![Who were the « Charlie » in the Streets? A Socio-Political Approach of the January 11 Rallies [Qui étaient Les “Charlie” dans la rue ? Approche Socio-Politique des Rassemblements du 11 Janvier] Cover](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsciendo-parsed.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com%2Fubiquity%2F68406ce7da18af458e76840b%2Fcover-image.jpg&w=3840&q=75)
Figure 1
The sociological profile of the participants to the rallies.
Figure 2
The political and ideological profile of the participants to the rallies.
Table 1
Explaining the attitudes towards the Charlie demonstrations.
| participated vs. refused | wish vs. refused | participated vs. refused | wish vs. refused | participated vs. refused | wish vs. refused | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Religion | ||||||
| Practicing Catholics | .66 | .48* | .75 | .49t | .68 | .47* |
| Occasionally practicing Catholics | 1.38 | 1.21 | 1.53 | 1.27 | 1.47 | 1.24 |
| Other religion | .90 | .62 | 1.00 | .69 | .89 | .65 |
| Muslims | .75 | .54 | .54 | .46t | .47 | .41* |
| No religion | 1.40t | .92 | 1.25 | .93 | 1.09 | .88 |
| Non-practicing Catholics | (ref) | |||||
| Birth cohorts | ||||||
| Born before 1940 | .55 | 1.26 | .63 | 1.31 | .62 | 1.34 |
| 1956–66 | 1.49 | 1.33 | 1.67t | 1.44 | 1.60 | 1.38 |
| 1967–76 | 1.49 | 1.61t | 1.83* | 1.87* | 1.74t | 1.81** |
| Born in 1977 or after | 1.47 | 1.76* | 1.78* | 2.08** | 1.76t | 2.01*** |
| 1940–55 | (ref) | |||||
| Level of education | ||||||
| Secondary education | 1.97* | 1.19 | 2.09* | 1.22 | 2.06* | 1.21 |
| Baccalaureate | 3.22** | 1.36 | 3.28** | 1.35 | 2.93** | 1.29 |
| University degree | 5.11*** | 1.32 | 4.17*** | 1.14 | 3.61*** | 1.07 |
| Primary education | (ref) | |||||
| Profession | ||||||
| Shopkeepers or craftsmen | .41 | .81 | .54 | .82 | .47 | .78 |
| Intermediary professions | .88 | 1.29 | .73 | 1.17 | .72 | 1.16 |
| Employees | 1.16 | 1.57t | 1.05 | 1.49t | 1.03 | 1.47 |
| Blue collars | 1.05 | 1.18 | .91 | 1.13 | .86 | 1.11 |
| No profession | .96 | 1.16 | .89 | 1.13 | .82 | 1.12 |
| Professionals | (ref) | |||||
| Place of living | ||||||
| Suburbs of big cities | .55** | 1.11 | .53** | 1.13 | .55** | 1.12 |
| Medium-size or small cities | .57* | 1.11 | .65 | 1.25 | .68 | 1.24 |
| Big cities | (ref) | |||||
| Gender | ||||||
| Men | 1.48* | 1.15 | 1.49* | 1.21 | 1.51* | 1.22 |
| Women | (ref) | |||||
| Partisan Proximity | ||||||
| Radical left | 4.88*** | 1.64 | 3.53** | 1.39 | ||
| Left (Socialist party) | 3.90*** | 1.98* | 3.15** | 1.78* | ||
| Centre | 1.83 | 1.19 | 1.58 | 1.10 | ||
| Radical right (FN) | .76 | .72 | .83 | .78 | ||
| No party proximity | .92 | .60** | .76 | .58* | ||
| Right (UMP) | (ref) | |||||
| Tolerance toward immigrant | 1.52** | 1.25t | ||||
| Tolerance toward Muslims | .87 | .91 | ||||
| Constant | .25*** | .48*** | .16*** | .48* | .23*** | .44t |
| N | 1013 | 1013 | 1013 | |||
| R2 | 6 percent | 9 percent | 10 percent | |||
[i] NB: The model is a multinomial logistic regression. Entries are odds ratios: an odds ratio of 1 means that between the tested group and the reference group the chances are even to give a specific answer, an odds ratio greater than 1 that the tested group has more chance to give a specific answer than the reference group and an odds ratio less than 1 that the tested group has less chance to give a specific answer than the reference group.
***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05 et t p < .10.