Deciding to re-publish this text originally appeared in a slightly different version, I can not help thinking of a woman who, for me, deserves to be commended and thanked, on behalf the French, for his courage and his strength of convictions, Nora Remadnia Preziosi. I'm happy and excited, to offer the new edition of this text, with all my friendship and best wishes of success, still, and always. author.
The question of identity lies at the heart of my research. While working, obviously, I got to thinking about the thorny issue of integration and, more generally, immigration. As a historian of thought, intrinsically linked to philosophy, obviously, I could move there was always this is a problem, as discomfort transposed from one generation to another. For every company, every human group, takes a dim view of the other, this being different in personality, so we know only too bad that he does, what he thinks, how he wants to live, and what he wants, as a rule. Arguing that even his presence can not be a coincidence and hence there is some dark desire. Easily and quickly, the machine fantasy racing. The band tightens and seems to want, as one man to stand in front of the identity conflict that he himself created. From that moment, the other groups and with those he sees as similar or even simpler, with those who, like him, are "foreigners." The word, terrible, just been asked. this stranger, this stranger is scary because we know little, if any, will be to blame the ills and troubles agitating the community. Witch hunt, therefore, the scapegoat here. The humanities are most often left this phenomenon in the shadows, daring to write that the group needs victims to sacrifice to maintain its unity, a unity flickering, shaking, shaken by a mismatch in a rapidly changing world . Unless the group is bonded, unless he feels stronger, he is a racist, closed, able to cause severe weather. On the contrary, the more a group is tied together by common values, common projects, and it will be less xenophobic. For there is racism in times of trouble, doubt, anxiety. Everything
then includes the theory of the scapegoat, the other struck the seal of the difference which will take responsibility for ills. And it is striking, morally or physically, that group identity is shaky for some time to resolder. intolerance of "alien" is, like conservatism and social appeal to the regression (returning to the values of yesteryear, the old models, rejection of institutional change while the population calls it), a marker Company flickering. So I see for my part in the recent results of the Front of hatred, just discomfort of living together. I draw some ideas. Above all, should not the UMP "rightward" his positions and his political line. It must, in my opinion, treat the cause not the consequence. must talk about immigration, we must speak of identity, we must talk about integration, but not in any way, nor with anyone. For the moment, no defensible arguments advanced in this field. Extremists, of course, there are a great place to dump a SAWS bile bitter for them, zero immigration, more immigrants, no problem. Yet immigration is an opportunity and a need. France would gain much by integration, but a real integration, constructive and respectful of everyone.
And I can not help thinking, writing this, the sad return of the thesis of assimilation . We have a wonderful example of non-solution. For some singers who are to stand still, assimilation is the answer to the problem of integration. Yet this idea does not, it is only a theory based on assumptions who are unaware of the construction of Being, the construction of his mind, and identity. Forgetting the rules also allow the construction of the group, relationships between groups that lead to a society, and many other concepts, fundamentals, it would need a dictionary to group them all. So also, by the way, freedom to choose, it re-affirms a model "French" frozen, almighty, and perfect. In sum, a sort of French-type, uncreated, perfect, straight down from a terrestrial paradise too, carried by a God with a mustache, red beret on his head, baguette under arm ... These words will make you smile, yet it should not. Defend because assimilation is tantamount to demanding the newcomer learning by heart of this model and its imitation. Or, is it being built, really, that play a role? The answer is no appeal, and negative. Moreover, such an obligation would be worse than doing nothing.
By repeating the beginning of this text, you will find that the rejection of others by the group leads communitarianism (which is not necessarily a bad thing since it is natural for any State, an upcoming article will elaborate on these ideas there). In short, assimilation causes against which she hoped to fight. These assumptions do not hold. Who can now represent "the" French? That can advance a model, unique prototype, stereotyped? No one, fortunately, because France is not here, and many more. We must be diversity and respect for each other. We do not want a whiff of colonial nauseating "good French" civilizing by "kindness" "poor savage." A
ways on to my sense of divide people on this difficult issue would be to stimulate the desire to live together. This desire is associated with a curiosity for the other, reciprocal and shared over time, and in diversity. Our diversity, our differences, our commonalities as we have everything to gain. imagine a France of freedom to be and where we would be grouped around a common set of values. These values is our heritage of liberty, equality, and fraternity. And I am tempted to add in the margin, and "united in the desire to live together"
Nicolas Madelenat di Florio, April 2010.
The question of identity lies at the heart of my research. While working, obviously, I got to thinking about the thorny issue of integration and, more generally, immigration. As a historian of thought, intrinsically linked to philosophy, obviously, I could move there was always this is a problem, as discomfort transposed from one generation to another. For every company, every human group, takes a dim view of the other, this being different in personality, so we know only too bad that he does, what he thinks, how he wants to live, and what he wants, as a rule. Arguing that even his presence can not be a coincidence and hence there is some dark desire. Easily and quickly, the machine fantasy racing. The band tightens and seems to want, as one man to stand in front of the identity conflict that he himself created. From that moment, the other groups and with those he sees as similar or even simpler, with those who, like him, are "foreigners." The word, terrible, just been asked. this stranger, this stranger is scary because we know little, if any, will be to blame the ills and troubles agitating the community. Witch hunt, therefore, the scapegoat here. The humanities are most often left this phenomenon in the shadows, daring to write that the group needs victims to sacrifice to maintain its unity, a unity flickering, shaking, shaken by a mismatch in a rapidly changing world . Unless the group is bonded, unless he feels stronger, he is a racist, closed, able to cause severe weather. On the contrary, the more a group is tied together by common values, common projects, and it will be less xenophobic. For there is racism in times of trouble, doubt, anxiety. Everything
then includes the theory of the scapegoat, the other struck the seal of the difference which will take responsibility for ills. And it is striking, morally or physically, that group identity is shaky for some time to resolder. intolerance of "alien" is, like conservatism and social appeal to the regression (returning to the values of yesteryear, the old models, rejection of institutional change while the population calls it), a marker Company flickering. So I see for my part in the recent results of the Front of hatred, just discomfort of living together. I draw some ideas. Above all, should not the UMP "rightward" his positions and his political line. It must, in my opinion, treat the cause not the consequence. must talk about immigration, we must speak of identity, we must talk about integration, but not in any way, nor with anyone. For the moment, no defensible arguments advanced in this field. Extremists, of course, there are a great place to dump a SAWS bile bitter for them, zero immigration, more immigrants, no problem. Yet immigration is an opportunity and a need. France would gain much by integration, but a real integration, constructive and respectful of everyone.
And I can not help thinking, writing this, the sad return of the thesis of assimilation . We have a wonderful example of non-solution. For some singers who are to stand still, assimilation is the answer to the problem of integration. Yet this idea does not, it is only a theory based on assumptions who are unaware of the construction of Being, the construction of his mind, and identity. Forgetting the rules also allow the construction of the group, relationships between groups that lead to a society, and many other concepts, fundamentals, it would need a dictionary to group them all. So also, by the way, freedom to choose, it re-affirms a model "French" frozen, almighty, and perfect. In sum, a sort of French-type, uncreated, perfect, straight down from a terrestrial paradise too, carried by a God with a mustache, red beret on his head, baguette under arm ... These words will make you smile, yet it should not. Defend because assimilation is tantamount to demanding the newcomer learning by heart of this model and its imitation. Or, is it being built, really, that play a role? The answer is no appeal, and negative. Moreover, such an obligation would be worse than doing nothing.
By repeating the beginning of this text, you will find that the rejection of others by the group leads communitarianism (which is not necessarily a bad thing since it is natural for any State, an upcoming article will elaborate on these ideas there). In short, assimilation causes against which she hoped to fight. These assumptions do not hold. Who can now represent "the" French? That can advance a model, unique prototype, stereotyped? No one, fortunately, because France is not here, and many more. We must be diversity and respect for each other. We do not want a whiff of colonial nauseating "good French" civilizing by "kindness" "poor savage." A
ways on to my sense of divide people on this difficult issue would be to stimulate the desire to live together. This desire is associated with a curiosity for the other, reciprocal and shared over time, and in diversity. Our diversity, our differences, our commonalities as we have everything to gain. imagine a France of freedom to be and where we would be grouped around a common set of values. These values is our heritage of liberty, equality, and fraternity. And I am tempted to add in the margin, and "united in the desire to live together"
Nicolas Madelenat di Florio, April 2010.
