NYT OpEd: How to Integrate Europe’s Muslims

[pampango]

The failure of Islamic integration in Europe is often attributed — especially by right-wing parties — to an excess of tolerance toward the large-scale Muslim immigration that began in the mid-1970s. By recognizing Muslim religious requirements, the argument goes, countries like France, Britain and the Netherlands have unwittingly hindered assimilation and even, in some cases, fostered radicalism. But the unrest in gritty European suburbs stems not from religious difference, but from anomie.

Europeans should not be afraid to allow Muslim students to take classes on Islam in state-financed schools and universities. The recognition and accommodation of Islamic religious practices, from clothing to language to education, does not mean capitulation to fundamentalism. On the contrary, only by strengthening the democratic rights of Muslim citizens to form associations, join political parties and engage in other aspects of civic life can Europe integrate immigrants and give full meaning to the abstract promise of religious liberty.

The rise of right-wing, anti-immigrant parties has led several European countries to impose restrictions on Islamic dress, mosque-building and reunification of families through immigration law. These policies are counterproductive. Paradoxically, people for whom religion is otherwise not all that important become more attached to their faith’s clothing, symbols and traditions when they feel they are being singled out and denied basic rights.

In the last few months, there have been some signs that the right-wing momentum has slowed. A French bill to ban headscarves from day care centers was killed in committee. The Dutch Parliament voted down a bill to outlaw Islamic animal slaughter. And Germany’s most populous state helped offset a judicial ban on school prayer by announcing equal access to religion courses for Muslim students.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/24/opinion/how-to-integrate-europes-muslims.html

Integration of immigrants into their new country's culture is a slow process. It will happen, though, if it is national policy to facilitate this rather than using the existing cultural differences of immigrants as a means to stigmatize them and make them into a partisan political "football" which the right-wing anti-immigrant parties are good at doing.

[DCKit]

1. Finally, but too late, some sanity. nt

[muriel_volestrangler]

2. I'm not entirely convinced by his writing

For instance:

In Britain, for example, race-based equality laws protected Sikhs and Jews as minorities, but not Hindus and Muslims, since they were still considered “foreign.”

Well, no. There was a difference in the race hatred laws because Sikhs and Jews were recognised as ethnic groups in their own right - Jews in particular often self-identify as Jewish, but without any religious belief. Sikhs, similarly, are from one specific region, and have traditions that are distinct from those around them.

Hindus, while overwhelmingly from India, are primarily a religion; and hatred against them as 'Indian', rather than as 'Hindu', is far more common and would be covered by the race relation laws. Muslims, in contrast, come from a wide variety of regions - from Nigeria to Indonesia and beyond, and from a range of cultures. It is a religion beyond anything that can be called 'race'. So, far from it being a question of them being considered 'foreign', it was precisely because it is a world religion that there was no way to cover equality laws for Islam under race laws. Anyone can convert to Islam; to convert to Sikhism or Judaism, if it is not part of your ethnic heritage, is far harder. The 'race hatred' laws have been modified since to cover religion (or lack of it), however - but there's a lot of controversy about when criticism of religion, which is legitimate, becomes 'inciting hatred' (the current standard is whether the speech or actions are 'threatening'; ridicule is allowed). Equality laws for things like employment covered religion some time ago.

And, while Laurence says state schools should give lessons on Islam to Muslim students, he doesn't address whether there should be separate Islamic state schools, as increasingly provided in the UK, and highly desired by some Muslims. I see these as divisive; I think the division of the vast majority of Northern Irish schools into 'protestant' or 'Catholic' perpetuates the problems there. He also stays away from the question of Islamic arbitration courts for things like divorce or business disputes. The article just doesn't tackle the difficult subjects for integration, assmilation or multiculturalism.

[pampango]

3. Thanks for the insight. Great post. n/t