I was shocked by this article in Le 360, which calls for the establishment of an American multinational (Uber, but not only) as the best way to help Morocco evolve. Moroccans are the first to criticise France for economic neo-colonialism, so why accept it from another country?
The 360 advocates the deregulation of taxis
Karim Boukhari, who was the editor of Tel Quel for many years and is now a columnist for 360, has just published his regret at seeing Uber leave Morocco.
It is a shame that one of the few articles published on Uber’s departure that goes beyond simply quoting the press release is so full of falsehoods and ends up calling for a new economic colonisation of Morocco, against which it will be much more difficult to wage a war of independence once this colonisation is complete.
Moroccans constantly swing between boundless chauvinism and self-hatred, a complex towards foreigners who always know how to do things ‘better’, which is disconcerting.
Indeed, beyond factual errors (starting with the confusion between taxi regulations and the grima system and those governing tourist transport), what is most disconcerting in Karim Boukhari’s article is that, for him, the only way to improve Moroccan taxi services is Uber.
His call for Uberisation ignores what this word actually means: the enslavement of people offering services through a platform, whose pay conditions deteriorate significantly once the platform has managed to capture a significant share of the market (and thus colonise it), driving out traditional players.
As the sole master on board, holder of the tool that provides access to work, and exercising a virtual monopoly on this type of tool due to its financial power, Uber can then start to reduce drivers’ pay and place more demands on them, without limit, since it is not subject to labour laws [Uber is not an employer] or passenger transport laws [but that is coming].
Moroccan vocabulary: makhzen and grima
One could even see in this call for Uberisation, for the rejection of the state as a partner in improving taxi services, a very old Moroccan flaw: the rejection of everything associated with the ‘Makhzen’, i.e. the central government.
It was the rejection of the Makhzen that turned southern Morocco into a ‘siba’ (i.e. rebellious) country, where inter-tribal violence was a daily occurrence (the ksours , kasbahs and borjs that tourists admire are proof of this: in France, fortified castles became beautiful Renaissance residences, while in Morocco, the defensive function of these dwellings was still a necessity until the early 20th century, and it was the colonisers who effectively ‘pacified’ Morocco, at least disarmed the tribes).
Once again, the Makhzen is the enemy. Some of the criticisms levelled at it are justified, but because it is ‘the Makhzen’, it is automatically disqualified. The state is not seen as a recourse, the law is above all a form of oppression, all control must be circumvented, the best way to combat the effects of corruption is to engage in corruption oneself, and the best way to do away with a state privilege (the grima, a licensing system for taxis) is not to reform the state but to call for its Uberisation.
The Makhzen regularly uses the carrot and the stick. The carrot helps to oil the wheels, to make the system bearable. The distribution of favours, whether given simply to poor Moroccans or to servants of the state, is part of the carrot. Among these, the grima, or taxi licence, is one of the juiciest carrots. Unlike in France, in Morocco, you do not pay for your licence; you receive it from the state, with permission to use or ‘rent’ it.
The Grima, taxi licence system
The grima clearly poses a problem, as do the licensing systems in place in various European countries. It allows for the organisation of chain exploitation, with the grima holder leasing it to a taxi operator who then leases their taxi to one or more drivers, so that the vehicle can be in operation 24 hours a day.
The requirements to become a taxi driver are not only financial: a taxi driver must have a ‘permit of trust’, a special licence granted after passing an examination and renewed every three years. As in most countries around the world, the permit of trust allows the driver’s knowledge (traffic regulations, routes) to be verified, as well as ensuring that they have no criminal convictions (criminal record).
Was Uber really necessary to bring about change?
Almost five years later, things have changed significantly. Rereading my article made me happy, because I was right about Uber and because Morocco did not fall into ultra-liberalism.
Uber is contested almost everywhere in the world.
The “Uberleak” proved that the company was not as ethical as it claimed to be, far from it. The risks I mentioned, in particular the drop in drivers’ pay, have come to pass. Uber is now facing complaints in many countries.
Worse still, the company has proved incapable of ensuring the safety of its passengers, with numerous cases of harassment, attempted rape, etc. reported by frightened female users.
Uberisation is no longer seen as an “opportunity”. Since the Covid crisis, the disruptive model has been on the wane almost everywhere in the world: the Makhzen is bad, but you need a state to protect you and distribute aid.
Careem is a “soft” Uber
Arriving on the Moroccan market quietly, Uber’s subsidiary never claimed to bring “transportation civilisation” to Morocco. It integrated taxis from the outset, which allowed it to avoid the major protests that Uber faced. It operates smoothly, with a wider price range than Uber and the convenience of online ordering and payment.
Taxis themselves are evolving
This horrible Makhzen did not abolish the grima, but it did introduce subsidies to renew the taxi fleet. Today, the vast majority of taxis – at least the red taxis in Casablanca – are perfectly acceptable, in satisfactory condition, clean, etc.
One could argue that it was the Uber “shock” that drove this change. I don’t believe so. It may have accelerated it a little, but it is part of an overall policy that began with large taxis.
In 2022, the “permit of trust” is changing
It is being transformed into a professional licence, which can be obtained after training, provided free of charge by the Ministry of Transport. (As was the case for the regularisation of “fake guides”). With the digital card introduced in Kenitra, one could even say that Moroccan small taxis have entered the 21st century, much to the delight of K. Boukhari.
“Behind Uber, the question is whether we are truly living in the 21st century.”
Rereading Karim Boukhari’s article five years later, this sentence struck me. I thought back to my in-laws in the Draa Valley, I thought back to the isolated villagers in the mountains, to those who die of cold every year, I thought back to the hundreds of thousands of people living in such harsh conditions in the suburbs of Casablanca, and I wondered who this “we” was.
Because the people I am talking about may be living chronologically in the 21st century, but in reality they are living in a much older era, at least a hundred years older.
And I thought to myself that, among all the Moroccans, there was one who, in his legitimate thirst for modernity and progress, was losing touch with the Morocco below.
The grima still exists. The state helped taxis, but would it have helped Uber?
The grima is an archaic system that should be reformed. Like all systems where taxis, in one way or another, purchase licences. Abolishing the grima without compensation would be tantamount to robbing those who hold them. It would also transfer the operation of taxis to someone else, whether an individual or a company, as the majority of taxi drivers cannot afford to buy their own car.
The state has distributed subsidies to small taxis to help them cope with the rise in fuel prices, distributed on presentation of the vehicle registration document to prevent hoarding.
But these subsidies are reserved for official transport operators, small and large taxis, bus drivers, etc. For others, the increase in petrol prices is at their expense and therefore, ultimately, at the expense of their customers. However, there are many Moroccans, in Casablanca as elsewhere, who already struggle to pay a fare for a small taxi. They are completely unable to pay “a little more” than the normal fare.
Economic neo-colonialism
The argument “I do what I want in your country to bring you modernity, wealth, etc.” is an exact replica of France’s perception of its role in Morocco.
And that is the huge difference between Careem and Uber: the former respects the legal framework, while the latter claims to be bringing beneficial innovation, without this actually being the case.
The path to social liberalisation
Uber represented violent liberalisation, American ultra-liberalism and the displacement of taxi drivers by an American company. That is why I referred to it as a “new coloniser”.
But history shows that this type of liberalisation, particularly in emerging countries, does not happen without social disruption and serious unrest. Iran is proof of this, which any progressive bourgeoisie should reflect on.
The path chosen by Morocco is less direct, constantly negotiating between the needs and expectations of the “Moroccans at the top” and those of the “Moroccans in the countryside”. The new finance law is an example of this mix of social issues and economic acceleration.
A typo or syntax error? You can select the text and hit Ctrl+Enter to send us a message. Thank you! If this post interested you, maybe you can also leave a comment. We'd love to exchange with you !
