<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Society.ie &#187; France | Society.ie</title>
	<atom:link href="https://society.ie/tag/france/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://society.ie</link>
	<description>Social Issues Website</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2019 10:04:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.38</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>Geopolitical preferences and the Securitization debate</title>
		<link>https://society.ie/2015/02/geopolitical-preferences-and-the-securitization-debate/</link>
		<comments>https://society.ie/2015/02/geopolitical-preferences-and-the-securitization-debate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Feb 2015 10:50:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ryan Ó Giobúin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ryan's digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[France]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securitization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://society.ie/?p=452</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The recent events in Paris have again brought the debate of securitization to the fore in European political dialogue. The acts, perpetrated by members of a minority ethnic community against a bastion of francité &#8211; the free press, has been decried not only in France, but across Europe as a continent and further afield. In its wake, not only have we seen acts of violence against ethnic minority communities, but also renewed calls for the rejection of multiculturalism and increased restriction on immigration. The securitization debate involves the framing of immigrants as an ‘existential, material and/or physical safety threat’, with something defined as a security problem when declared by elites to be so (Lahav et al., 2014, p. 213). The Hague Programme agreed upon by the European Council in 2004 was intended to strengthen pan-European control of illegal immigration by ‘establishing a continuum of security measures’, with such measures ‘also of importance for the prevention and control of crime, in particular terrorism’ (The Hague Programme, 2005, in Mitsilegas, 2012, p. 17). The maintenance of this ‘Fortress Europe’ mentality has arisen not only as a result of unwanted immigration being perceived as a burden on the resources of the state, but also in response to both the increased securitization [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://society.ie/2015/02/geopolitical-preferences-and-the-securitization-debate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Far-Right in Europe: Nightmare Scenarios and Inevitabilities</title>
		<link>https://society.ie/2014/09/the-far-right-in-europe-nightmare-scenarios-and-inevitabilities/</link>
		<comments>https://society.ie/2014/09/the-far-right-in-europe-nightmare-scenarios-and-inevitabilities/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2014 17:20:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ruairi Maguire]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ruairi's digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Far-Right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[France]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Front National]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sweden]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://society.ie/?p=381</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last Sunday Sweden went to the polls to elect its national legislature. The result was the replacement of a minority centre right administration with a minority centre left one. In Europe an occurrence such as this (or its reverse) is generally of only passing interest. On this occasion, however, the most startling result of the election was not the defeat of the governing parties, but the surge in support for the far-right Swedish Democrats, who captured more than twelve per cent of the vote, making them the third largest party. A few days before this, opinion polls showed that Marine Le Pen, leader of the Front National, was topping polls for the French Presidential Election in 2017.[1] The surge in support for far-right parties, made evident at the European Parliament elections this May has, then, not faded. On the back of this, I wish to attempt to answer two questions in this article. The first question concerns the type of scenarios in which continued success for the far-right could result. The second concerns the manner in which mainstream parties could attempt to avert further growth in support for the far right, or, at least, minimise the consequences of such growth. [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://society.ie/2014/09/the-far-right-in-europe-nightmare-scenarios-and-inevitabilities/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
