And I can testify that most pied-noirs (and their descendants) still *hate* Muslims, from Algeria or elsewhere -and indeed claim to know them better than the Metropolitans, to be 'experts'.
Really? How, I guess you know more about me than myself then.
I'm seriously that close to report that "I know that this group are all the same", but let's admit it could have been a mistake.
If someone said something as ludicrous than "Most southerners still *hate* Blacks from South or elsewhere", it would have ended quickly with at least a warning.
Now, you don't have something like a pied-noir establishment today : basically because they didn't settled in France in the same place, lived with metropolitan french and that descendents of pied noris by their two parents is not the main case (not talking about great-parents).
For myself, I can testify of my familial life and experience that pied-noirs (not their descendents) are the more likely to know some Arab language (I don't know how many french people would do that in a "they have to use French"), to use some Arab features in their everyday life (mostly alimentation).
Finally, while no study was done on it, I suspect the far-right proportion among them must be admittedly more important than overall population (while pied-noirs or ex-"French Algeria" activits in FN have an importance, critically in their party machinery) but certainly not the majority, and is really important in provencal coast that was already a far-right/conservative stronghold since the XIX.
Outside it, in a social context that favorize right-wing extremism, the tendence is less important.
Finally while it is true that many associations of pied-noir are on FN hands, because of this, they are avoided by others ones.
If it can help :
here's an article.
For non-french speakers :
-28% of pied noirs voted FN, 24% of their descendants
-26% for PS, 31% of their descendants
-26% for UMP, 15% of their descendants
- 9% for center, 14% of their descendants
Pied-noir population would reach roughly 1,2 millions, more than 3 if you count descendents that assume their ascendency.
Furthermore, and back to the OP, while the "racial" climate in Algeria was segregative, it was pretty well the same in metropolitan France. Tragic events as
Massacre of 1961 (a pro-FLN demonstration in Paris was crushed bloodly by french police, that was used to torture algerian workers) or
Charonne did happened in France and only the second really provoked a turmoil because it was "ethnic French" that were involved.
In French Algerian society, you didn't have an "open" racism towards Arabs (at least up to 1950's) while you had a socially acceptable one against Spaniards (my father could use Arab words at home, but one Spanish one would have owed him a good spanking). Not to say they were close and tolerent of course, but as they were basically two distinct societies living on the same territory (both because of France's law that considered Alegrians not as citizens but subjects and Arab Algerian refusal to mix with conquerors) it was hard to maintain a link between them.
Now, how make Algeria more french at the point they're considered Frenchmen? That seems really hard, and I don't see how it could be done : settlement colonies very rarily considered themselves as the same than metropole (USA, Australia, Canada, ...) when they weren't in its territorial continuity.
Let's try some things anyway.
- After the 1920's, Arab Algerian population had an important growth : the proportion of French Algerian passed below the 10% and they began to quit countryside to establish themselves in coastal towns, reinforcing the segregation in Algeria. Without going in a praise of a pastoral Algeria, you had at least direct contact between the populations.
You can't prevent the Arab population growth, that is basically due to amelioration of living standards, without a willing policy of french authorities that is going to piss Arab population more quickly.
But, with less french investment in Algeria for whatever reason, you could prevent a rural move, or more likely diminish its importance.
- Having a PCA (Algerian Communist Party) being open to Arab since the 20's. OTL it was such only in the late 30's and was still mainly a party of european coastal workers. You'll need to butterfly away the ultra-patriotist line that PCF had adopted in the late 20's (maybe continuous "bolshevisation"), give autonomy to Algerian communists, and have a maintained anti-colonialist line like it was in the 20's (it wasn't removed in the 30's but somewhat given less importance and that ended in the 50's to a reluctance to accept Algerian independence).
- Blum-Violette project is adopted : it would have allowed Algerian elit to gain citizenship without renouncing to personal and religious particularities (OTL, both were incompatibles). While anti-colonialists denounced this project as perpetuating the colonialism by submitting native elites to their domination, it could have helped even if it was far too late for making them "Frenchmen"
-More acknowledgment of Algerians in french army after 1944. Segregation was maintained in the army, with Arabs and Berbers being almost systematically disfavoured for promotion, advantages and even gifts. Many of the ALN commanders fought in french army and it can legitimally be considered as a factor of their involvment in independence fight.
-Application of 1905 separation of Church and State to Islamic religion. While it was applied to other religions, it wasn't for Islam and arab religious continued to be payed by the state and somewhat promoting official stances.
Having this separation is going to piss many people in Muslim society (that tended to prevent mix with Europeans) and in French Algerian one.
Finally, in my opinion, the only way to have Algerians being total Frenchmen is to limit the conquest of Algeria to coastal band, and make southern part a protectorate distinct from the former. it won't be a given, but would be still more doable.