Nicolas Sarkozy and the rebels of the slums are the result of the same situation: a country that, going to the extremes, turns its actors into beggars or multimillionaires, rejects its leaders, confronts its history and where Salman Rushdie lets people issue death threat against him at the public services of television. Sarkozy is the defender of the “hard liners”, he wants to turn the country into an anonymous society and uses the republican principles as a cover for his personal ambitions. More than ideas, he’s looking for fame, combat and money, just like his enemies in the slums.
The causes of violence are already obvious (poor integration, wrong urban policies, massive unemployment, unreal transfer of the problems of the Middle East and Africa, a high cost-based social policy that yields to the free-of-charge religious policy, etc...) but the magnitude of the violence is a new fact. The government did not pay attention to the demonstrations of October 4 although others were expected. However, they did not happen in the Place de la Republic, Paris but in the slums where everything that seems to represent the State causes a burning atmosphere. Demonstrators actually shoot at the police in different places...people throw stones, bolts, petanque balls, as in Palestine...Apart from the organized plot that Sarkozy denounces, it’s about a convergence of passions and anger whose combination provokes coherent results, the product of the mutation of racism and anti- racism.
Nowadays, anti-racism does not know what to do. The “natives of the Republic” would like to put colonization, slavery and Shoah at the same level but not with the purpose of appreciating the dramas their ancestors suffered and giving a relative character to the Shoah with the objective of succeeding there where Faurisson’s too small minority of negationists failed. The Dieudonnés, the Thierry Meyssans use the same fallacies to feed the hate that has become the non plus ultra of the radical opposition...This and the radicalization of the ghettos have been caused by the disengagement of the State. This is not about defending rights, equality and mutual respect, but about justifying the expression of a violence caused by the Machiavellian perfidy of the guilty Jew, American and, by extension, white citizen of a democracy. That movement can not be compared with the events of May 68 for a man like Daniel Cohn-Bendit could not fit in it for being a Jew. Besides, the events of May 68 took place because the boys wanted to have access to the girls rooms and vice versa. What’s happening with the rebels of our slums is the contrary. They reject such a mess, they want the girls to wear veils and be inaccessible to those they considered to be strangers. God is on the other side. Today, preachers –in this case, the imams- support the rebels.

Source
Charlie Hebdo (France)
Charlie Hebdo is a weekly reference for part of the French radical Left. Launched in 1992 by Philippe Val, it can be proud of its affiliation with Hara-Kiri and Charlie, satirical magazines of the 60s and the 70s. Anarchist and anti-religious at the beginning, it gradually evolved and adopted a more atlantist tone and, systematically, has criticized the Arab or Muslim populations.

“Jours pas tranquilles à Clichy”, by Philippe Val, Charlie Hebdo, November 9, 2005.