The growing immigrant community in France is igniting a debate over the definition of French identity and equality. Despite the rapidly changing ethnic makeup of French society, many citizens refuse to acknowledge race as a factor in the subsequent rise in culture-conflicts. They claim to live in a color-blind society, and even criticize the politicians and public figures that bring up the concept of race as motivation for policy. Instead of acknowledging the prevalence of racism, discriminatory policies like the hijab ban are excused by a cry for French identity to triumph any marker of cultural heritage. This blatant deflection and public adherence to color-blind race policies will only engender conflict and promote injustice.
France’s history of warped patriotism informs the kind of conversations it has about race, or lack thereof. The concept of laïcité, or the separation between church and state, became notoriously popular during the Ancien Régime in France. During this time until 1789, governing power was almost exclusively funneled to white clergy members and nobility as a way to exclude the common man from participating in politics. The French brand of secularism made its official comeback in 1905 when laïcité passed as a law ordering public institutions like schools and political buildings to operate freely from the influence of religion. The goal was to cement the idea that French identity was independent of any social identifier like religious affiliation, ethnic heritage, or race (Pernsteiner 2017, 123). In the years that followed, France was hesitant to acknowledge the existence of different races in order to maintain a “color-blind” policy. They believed if there were no laws that explicitly mention or define race—effectively denying the presence of racial privilege altogether—then everyone would be considered equal under the French identity (Chapman 2004, 163). To this point, the Data Protection Act of 1978 passed to prohibit France from collecting any statistical information on the racial or ethnic makeup of its population (Chapman 2004, 165).
Though there are laws in place that generally forbid discrimination in schools or the workplace, racial tensions cease to decline in France’s ever-increasing multicultural society. French people who are discriminated against based on their race or nationality cannot seek legal restitution because the law does not codify race. Minority and immigrant populations more than others feel this particular burden because the “color-blind” attitude implicitly favors the “standard” white Frenchman. A 1995 survey by Nouvel Observateur showed that white native-born French do not think of racism as one of the most important issues threatening French society, but foreigners and immigrants viewed it as the first or second threat (Lamont 2004, 150). This discrepancy regarding the public perception of race in France is also evident in a 1999 Harris poll conducted by the Commission nationale consultative des droits de l’homme, which said that 68% of respondents from the national sample believe themselves to be somewhat racist and 61% of respondents believe there are too many foreigners in France” (Lamont 2004, 140). Meanwhile, 65% of French people from foreign countries say that they have been victims of racism,” such as when applying for work or during police encounters (Lamont 2004, 149).
The French public school system has also proven the country’s intolerance to religious heterogeneity which contributes to the social inequality in French society (Wieviorka 2009, 167). The most glaring case of French discrimination and religious intolerance is the widely known “hijab ban.” In 2004, a new law banned the use of religious signs and garments in public primary and secondary schools. Though it was not written to specifically target Muslim head-coverings (Sikh turbans, Jewish yarmulkes, and large Christian crosses were included), the ban ultimately impacted Muslim schoolgirls the most. A 2020 Stanford University study found that the ban had “a detrimental effect on both the girls’ ability to complete their secondary education and their trajectories in the labor market” because of “increased perceptions of discrimination.” Ironically enough, the ban achieved the very effect it tried to eliminate.
As more migrants enter the country, France will demographically diversify and shift away from its white-majority population. In response, the country must adapt or prepare for a violent cultural clash. The first step is for the French government to reconsider the meaning of laïcité in their rising multicultural society. Toxic methods of integration such as the hijab ban or anti-separatism bills will create more conflicts when minority and immigrant populations are growing in numbers. Because of the close relationship between the personal and the political, the only way to create a better cosmopolitan environment for migrants is to push for a societal change in the perception of race. The French people must realize that adhering to color-blind policies only abet, not abate, racist attitudes.