Universalist republic and ethnic statistics

Overall ambition

The RUSE project ("Universalist Republic and Ethnic Statistics") is part of a controversial debate on ethnic statistics in France; a divide that has emerged over the last twenty years around the possibility or prohibition of producing and disseminating official figures on "ethnic" or "racial" origins and religious affiliations, thus going beyond the only criterion authorized in France during censuses: the legal criterion of nationality. For several years now, some have argued that ethnic statistics are a lever for political action, providing a better understanding of the discrimination (e.g., in hiring, housing, etc.) to which certain "minorities" are likely to be subjected (Simon, 2015 a & b, Tribalat, 2016), and thus to take action to combat discrimination without the risk of it being lost in integration policies (Mazouz, 2017). Conversely, others, notably members of CARSED (Alternative Commission for Reflection on Ethnic Statistics and Discrimination), argue that this would constitute a veritable "return of race" (Collectif, 2009), insofar as counting and classifying goes beyond the instrument of measurement: measuring "ethnic" and/or "racial" groups risks entrenching ethno-racial classifications in society, thereby ethnicizing or racializing social relations by fossilizing differences that are destined to gradually disappear (through a process of integration or, in the longer term, assimilation). Between these two points of view, there have been attempts to construct more "reasoned" indicators for combating discrimination, for example by considering only the country of origin or nationality of ancestors. In fact, this solution makes it possible, in the medium term, to avoid "fossilizing" differences, since with the birthright citizenship mechanism adopted and applied in France since 1889, children born in France to parents born abroad (immigrants) become French when they reach the age of majority. thus, since their children are born to French parents, the question of their foreign origin is likely to gradually disappear from official statistics (Weil, 2005). As we can see, the issue of population counting is a real political challenge at a time when debates on immigration often oscillate between denial and misinterpretation (Héran, 2023; Savarese, 2023).

This recent controversy surrounding ethnic statistics also goes beyond the technical issue of the measurement tool, as it implies a point of view on "living together," and therefore on citizenship. Furthermore, it should be noted that this controversy only makes sense in countries such as France, Germany, and Italy, where the production of ethnic statistics is prohibited for official bodies such as INSEE, as they are considered incompatible with the universalist republican model of citizenship. Conversely, in countries where the multicultural model has been adopted, ethnic statistics do exist, as is the case in England, the United States, and Canada. More specifically, in France, the republican model of citizenship developed under the Third Republic, and repeatedly reaffirmed since then despite numerous controversies (Nicolet, 1994), has three characteristics. First, it is individualistic, in the sense that rights can only be attributed to individuals, which explains why minorities are not legally recognized. it is also universalist, in that individuals are defined as universally equal in law; finally, it is secular, in the sense that the state is neutral in matters of religion and is committed to protecting freedom of conscience and worship, which since 1905 have been a matter of individual choice, with religion becoming a private matter. Under these conditions, there can be no question of counting groups of individuals on the basis of ethnic, racial, or religious criteria, since these characteristics have no bearing on the attribution of civil, social, or political rights associated with citizenship in France.

This is why the emergence, over the last twenty years, of a genuine controversy surrounding the political uses of ethnic statistics (the fight against discrimination, which these statistics would make it possible to better understand and therefore better combat) and the risks associated with the official production of such data (the ethnicization or lasting racialization of French society) must be explained. Not by analyzing the sociology of the actors involved in this controversy or mapping the circulation of ideas, but by considering history as a "compass" that allows us to better understand the issue. In fact, it is a question of shifting our gaze from present-day metropolitan France to colonial France, and more specifically to colonial Algeria where, despite the expressed desire to replicate metropolitan institutions within a colony long considered a "second France," ethnic statistics were indeed established following several provisions allowing the classification of the colony's populations. To summarize, as early as 1830, when there was still no plan for colonization, a decree distinguished between "Europeans " (French by right of blood established by Napoleon, or foreigners for those who would gradually populate the colony, coming from countries around the Mediterranean) and "indigenous people" (Jews or Muslims, distinguished by their religious affiliation). Subsequently, Napoleon III, informed by the Saint-Simonians and wishing to strengthen the means of the colonizing state government in Algeria, produced, via the Senatus Consulte of 1860, the distinction between non-citizen French (nationality without citizenship, and therefore without the right to vote, which applied to indigenous Jews and Muslims) and French citizens (nationality associated with citizenship, for French people and then Europeans who could be naturalized). But when indigenous people of the Jewish faith collectively became French citizens in 1870 (Crémieux Decree), and the 1889 law on jus soli contained provisions to naturalize "Europeans" more quickly, at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th century, two categories of population coexisted in the colony: French citizens (those who already were, former indigenous people of the Jewish faith, and "Europeans" who were gradually naturalized), and non-citizen French people (French people of the Muslim faith, who only gained full citizenship during the Algerian War in 1958). The classifications enshrined in colonial legislation thus led to the creation of two legal statuses (national citizens and non-citizens) to group together populations that were initially more numerous.

However, this binary distinction between two categories of population (French citizens and non-citizens) is not reflected in official population censuses, which are regularly recorded in the General Table of Municipalities of Algeria. In fact, the populations are distinguished not according to the criteria of nationality and citizenship, as defined by colonial legislation, but according to criteria that are both legal and ethno-confessional, since the census includes "French" (nationals and citizens), "indigenous Muslims" (non-citizens of Muslim faith), "naturalized Israelites" (nationals who are citizens of the Jewish faith), foreigners of European origin, and foreigners from the Maghreb (Moroccans and Tunisians). This is why colonial Algeria constitutes a unique case study, to our knowledge, of the establishment of ethnic statistics within a colonizing state that constantly sought to reaffirm—though not always to implement—republican and assimilationist principles.

Hence the interest in examining a case that clearly deviates from the model of citizenship, within the framework of a present-past-present approach (Braudel, 1969), which is part of a socio-historical perspective (Noiriel, 2008) on ethnic statistics in colonial Algeria: constructed in the present, starting from the controversy over ethnic statistics in contemporary France, the aim is to examine the issue in the past, in the colonial context of Algeria, which offers an original and little-studied case study, in order to better understand its significance and propose a better understanding of the controversies of the present day.

Topics and questions addressed

This raises the research question that needs to be addressed: how can we explain the emergence, within a universalist republic, of ethnic statistics that are in principle incompatible with the republican model of citizenship? Hypothetically, can it be explained by a departure from republican principles, given the characteristics of the colonial situation (the Indigenous Code, the dissociation of nationality and citizenship, which makes sense when the process of nation-state building is complete, at the end of the 19th century)? By the desire not to dissolve, probably under pressure from the "colonists " (Ageron, 1978), the issue of indigenous status, which remains the main challenge historically faced by all settlement colonies (Veracini, 2010), both former French colonies (Algeria, New Caledonia) and former foreign colonies (Australia, Latin America)? Was it in order to better control the territories and the various populations of the colony, given that colonial power remained "structurally" a "weak power" (Cooper, 2005), by making statistics a science of government or cameral science (Ihl, Kaluzinski, Pollet, 2003)?

This largely "forgotten" experience deserves closer examination for two reasons. On the one hand, because the development of knowledge about former settlements has made it possible to decipher the various ways in which the issue of indigenous status was resolved—confinement to reservations, ethnocide, physical elimination, and regrouping camps, as was the case during the Algerian War (Sacriste, 2022), but also access to full citizenship—while ethnic statistics record and measure differences. On the other hand, in the sense that the issue of managing cultural and religious diversity, in former metropolises and in reverberation with former colonies, now makes sense in all Western democracies, regardless of the models of citizenship that are adopted (Joppke, 2010). Thus, multicultural regimes sometimes adopt rather assimilationist measures, such as the obligation for immigrants to take language courses in the Netherlands (Constant, 2000), while universalist regimes also seek adjustments by adopting more particularistic measures, as shown by the many memorial laws adopted over the past 30 years in France concerning Jews, descendants of slaves, repatriates, Armenians, and even the Harkis (Savarese, 2020). In this way, the experience of introducing ethnic statistics in colonial Algeria, which historically constitutes a truly negative case, must be examined in order to gain a better understanding of current controversies, particularly that surrounding ethnic statistics in France. Building citizenship always involves, in former metropolises as well as in colonial territories (De Mari, Savarese, 2019), drawing a line between inclusion and exclusion by specifying the conditions for belonging to the community of citizens. Conversely, the aim here is to understand what it means to define and measure indigenous status on the basis of ethnic statistics, and how such statistics affect social relations and political choices—the recurrent refusal to grant citizenship, a specific expression of anti-Semitism, which is neither a feature of the "colonial situation" " (Balandier, 1951) nor specific to colonial Algeria (Savarese, 2019)—can be, if not "measured," at least identified. The focus here is therefore on the sociogenesis, practical uses, and effects of a measuring instrument in the former colony, in order to better understand the issues at stake in the present.

Methodology and approach

1/ Thus, we must first examine the "sociogenesis" of ethnic statistics in colonial Algeria: in what context were they introduced in 1830 and maintained under the Third Republic despite the promotion of an individualistic and universalist model of citizenship? Who were their potential promoters or detractors, what were their social characteristics and institutional positions in the former metropolis or in the colony, and what were their interests, strategies, alliances, and networks of relationships? The identification of the actors involved and the factors favorable (process analysis) to the introduction of ethnic statistics must be carried out by cross-referencing the decisions of the colony's general government, available at the Overseas Archives Center (Aix-en-Provence), with the resources and trajectories of the actors involved, most of whom are listed in the library of the former colonial school (founded in 1889 by Auguste Pavie to train future executives of the empire), and whose decisions are also commented on in the colonial press—the latter two sources, especially the former, also being available at the Overseas Archives Center.

2/ Next, we need to define how it was established and implemented in practice, identifying, beyond the population categories already identified, what procedures were used to count the population. Since 1801, the French population has been regularly counted, as has the population of colonial Algeria, where 19 population censuses were carried out between 1830 and 1962. The General Government of Algeria endeavored to ask the administration to model the counting method on the instructions given in metropolitan France. However, in military territory, indigenous populations were estimated based on the counting of established tribes, and thus adjustments were made at the local level, at least until the transition to civilian rule (1970), when the method used in metropolitan France was adopted (Kateb, 1998). Ethnic statistics, as carried out in countries that have adopted a multicultural model of citizenship, assume that it is the individuals being counted who specify their own ethnic, racial, or religious affiliations (Schor, 2009; Kertzer, Arel, 2009; Perlmann, 2018), whereas the census conducted in mainland France, using a universalist model, only covers "objective" criteria (age, sex, occupation and socio-professional category, nationality, type of residence), which are identified on the basis of questions asked by the interviewer. Under these conditions, the archives of the Arab offices and military administrations, also available at the Overseas Archives Center, which were seized at the time of the census periods, must be used to establish how the metropolitan census method is likely to be adapted locally: is the definition of ethnic or racial category and affiliation produced by the interviewer, as in metropolitan France, or by the respondent, as is the case in countries using ethnic statistics? Did the colonial government make any original or unusual adjustments—depending on the territories, civil and military, and periods (martial law, transition to civilian rule)—to carry out the 19 census operations recorded between 1930 and 1962?

3/ Finally, we must ask ourselves to what extent this statistic contributed to the ethnicization or racialization of colonial society. There is little doubt that such ethnicization/racialization took place, given that the actors are regularly referred to as "French," "European," "Jewish," or "Arab" (Lorcin, 1999), rather than by their socio-professional status. However, other factors contribute to this dynamic, in particular colonial ideology or imagination, through which the differences between the components of colonial society mainly reflect supposed civilizational differences (for example, between "Kabyles" and "Arabs," the former being considered closer to the French, even though both groups were considered inferior to French citizens). Examining the effects of colonial statistics on Algerian society therefore requires identifying areas where this difference is expressed, such as elections, which have already been studied in Oran (Savarese, 2016) due to the presence of the department's electoral archives at the Overseas Archives Center. Other areas where the racialization of society is expressed, such as complaints filed and court decisions (also belonging to the "sovereignty archives" and thus fully available in Aix-en-Provence), could be addressed to enrich these analyses.

These three sets of questions should require—based on estimates and taking into account our relative knowledge of the available resources—approximately two months of work devoted to reviewing the archives and sources listed above. Given the academic calendar of a research professor, this work will be organized into several one- to two-week periods (shorter periods are often unproductive, based on experience). As July offers the possibility of two weeks of work in the archives, and the weeks when classes are not in session will be devoted to completing the work, we propose the following schedule for research and discussion.

Potential impact and repercussions

1/ With regard to stays at the Overseas Archives Center, we are planning two weeks in July 2024, one week during the break in classes in November 2024, one week at the end of December 2024, one week during the break in classes in April 2025, and the remainder in July 2025. The pace of progress on the project may necessitate adjustments and additional visits to the archives, particularly in the second half of 2025, given that most of our teaching takes place in the first half of the year.

2/ In the meantime, we will organize an exploratory research seminar in Montpellier between January and June 2025, to welcome an Algerian colleague from CRASC (Center for Research in Social and Cultural Anthropology, Oran), as well as several French and foreign specialists in population counting and census operations. These sessions will provide an opportunity to discuss the initial results of our work, to compare it with the presentation of surveys on Algeria and other European countries, and to consider the feasibility of a comparative research project on controversies surrounding ethnic statistics in various contexts. We also intend to present the results of our research in Oran to our colleagues at CRASC, a laboratory with which our own laboratory has recently finalized a multi-year scientific and educational partnership agreement.

3/ The proposed archival research must lead to the publication of a research paper on the socio-history of ethnic statistics which, based on its applications in countries that have adopted a multicultural citizenship regime and the controversies on the subject in countries that have chosen a universal model, can account for the contributions of the Algerian colonial case to the sociology of these controversies. It may take the form of a research paper in the author's own name, or the coordination (alone or in association with a colleague) of an issue of a peer-reviewed journal, depending on the results presented at the seminar we wish to organize—and in which we will invite one or more students enrolled in a Master's research program to participate.

4/ As the person responsible for teaching epistemology and research methods in the social sciences as part of the Master's degree in Comparative Politics, Comparative Politics and Public Action track, we will supervise a research thesis written by a student as part of a laboratory internship, which has become mandatory since this Master's program joined the IDIL program. The thesis will focus on the sociology of the controversy surrounding ethnic statistics in France and may be linked to the research we wish to conduct on the historical application of these statistics in colonial Algeria.

Project summary in French

Starting from the recent controversy over the possibility of conducting a census of the French population by introducing ethnic statistics, we will take a detour via colonial Algeria to draw on a unique experience: the introduction of ethnic statistics to count the populations of the former colony. This is a unique example in that the republican model of citizenship, which recognizes only the universality of individuals, is a priori incompatible with ethnic statistics, which in principle only concern countries that have adopted a multicultural model of citizenship. The sociogenesis of ethnic statistics in colonial Algeria can thus be examined in three ways: by attempting to identify the conditions under which they were introduced, the practical conditions of their application (how to conduct the census), and the effects of the measurement technique on the dynamics of ethnicization/racialization of the colony's populations, in order to better understand the issues involved in classifying the French population today. This work is based on an analysis of archives available at the Centre des Archives d'Outre-Mer (Overseas Archives Center).