French neoconservative philosopher Alain Finkielkraut is at it again. He called the French soccer team, which exited from the world cup in South Africa in disgrace, a "group of scum who knows only one value system, that of the mafia." Finkielkraut is obviously linking the dreadful behavior of the players to the lingering social problems of France's infamous (banlieues) suburbs where many of the players on the national team grew up. He said the tournament disaster in South Africa was a direct result of ethnic and religious divisions in the French team. Finkielkraut's problem is not only one of an inscrutable logic but as usual he's quick in making spurious connections and the more he does that, the more he precipitates French public discourse in a dangerous banalization of racism. So when French player of Algerian origin Zinedine Zidane (who also grew up in the suburbs) led his team to triumph in the 1998 world cup and to the finals game in 2006, he was the symbol of a happily multicultural France (Blanc, Black and Beur), but when some players in the 2010 team misbehave and underperform, they can only be thugs from the banlieues. Reportedly three players in the current French team have converted to Islam recently, including Nicholas Anelka who started off the row with the team's manager. Is this what Finkielkraut means by the religious and racial tensions in the French team? Should there be a race and religion preference on the national team? I don't believe the average French thinks like Finkielkraut, but I can't believe that the day after the French team is eliminated, one of France's well-known radio stations irresponsibly invites Finkielkraut to its most important primetime program to spew out his own rage.