I HATE LIVING IN FRANCE

[Periplus]

How's this "racist" if France acknowledges Human "Races"? Do you understand that there's a clear difference between Race in French and in English?
After the Declaration of Human Rights, in 1789, France officially doesn't believe in Races.
Do not compare it to the complicated history of Blacks in America and the Algerian Case.

Watch the video that I linked that tackles France not recognising race. It is absolute BS.

When France signed the Declaration of Human Rights, they were still a slave-owning state. When they outlawed it in 1848, they just continued indentured labour which was glorified slavery until the 1960's.

France had a bigger slave issue than the US, they crippled Haiti's economy to this day through reparations because they refused continued slavery. 122 years of debt payments by the French turned one of the richest colonies in the world into the disaster it is today.

France had psuedo-slavery in all of its colonies well into the 20th century and effectively shunned its victims until extremely recently.

As far as I know, the 5th Republic doesn't recognise Vichy's Regime, while it is legitimate to talk about the Sedif Massacre, it's dishonesty of you saying that "we are not taught enough about Colonialism" while you took the 2005 example (do you understand that School Programs change each other years, and ever since "l'Ecole de la Méthode" in late 19h, early 20th centuries, we teach children about France's History with less of a "Roman National" for a "Vérité Historique"?)

I used the 2005 legislation example to show the thinking of the political class in France. The fact that such a legislation got majority support is baffling. The fact that Chiraq still had no chance of repealing it through the National Assembly despite the backlash is also flabbergasting.

Anyhow, as of "L'Afrance" (French-African team) is another pegorative term from retarded football right wingers, and Trevor Noah doesn't have any clue of actual French's Geopoliics in Africa, besides a few known Scandals.

He discusses the term having an alt-right meaning but his main point was about France's so-called national "colour-blindness".

---------

Pt 1 of Pt2

 

[Periplus]

Non, la guerre d'Algérie n'est pas cachée aux élèves (mais le sort des harkis, oui) (franceculture.fr)

Algeria's coloniazation is still a problematic (for teachers) as we try to stay as neutral as possible, while the 2005 Law was heavily contested, teachers still have to learn how to stay truthful to historical facts about Algeria's War.
here's an article from Le Monde:
" Professeure d’histoire-géographie dans un lycée en périphérie de Lille (Nord), Nejwa Mimouni était ainsi la seule de son établissement, parmi une dizaine d’enseignants de la discipline, à traiter de la décolonisation algérienne. « Peut-être que sur la seconde guerre mondiale, le travail d’historien a été fait et digéré, alors que sur la guerre d’Algérie, personne n’est vraiment à l’aise », suggère-t-elle. "


En France, la colonisation algérienne peine à se faire une place dans les programmes scolaires (lemonde.fr)


In Summary,

While it was fair to criticize the French Regime of trying to cover up some truth behind the Algerian War (like Harkis, those soldiers who fought for France and who were abandoned by De Gaulle), but it is also fair to salute the efforts of many french politicians, teachers, historians who try to instruct the youth about the realities of Colonization. 2005 Law couldn't get the popular approval, most academics were against it, and since then, the memories of the said War is still as vivid as memories of Shoah (that teachers find easier to explain than what happened between the FLN and the French Govt). To be impartial, you could've also added that the Algerians have killed hundred of french civilians, placed bombs and raped many of innocent civilians, and after their Independence, they massacred the Harkis.
Nonetheless, it's a social debate that French and Algerians should have, and it has nothing to do with your original premise, as France being a chauvinistic, intolerant and racist country.




Massacres de harkis — Wikipédia (wikipedia.org)

Le F.L.N. massacre tous les hommes d'un village qui s'était élevé contre l'exécution de cinq habitants TROIS CENTS MORTS Un premier récit du drame (lemonde.fr)

Massacre de Melouza par le FLN en Algérie (histoire-en-questions.fr)
" Les hommes qui résistent sont abattus. Une heure plus tard, trois cent quatre hommes du village sont rassemblés, misérable troupeau, accroupis sur la place de la mechta, mains sur la tête. Hébétés. A coups de crosse, au milieu des gémissements des femmes et des cris des enfants, les hommes du F.L.N. les obligent à se lever et les font avancer par un sentier de chèvres en direction de MechtaKasba, petit hameau d'une dizaine de familles, situé non loin du village... Abdelkader Sahnoun et le capitaine Arab ont décidé de frapper les esprits et de massacrer leurs prisonniers dans cette mechta. "


Attentats pendant la guerre d'Algérie — Wikipédia (wikipedia.org)


What does Algiers say about this?


Nothing.
Yet, they cold-heartly killed their own people, as they also massacred the Harkis.
This hypocrisy has to end; expecting eternal reparations from France,
while they themselves were as ruthless as the French,

A few takeaways from this.

1. Does "being neutral" mean giving a for and against case for colonisation? Answer honestly. Judging by your repeated mentioning of the Harkis, I guess yes.

2. Many academics were against the 2005 law because the government tried to impose its own translation of history, not because they were against the actual contents of the legislation. For example, 19 historians signed a letter requesting the repealing of all "historic" law including the law that referred to slavery as a crime against humanity, recognising the Armenian genocide and the Holocaust denying law. That is something that would never be uttered in the Anglosphere.

3. No I was neutral. There is no moral equivalency for a country that subjugated a people for 150 years and rebels that wanted to take their country back. Harkis were military soldiers that killed FLN fighters and were part of the mechanisms of colonisation, they were no different than the French. The Harkis were no different than the French collaborators of Vichy France, both of them willingly led civilians to their deaths by insane numbers.

4. Comparing the 150 years of killing and subjugation of Algerians by a colonising force to massacre during a conflict of military officials that were part and parcel of said subjugation proves my point regarding the white washing of this conflict.

 

[MinnesotFaarax]

u hate England ma ha? Stay away from our USA waryaa

Let him come, we can set him up in a nice apartment in Cedar-Riverside in Minneapolis lol

 

[Basra]

Let him come, we can set him up in a nice apartment in Cedar-Riverside in Minneapolis lol

OK. as long as he promise he wont Join Cedar Skinny Gang

 

[zaffron]

France are the biggest terrorists after US & yahuud. Just a couple months ago they bombed a wedding in Mali because they were muslim, killing 20 people including children

 

[Ozark]

Untruthful, unproven and sounds like another invention from a former colonised.

As someone who lives and does study France's history, we do insist in teaching children about Colonialism, the failed "Assimilation" of African communities (surprisingly, Asians and Jews have had a more tumultus story with France, yet they are per say way more successful than Blacks and Arabs).
While I do agree that some (still existant Gaulists) believe that Francophonie is as real as Palestine,
in reality, France's policies in early African post-colonial countries destroyed furthermore the relations between Africans and French, and the whole "France FCA" which has been brought upon by legitimate issues, like the Financial Independence of certain regions of West Africa, in my opinion, France is opened to re-negociate and give to Francophone Africans their Economical Freedom.

It's up to their rulers to make it happen.

Some like Paul Biya of Cameroon used this as a form of escapism of their poor management of their country, as usual, "Daddy France is to blame ALL Africa's intrisinc problems" (populism).

I'd wish, personally, a more friendly relationship between France and Francophone Africa, with more transparency and honesty of each board.


Despite my vivid hatred of Macron's attitude, national and international's policies,
in 2017, he openly (not as the President of the French Republic, but still one of the few french politicians who recognized the horors of Colonialism) in Algeria, he said that "Coloniasm was a crime against Humanity [...]" A few weeks of ago, the same thing happened when Kagame (involved in the conflict and a former Warlord who accelerated the Rwandan Civil War) guilt-trapped the French in their role in the Genocide of Tutsis.

And Macron, formally, as the Head of the State and the representant, officially recognized the Rwandan Genocide.

Morever, the Chauvinistic attitude (and paternalistic) of France has diminished throughout the decades, ever since the 80s, France's main concerns are in Asia (Francophone Africa isn't lucrative enough; not productive enough for its interests, despite the Barkan Intervention when the Malian Govt called upon the French to save them, despite the hatred of the local people).

In definitive,
local Africans are seeing the French' presence as a treat, as most were indoctrined to always remember De Gaulle's views of Africa and considerations, while at the same time, African leaders sign pacts and alliances with France (recently with South Africa and a few years ago, with Nigeria).

I believe that we can compromise and find many common-grounds for more mature talks, instead of blind chauvinism and resentment.

Look at this coon defending his French masters. It’s not that serious warya

 

[4head]

Look at this coon defending his French masters. It’s not that serious warya

Come on,

as always I got tagged in a topic about France and < 55 IQ s like niggas like you can't have basic conversations besides being dumb negroes.


Go on and clean my dirty shoes,

Retarded son of Samaale.

 

[wheel]

Sounds a lot like England.

 

[Odayga_Jabuuti]

@4head
You talk about France as if the country is perfect.
Me too, I am familiar with french culture, history etc... In french school they taught me about Napoléon, Diderot, Voltaire, Victor Hugo, Molière, Albert Camus etc...
This country even though it's my favourite european country, you cannot deny that it is still comitting a lot of attrocities outside in certain parts of Africa with their drones and jets, for example in Niger and Mali. Countless UN documents have condemned french aggresions in the region.
Inside France, it's not a society that will see you as french french (français de souche), even the famous ultra nationalist Eric Zemmour doesn't consider himself french french.
Most people tend to identify with their ethnic group, most algerians french will always say that they are algerians, the malians will say that they are malians, the senegalese will say that they are senegalese unlike american born who will identify first as american. Because even though a lot of people try to paint america as a racist country (which used to be the case but now isn't), in america you will be seen as american first. You will never see a Kamala Harris or a Barrack Obama in France. You had Najat Vallaud Belkacem who is 100% integrated in the french society (and even became the first female minister of education) but they still accuse her of teaching arabic.


Plus, I can also talk about the debate about hijab that just doesn't stop, there is a french saying:
"Les français si tu leur enlèves le débat du voile, ils ne parleront plus que de la météo et encore ils diront que le ciel est voilé.".
They keep talking about why wearing a hijab is so bad because "laicité", and some right wingers want to ban the hijab everywhere. You cannot be president or prime minister if you hear a hijab.
French secularism (different from the secularism that you find in UK, Canada, USA, Australia) also known as "laicité" is state sponsored atheism just like Sharia is state sponsored islam, this is why a lot of french hate religions in public life, especially this Melenchon guy.

 

[Periplus]

@4head
You talk about France as if the country is perfect.
Me too, I am familiar with french culture, history etc... In french school they taught me about Napoléon, Diderot, Voltaire, Victor Hugo, Molière, Albert Camus etc...
This country even though it's my favourite european country, you cannot deny that it is still comitting a lot of attrocities outside in certain parts of Africa with their drones and jets, for example in Niger and Mali. Countless UN documents have condemned french aggresions in the region.
Inside France, it's not a society that will see you as french french (français de souche), even the famous ultra nationalist Eric Zemmour doesn't consider himself french french.
Most people tend to identify with their ethnic group, most algerians french will always say that they are algerians, the malians will say that they are malians, the senegalese will say that they are senegalese unlike american born who will identify first as american. Because even though a lot of people try to paint america as a racist country (which used to be the case but now isn't), in america you will be seen as american first. You will never see a Kamala Harris or a Barrack Obama in France. You had Najat Vallaud Belkacem who is 100% integrated in the french society (and even became the first female minister of education) but they still accuse her of teaching arabic.


Plus, I can also talk about the debate about hijab that just doesn't stop, there is a french saying:
"Les français si tu leur enlèves le débat du voile, ils ne parleront plus que de la météo et encore ils diront que le ciel est voilé.".
They keep talking about why wearing a hijab is so bad because "laicité", and some right wingers want to ban the hijab everywhere. You cannot be president or prime minister if you hear a hijab.
French secularism (different from the secularism that you find in UK, Canada, USA, Australia) also known as "laicité" is state sponsored atheism just like Sharia is state sponsored islam, this is why a lot of french hate religions in public life, especially this Melenchon guy.

Couldn't agree with this more.

I did not even touch on Lacité and the stupidness of that theory.

 

[4head]

Couldn't agree with this more.

I did not even touch on Lacité and the stupidness of that theory.

It's not a " stupid theory".
Without it, you would be living in Iran, fearing of what will happen if you dare to criticize the Statuquo.

@4head
You talk about France as if the country is perfect.
Me too, I am familiar with french culture, history etc... In french school they taught me about Napoléon, Diderot, Voltaire, Victor Hugo, Molière, Albert Camus etc...
This country even though it's my favourite european country, you cannot deny that it is still comitting a lot of attrocities outside in certain parts of Africa with their drones and jets, for example in Niger and Mali. Countless UN documents have condemned french aggresions in the region.
Inside France, it's not a society that will see you as french french (français de souche), even the famous ultra nationalist Eric Zemmour doesn't consider himself french french.
Most people tend to identify with their ethnic group, most algerians french will always say that they are algerians, the malians will say that they are malians, the senegalese will say that they are senegalese unlike american born who will identify first as american. Because even though a lot of people try to paint america as a racist country (which used to be the case but now isn't), in america you will be seen as american first. You will never see a Kamala Harris or a Barrack Obama in France. You had Najat Vallaud Belkacem who is 100% integrated in the french society (and even became the first female minister of education) but they still accuse her of teaching arabic.


Plus, I can also talk about the debate about hijab that just doesn't stop, there is a french saying:
"Les français si tu leur enlèves le débat du voile, ils ne parleront plus que de la météo et encore ils diront que le ciel est voilé.".
They keep talking about why wearing a hijab is so bad because "laicité", and some right wingers want to ban the hijab everywhere. You cannot be president or prime minister if you hear a hijab.
French secularism (different from the secularism that you find in UK, Canada, USA, Australia) also known as "laicité" is state sponsored atheism just like Sharia is state sponsored islam, this is why a lot of french hate religions in public life, especially this Melenchon guy.

Poor analysis.

First and foremost,
you got it wrong about the French notion of Identity.
If we follow the 1789 Charte of Liberty, according to the famous French Historian;
" Je crois que le thème de l'identité française s'impose à tout le monde, qu'on soit de gauche, de droite ou du centre, de l'extrême gauche ou de l'extrême droite [...] II ne s'agit donc pas d'une identité de la France qui puisse être opposée à la droite ou à la gauche. Pour un historien, il y a une identité de la France à rechercher avec les erreurs et les succès possibles, mais en dehors de toute position politique partisane. Je ne veux pas qu'on s'amuse avec l'identité [...] C'est justement cet accord du temps présent avec le temps passé qui représenterait pour moi l'identité parfaite, laquelle n'existe pas. Le passé, c'est une série d'expériences, de réalités bien antérieures à vous et moi, mais qui existeront encore dans dix, vingt, trente ans ou même beaucoup plus tard. Le problème pratique de l'identité dans la vie actuelle, c'est donc l'accord ou le désaccord avec des réalités profondes, le fait d'être attentif, ou pas, à ces réalités profondes et d'avoir ou non une politique qui en tient compte, essaie de modifier ce qui est modifiable, de conserver ce qui doit l'être. C'est une réflexion attentive sur ce qui existe au préalable. Construire l'identité française au gré des fantasmes, des opinions politiques, ça je suis tout à fait contre. "

As you read, it's more complicated than some polymists like Zemmour or Jean Messiah.
The French Identity, which transcends Political Parties, has been an ongoing subject for the Intellectuals, University Academics and Political debates. If we follow closely to 1789 principles; "La France est Une, et Indivisible" -> Unitarism doctrine of France is legacy of the "Old Regime; Monarchy", and throughout the XIXth century, with the wars, Revolutions, the multiple Republics that the French tried; La Terreur Blanche and the Intolerance of the Intolerance during the 1789 Revolution, the Bonaparte Consulate, the Empire, la Restauration de 1815, the 1830 Monarchy, etc...All of them leading to the Dreyfus Case, and the Wars between the Lefties Republicans against the Clercs, the French Secularists against the Conservatives.

Whether it's the Monarchists' ideas of French Identity, from Barrès to Bernanos, with Mauras and the Action Française, whom believed that only French, Catholics, of European descends monarchists could be the "real French". Eduard Drumont, infamous french Antisemite Journalist, believed that the Republic was the relic of Satan, of JEws who infiltred the political and philosophical spheres,etc.
Or,
The Bonapartists and their ideal of Meritocracy, with the heritage of 1789, centralized this question around the Unicity of the French Republic and how it can't be dissolved.
To be French, you'll have to serve France.


Fraudel says: "

L'oeuvre de la royauté française est une oeuvre de longue haleine pour incorporer à la France des provinces qui pouvaient pencher de notre côté mais avaient aussi des raisons de ne pas désirer être incorporées au royaume. Même la Lorraine en 1766 n'est pas contente de devenir française. Et que dire alors des pays de la France méridionale : ils ont été amenés dans le giron français par la force et ensuite par l'habitude.

II y a donc dans l'identité de la France ce besoin de concentration, de centralisation, contre lequel il est dangereux d'agir. Ce qui vous suggère que je ne vois pas la décentralisation d'un oeil tout à fait favorable. Je ne la crois d'ailleurs pas facile. Je crois que le pouvoir central est tel que, à chaque instant, il peut ramener les régions qui seraient trop égoïstes, trop soucieuses d'elles-mêmes, dans le sens de l'intérêt général. Mais c'est un gros problème."

France's Centralization prioritized Paris to the "Province". To be French, you will have to speak, with the dialect of Paris, with the ideas of La Commune."
La Laicité, that you virulently criticize is one of the principles of which the French System has been running so in the last 100 years.

Quite a coincidence, as I had my exam (in Uni), about the French Secularism through the very unique definition of Laicité, in France:
to put simply;

Ever since the first Uprising against the Tyranny of Louis XVI, the Terreur Blanche, after 1792, imposed restrictions, fought off centuries of Religious Privileges, and after the 1804-1812 Concordat; Religion will stay in France, but with one condition; accepting the Plurality of Religions, and in return, Catholics were not repressed. After the first (real) Secular Laws, in 1882 to 1905, multiple Scandals (dramas) between the French Govt of "les Opportunists (Socialists)" and the Pope, to the point, people were afraid of another Civil War in France.

Passed the 1901 Law of "Associations", where now Religious Congregations would reform into free, cult, organization (without the funding of the State), following this and the end of the Concordat, of "La loi sur la séparation de l'Eglise de l'Etat", in 1905, France has definitively stopped getting into the Religious' Affairs (the State is now Neutral), and the same with Religion in regards of Politics.


Laicité wasn't and isn't a repressive tool against the innocent believers.
As it guarantees the freedom of Religious Expression ; you can be Muslim, wear a Muslim Hijab, in Public without fearing for your life.

You pointed it out Melanchon's stands on Religion;
this guy is clearly an Anticlerical individual, in the long history of Anticlerical politicians, like Clemenceau, it is nothing new. Your Rights as a French Citizen, of Muslim spiritual affiliation, are respected.

Though, if we come back in time, back in late 1980s, and Stasi Commision; we learned that the 1905 Law needed some modifications to suit with the rising issue, as you stated, with the Communautarisation of French Minorities. In 2004, we learned that young girls were forced, humiliated to wear their hijab by their fellow classmates. And thus, the French Deputees have voted to ban hijab in Schools (Public and the funded private ones only).
As far as I know, the only law that could've made France an anticlerical country would be the Law against the Niqab (to which, French politicians replied it wasn't a secular law but a security matter, as many terrorists wore Niqab, to pass incognito).

To conclude:

Everyone, under the course of the Law, can be a "Frenchman" or a "Frenchwoman".
There's no such thing as "Français de Souche" in the Constitution, nor in the concept of what consists to be a "French".
You previously said: " we don't have a Barack Obama, nor a Kamala Harris in France" which shows that France keeps its black citizens as second class citizens?
GIve me a break!

 

[4head]

Here are the most the notable french blacks:

Thomas Alexandre Dumas — Wikipédia (wikipedia.org) (famous father of one of the best french writers; Alexandre Dumas)
Toussaint Louverture — Wikipédia (wikipedia.org) (famous french-born, Haitian, Revolutionnaire)

Aimé Césaire — Wikipédia (wikipedia.org)
(born in the French Antilles, one of the leading thinkers of "la Negritude" ; an idea that heavily emphasis on Black Independence; mentally, physically, culturally,etc)
Léopold Sédar Senghor — Wikipédia (wikipedia.org)
(born in Senegal, became a french mp and famous writer and african philosopher)

Noirs de France — Wikipédia (wikipedia.org)

Now compare it to African Americans when they came in France (after decades of Jim Crow Laws, of Segregation):
" Paris saw the beginnings of an African-American community in the aftermath of World War I when about 200,000 were brought over to fight. Nine tenths of the soldiers were from the American South.[1] Many black GIs decided to stay in France after having been well received by the French, and others followed them. France was viewed by many African Americans as a welcome change from the widespread racism in the United States. It was then that jazz was introduced to the French, and black culture was born in Paris. African American musicians, artists and Harlem Renaissance writers found 1920s Paris ready to embrace them with open arms. Montmartre became the center of the small community, with jazz clubs such as Le Grand Duc, Chez Florence and Bricktop's thriving in Paris. "

" The political upheavals surrounding the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War protests in the United States were mirrored by civil unrest in France. The African-American journalist William Gardner Smith was a novelist (Last of the Conquerors) who also worked for Agence France-Presse. That French news service reported the events of the student uprising during the May 1968 protests. Many blacks supported the movement, which escalated into a virtual shutdown of the entire country. Once order was restored, however, a notable increase in repressive tendencies was observed in the French police and the immigration authorities.[citation needed] "

Paris being the Capital of Black Culture, Black Americans fleeing their beloved America for France, with that alone, it shows the real superiority of the French interpretation Humanist Universalism.

African Americans in France - Wikipedia


Here are a few sources, with good conferences on la Laicité:

L'identité française selon Fernand Braudel (lemonde.fr)
Conférence avec le philosophe et penseur de la laïcité Henri Pena-Ruiz - YouTube
1905-2020 : le long chemin de la laïcité en France - YouTube

 

[4head]

4head is hypnotised by da french punani

Spoiler: kkkk

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[Giftxo]

wow I can relate it’s a shithole here too. I would rather live in the UK or The USA

 

[MinnesotFaarax]

wow I can relate it’s a shithole here too. I would rather live in the UK or The USA

If y'all ever do come to live in the US come to Minneapolis

 

[Periplus]

It's not a " stupid theory".
Without it, you would be living in Iran, fearing of what will happen if you dare to criticize the Statuquo.

I am a fan of secularism but do not appreciate laicite. Its a less violent version of Hoxha's Albania.

 

[Aurelian]

strangers say hey to you when you walk past them.

Acudubillah

 

[4head]

I am a fan of secularism but do not appreciate laicite. Its a less violent version of Hoxha's Albania.

HS.
Hors-Sujet.

Enver Hoxha = dictature communiste, de l'Athéisme étatique contre les religions.

Laicité précède la Sécularisation (le Peuple qui se détourne de la Religion), en France c'était une première, puis sur l'ensemble de l'Occident.
Alors que les communautés protestantes demandaient des écoles "non-Sectariennes" à l'Etat Britannique, au meme moment, en France, c'était l'Etat lui-meme qui sécularisait les institutions scolaires (les Lois Ferry des années 1880).


La Laicité, c'est garantir la neutralité de l'Etat dans les affaires de la Foi (éviter ainsi les conflits, comme de par le passé avec l'Eglise), et l'Eglise reste à sa place; dans les affaires de l'Intemporel.

Pas de laicité, pas de pluralisme de religion, ainsi pas de liberté d'exprimer sa foi (autre que celle de la majorité des français).

Laicité > Secularisme communautaire Anglo-Saxon > l'Athéisme d'Etat des pays communistes.

 

[4head]

wow I can relate it’s a shithole here too. I would rather live in the UK or The USA

Living without any basic Free Education, Free Health and fearing for your life in dangerous America's big cities?

Ok bye

 

[Periplus]

HS.
Hors-Sujet.

Enver Hoxha = dictature communiste, de l'Athéisme étatique contre les religions.

Laicité précède la Sécularisation (le Peuple qui se détourne de la Religion), en France c'était une première, puis sur l'ensemble de l'Occident.
Alors que les communautés protestantes demandaient des écoles "non-Sectariennes" à l'Etat Britannique, au meme moment, en France, c'était l'Etat lui-meme qui sécularisait les institutions scolaires (les Lois Ferry des années 1880).


La Laicité, c'est garantir la neutralité de l'Etat dans les affaires de la Foi (éviter ainsi les conflits, comme de par le passé avec l'Eglise), et l'Eglise reste à sa place; dans les affaires de l'Intemporel.

Pas de laicité, pas de pluralisme de religion, ainsi pas de liberté d'exprimer sa foi (autre que celle de la majorité des français).

Laicité > Secularisme communautaire Anglo-Saxon > l'Athéisme d'Etat des pays communistes.

Tout d'abord, pardon pour ma grammaire. J'ai ne parlé francais depuis plusiers anneés.

Je pense que la sécularisation en France (laïcité) n'est pas neutre pour les religions, surtot l'islam. Il y a beaucoup de legislations comme "the hijab ban" "niqab ban" qui prouver mon raison. Oui, Enver Hoxha c'etait un dictateur, chui d'accord. Mais, j'ai dit la laïcité est moins violent que l'Albanie.

Peut-être, l'histoire de la laïcité était noble mais dans les dernières années, la laïcité dans les pays anglo-saxon est plus favorable aux les gens religieux que la laïcité française.

Sorry for the horrible grammar again but I hope I got my point across, its been a while since I wrote a piece of writing in French.