Inevitably, the subject lends itself to reflection. A debate, after the emotions. Has some perspective. Also, necessarily, to take a position. So, well, let’s go, even if I’m not going to make friends with this somewhat puzzling editorial. The facts first. Gross. During a high-level badminton match a few days ago, a recording of a match was released on social media. We hear a voice, which, clearly, refers to the foreign origins of the adversary of the one (minor, by the way), that this lady encouraged. And to add that she was not welcome in France, not to mention the following encouragement, uttered with a certain amount of vulgarity. More than anecdotal, this sequence, relayed on the web by the clubs and number of players, shocked. Me first. It provoked a tidal wave of legitimate protests. Among the friends of the player of Indonesian origin – whose kindness also seems to be unanimous – but more generally by the entire badminton community: clubs, committees, leagues and sponsors. The Federation, too, which spoke out and quickly condemned these remarks. In short, a large part of the badminton community rose up. Others haven’t said anything, but I imagine that seeing the recent political polls and the rise of populism surfing on these notions of immigration – that a minority partly shares this aversion for “the other” , the non-French of origin, who comes to tread the courts.
Two small asides before getting to the heart of the matter, here. The first, first of all to also recall that, if the first victim is this player of Indonesian origin – I give her here once again all my support – be careful not to fall into harassment and nastiness vis-à-vis saw the other player, incriminated by the words of those around her. On the one hand, one cannot be held responsible for words uttered by one’s relatives. On the other hand, her young age and the situation in which she currently finds herself, thus pointed out by an entire community, should lead everyone not to make any confusion and not make her bear a responsibility that she should not not endorse. If justice must be seized for violation of the law, free to his adversary to make this choice, and to the incriminated person to assume the consequences. The digital relentlessness, especially in this period of fragility that is adolescence, is dangerous. Be careful, therefore.
The other important point to remember here is semantics: the use of the word “racism” is, as is often the case, a bit diverted. By definition, racism is an ideology which, starting from the postulate of the existence of races within the human species, considers that certain categories of people are intrinsically superior to others “. So that’s not what it’s about here. Even if it comes close or if the concept is often correlated. We are talking here rather about aversion towards people of foreign origins in a specific context. Undoubtedly closer to Xenophobia whose sociological definition is, according to Wikipedia, ” all the speeches and acts tending to unjustifiably designate the foreigner as a problem, a risk or a threat for the host society and to keep him away from this society, whether the foreigner is far and likely to come, or already arrived in this society or still long settled”.
Little throwback (not too much, I’m relying here on my personal memories), in our history of badminton. To recall, already, that those who have become French, of foreign origin, have been for the most part under a naturalization “chosen” by the nation, that is to say by legitimization by the state of adoption of our way of life, our language, our values. The example of Pi Hongyan is one of those that can be cited: it was France that opened its arms wide to this young woman who could suddenly make her shine at Olympic time. The timing was badly chosen – just before the 2004 Athens Games, thus pulling the rug out from under the feet quite unfairly, it is true, of players whose dream it was to participate in the Olympics. The communication around the real objectives of her arrival was clumsy – it caused a lot of frustration, again legitimate, for a whole generation of players, who ultimately did not benefit from it – or little (the exercise was difficult to do both – development or high level). But in absolute terms and with hindsight, badminton has also developed greatly in France thanks to its arrival. In terms of notoriety. Of media coverage. Of professionalization. And also, to believe in your chances, that nothing is impossible, to beat the stars. As Brice then demonstrated. Sashina and Teshana a few years later were naturalized, not without difficulty after a fierce struggle to prove that their intention was above all to integrate into their new country, notably through their studies. And many have taken advantage of it, in Alsace around their adopted club. More recently, Xuefei, who wanted to be able to continue practicing his sport elsewhere, landed in a small village in Brittany. His love of badminton turned into love, and his marriage – from the heart – to a Frenchman gave him the sesame to represent our nation today (of which, by the way, the Minister of Sports is a former Romanian athlete naturalized French…). I could also mention Arif and Weny, who brilliantly represented our colors or played a key role in the development of many badminton structures. Or our former Bulgarians, Sveti Stoyanov and Mihail Popov, who have brought so much to trico badminton
lore both on the courts (who remembers this moving victory of Sveti and Vincent Laigle at the French Open?) and off it, in turn training hundreds of young people. What about Mihaïl’s brother, Toma Popov, whose family emigrated from Bulgaria to give today’s badminton and French badminton an international dimension, which also benefits players trained in France. With, for his toddlers – including one born in Sofia – European titles and Marseillaises that resonate very softly in our ears.
So, yes, it is undeniable that to see a “new” foreigner arriving at INSEP again who comes to “take the place” of young “local” girls, there is something disturbing in absolute terms. This debate comes back to the table with each “sacrificed” generation, according to some. I do not share this opinion – I am one of those who think that it should and can create a healthy emulation, if this arrival is framed, that the only beneficiary is not the only player in question. Yaëlle, Marie, Léonice are proving it admirably by working hard and significantly increasing their level of play in recent years. Profiting, for some, also from the expertise of these “external” contributions.
Also, more generally, the fact of being “born” somewhere should not give more “rights” than to anyone born elsewhere, but perhaps more deserving. We already have the chance – enormous – to be born in France, very assisted, educated, cared for free. In what capacity should we prohibit the benefit of those whom the nation has deemed worthy of benefiting from it too, through their work, their efforts to integrate. Their respect for the rules (fiscal, democratic, cultural). Very often, they fought, sacrificed much more than us to have this right. And have put their duties as aspiring citizens ahead of those rights that we enjoy by simple birth certificate. This is true in civil society as in high-level sport, where numerous naturalizations have very often given rise to magical human stories, from which generations of “native” French people have also benefited. Wealth is in tolerance, openness to others insofar as they wish to share, far from communitarianism. We owe it to ourselves to welcome those who have chosen to live from their passion under new colors. And to celebrate this beautiful communion of sport in its diversity. Especially 3 years from the Olympic Games, in France which will welcome the whole planet with a strong symbol of openness to launch. Let’s not be crazy enough to lose sight of this essential: to make France, for those who desire and deserve it at the same time, a welcoming land of Play(s), a land of Asylum.
Come on, happy Sunday everyone,
Raphael Sachetat
