things are veering out of control. Why then was I surprised to discover that British students appeared not to bat an eyelid over the Government’s decision to increase tuition fees by 200%? Britsh notions of égalité are clearly very different to those on the other side of the Channel. Thus, the definitive question is: does the British system function with more fluidity and therefore avoid mass social upheavals, or do the French simply care more?
Infognito
Screen Trek
QUOTE ME NO QUOTES!
I know a lot of people disagree with issues brought about by a careless, and less caring, government, but they cannot afford the time to protest, because by doing so will jeopardise their employment.
In Oz, the encumbent Federal Government has introduced laws that spin the industrial clock back a long way towards the days of feudal barons, they being the corporate/business owners, so now you can be fired without notice or reason.
You can be asked to work holidays, including Christmas Day etc etc, in fact, the once financially compensated loss of rights for working as a casual, has been fused with all types of employment.
In addition, to obfuscate the real unemployment figures, the government has included from one hour per week up, as being 'employed'.
Well, if I could only find a job worth a grand a week, for one hour's work, I'd be very happy...but of course, they do not exist.
cheers and fears
fog
I don't know how many working days are lost to striking in France, but I imagine the same figures transposed into an Australian or British context would deeply worry the Government.
Moreover, France has ample public holidays, 35 hour weeks and a desirable number of days off every year. I find it strange how their economy still warrants a place at all those G8 summits even though they work considerably less and strike so much more than we do in Australia and Britain.
The work more to earn more philosophy is clearly to benefit someone else other than the 'middleman'
Honestly...the French have it easy in comparison to the poor folk working Christmas Day down under!
Froggy Views and French News
Froggy News