pull down to refresh
From what I understand, with the budget, the state doesn't have the money right now to rebuild schools. They didn't even have the money to update them, so destroying them requires new money that isn't there. In a normal situation, I agree with you on the idea of getting destroyed and coming back strong being the right decision, but in the immediate term I don't see that being the case.
Countries like France, in particular, spend a ton of money on other social benefits programs that have gotten huge while tax revenues have fallen and life has gotten more expensive. They are in a pickle, and no matter what they do, a lot of people are going to be pissed. If more and more schools get torched, you have to wonder where the cuts will be made in the social programs to rebuild and/or fix the schools.
Funny thing is, it's not entirely irrational.
Studies have shown that areas in a developed city that get burned down often come back stronger than before. The thing is that tearing something down is sometimes the best thing to do, but as a collective action it's hard to get everyone to agree to tear it down. So it persists in a sorry state for a long time. If some external factor forces it to get torn down, the result can actually be better.