French students are revolting

For a pun to work, both meanings of the word have to make sense. In this case, they do. The word ‘revolting’ describes both what they do and what they are.

According to Le Figaro, the students of some of France’s best universities, such as Sorbonne, Ecole Normale Supérieure and Sciences Po, were rioting in Paris yesterday.

It’s not quite 1968, when Paris was paralysed, universities were taken over by rioters, and the economy of France was brought to a standstill for almost two months. That may be yet to come.

Meanwhile, France’s academic elite trashed classrooms, broke up furniture and bombarded the police vans in attendance by hurling books, chairs and – potentially most lethal – fire extinguishers out of the windows. When thrown from a great height, those appliances can cause a few headaches.

Realising this, the cops did the sensible thing and withdrew beyond the fire extinguisher range. They then returned fire with tear gas.

A TV journalist trying to film the fun was told: “Get rid of your camera, arsefucker!” That shows that France’s budding academics happily leave their lexical ivory tower when sufficiently provoked. No elitism anywhere in sight.

Yesterday’s riots were caused by the students’ dissatisfaction with the presidential elections and also with their curricula. That isn’t objectionable in itself, but the nature of their dissatisfaction is.

Considering that 42 per cent of young French people didn’t vote, one might get the impression they are apolitical. In fact, as the posters wielded by the rioters prove, they are anything but.

The students were unhappy with the choice in the forthcoming runoff election. This was made abundantly clear by the poster “Neither Le Pen nor Macron!” I understand their frustration. The choice is indeed unsavoury.

I was about to compliment the youngsters on their contempt for modern democracies that unfailingly throw up nothing but unfit candidates. But then I saw other posters, which made it clear what their preference was.

In fact, that was clear even without the posters. Almost a third of the rump group of youngsters who did vote opted for Jean-Luc Mélenchon. Now, Jean-Luc’s party is called La France Insoumise (France Unbowed), but I don’t want to confuse you with meaningless nomenclatures.

Not to cut too fine a point, Mélenchon is a communist. Or rather he is a watermelon: red on the inside, green on the outside.

As far as students of France’s best universities are concerned, those are ideal credentials for running the country. Their preference was expressed with typically youthful vigour: “Macron, resign! Give your place to Mélenchon!” “No to the extreme Right!” “No fascists in our universities!” “Burn Saint-Germain, with Macron and Le Pen in the middle!” “Stop doing nothing about climate change!”

Clearly, those youngsters haven’t yet mastered political nuances. Thus they lump together as “extreme Right” and “fascists” both Macron and Le Pen. Since the two candidates have little in common, they can’t both be those awful things, although I agree that both are indeed awful.

As to burning Saint-Germain, I wish they were more specific. Do they wish to immolate just the abbey of that name or the whole area where the magnificent church is located? The former would be easier, and in fact their typological ancestors did try something like that during the Revolution.

But even the Jacobins didn’t have the ambition of burning down all of what now is the 6^th Arrondissement. Of course, modern revolutionaries can benefit from scientific advances made since the 18^th century. I’m sure Monsieur Poutine will be happy to provide tonnes of plastique, free of charge.

Now, the students are also unhappy about things taught at their institutions. That’s par for the course. I am sure that Abelard, Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure and other students of the precursor to the Sorbonne had their grievances too.

Yet I doubt they expressed their displeasure by throwing heavy objects out of windows. Instead, they turned their university into the academic hub of the world, Paris into its cultural apex, and their time into the greatest intellectual peak of our civilisation.

Then again, their interests were different from what today’s lot consider paramount, according to one of the rioters: “racist, Islamophobic and misogynist violence, climate change, CO₂ emissions.” In other words, to cite yet another poster: “Revolution is a must!”

Lest you may think I have it in for the French, you are mistaken. French youngsters do tend to express their interests more violently than their British counterparts, which I suppose may have something to do with their more southerly temperament and a less stable system of governance.

But intellectual vacuity, moral degradation, anomie, destructiveness, hatred for the West with its cultural, political and intellectual traditions – none of these is the exclusive property of French students. Their counterparts in Britain, the US and, I suspect, throughout the West, are no better.

Ten to twenty years from now these rioters will have put their degrees from the most prestigious universities to good use. They’ll be running France, whichever party is in power.

This doesn’t bode well for the country’s – and the West’s – future, even if we make allowances for some growing up occurring in the interim. All things considered, I’m beginning to agree with a friend of mine, who always cites “young person” as an example of an oxymoron.