excuse me, but... wrote:
That's something I forgot to add, that the victims weren't black, which makes this all the more puzzling. My guess is that the reporter said "African American" as a reflex - perhaps without even knowing the origins of the children. Regardless of their skin color, they were part of a cultural minority that's faced discrimination in France. Most of the rioters are first or second-generation African immigrants, and there is actually a fair mix of North and Central Africans (white/arabic and black) from the footage I've seen. I really hope the situation is resolved soon, I don't feel anyone is benefitting from the riots, least of all the people who live in the impoverished neighborhoods (primarily hard-working Muslim immigrants).
Some observations from a political columnist who has a reputation for getting his facts straight:
"...what has been happening there since late October is neither American-style race riots nor a Muslim rebellion. About half the kids burning the cars and the buildings are white, working-class, post-Christian French, and they get along with the black and Muslim kids just fine."
"...the Paris riots are actually a splendid demonstration of the successful integration of immigrants into French culture (which has, after all, a long tradition of insurrection and revolution). The riots in Paris are not a Muslim uprising. They are not even race riots. They are an outburst of resentment and frustration by the marginalized and the unemployed of every ethnic group."
(emphasis added)
There's more to this than race. Granted, it's a significant part, but it's only one part. We see it through our own assumptions, and Jim Crow isn't that far behind us. There are still active NCAA D-I football coaches who at one time refused to allow any black players on their teams (even though it put them at a competitive disadvantage).