WaPo: When did Switzerland become Europe’s Saudi Arabia?
posted at 10:55 am on December 1, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Mona Eltahawy doesn’t just blast the Swiss for their human-rights hypocrisy after voting to ban new construction of minarets over the weekend. The Muslim essayist also takes the occasion to blast Muslim critics of the referendum for their sudden hue and cry over human rights themselves. In today’s Washington Post, Eltahawy makes the most important point of all, which is the pointlessness of it all:
My question for Switzerland and other European countries enthralled by the right wing: When did Saudi Arabia become your role model?
Even before 57.5 percent of Swiss voters cast ballots on Sunday to ban the building of minarets by Muslims, it was obvious that Switzerland’s image of itself as a land of tolerance was as full of holes as its cheese. When the right-wing Swiss People’s Party (SVP) came to power in 2007, it used a poster showing a white sheep kicking black sheep off the country’s flag. This was no reference to black sheep as rebels — the right wing doesn’t do cute — but to skin color and foreigners. Posters the SVP displayed before Sunday’s referendum showed women covered from head to toe in black, standing in front of phallic-looking minarets. Such racism preceded and fed into the bigotry that fueled the referendum.
Predictably, the election results sparked cries of “Islamophobia,” but the situation for Switzerland’s 400,000 Muslims is not (yet) dire. The four existing minarets were not affected by the vote, and there are still 150 mosques or prayer rooms in which to worship.
And that’s really the central pointlessness of this vote. Switzerland has only four minarets, and the referendum does nothing to those. It has over 150 places of Islamic worship, and it doesn’t bar the creation of more, either. The Swiss outlawed an architectural design, mainly as an expression of frustration over several years of incidents, including riots over editorial cartoons and the murder of Theo Van Gogh, among others, for criticism of Islam and radical Islamists. It’s almost an expression of utter impotence.
And that’s too bad, because as Eltahawy argues, we need more substantive debates over the problems radical Islam and shari’a law present to Western societies:
Raising the specter of “political Islam” or “creeping Islamicization” to frighten voters diminishes the concerns that ought to be discussed, such as an ideology’s opposition to many minority and women’s rights. And that’s where the difficult questions lie for Europe’s Muslims. They, too, have a right wing that breeds on fear and preaches an exclusionary and inward-looking Islam. It is the perfect foil for the non-Muslim political right wing on the continent.
Eltahawy then turns her rhetorical guns on Muslim protesters of the vote:
The Grand Mufti of Egypt, for example, denounced the ban as an “attack on freedom of belief.” I would take him more seriously if he denounced in similar terms the difficulty Egyptian Christians face in building churches in his country. They must obtain a security permit just for renovations.
Last year, the first Catholic church — bearing no cross, no bells and no steeple — opened in Qatar, leaving Saudi Arabia the only country in the Persian Gulf that bars the building of houses of worship for non-Muslims. In Saudi Arabia, it is difficult even for Muslims who don’t adhere to the ultra-orthodox Wahhabi sect; Shiites, for example, routinely face discrimination.
Bigotry must be condemned wherever it occurs. If majority-Muslim countries want to criticize the mistreatment of Muslims living as minority communities elsewhere, they should be prepared to withstand the same level of scrutiny regarding their own mistreatment of minorities.
Even for those who see Islam itself as an existential threat anywhere it resides, the minaret ban hardly addresses the issue. After all, terrorist recruiters don’t use minarets to attract and radicalize followers. It’s not the lofty architecture that makes people into crazed terrorists. The message of the ban is very much the same as Saudi Arabia’s treatment of Christians and Muslim minorities with their building code: they’re not welcome and should leave.
Events like these make me appreciate the wisdom of the First Amendment and the founders who established it. Through all of the passions of the American body politic, from Know-Nothings to today, that fundamental tenet of religious freedom has rescued us from serious and rather embarrassing missteps, such as the one taken by the Swiss this week. The US has around two million Muslims, the vast majority of which live peacefully in our communities. For those who do not, we trust our law-enforcement agencies to deal specifically with lawbreaking rather than conduct purges based on religious affiliation, which is how the Swiss should have left it.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4
Even still I don’t accept that this forfeits their right to self-defense or that it doesn’t involve the rest of us. If Muslims were looking to take over Switerland – instead of all of Europe, the US, Brazil, Russia and others – then it might be a matter of indifference.
But Iraq’s role in the Holocaust is also within living memory and I’d imagine some of the people involved are still alive. It was a contemporary event (to WWII) to go along with the historical examples.
I don’t know how you got that impression. Nazi gold held in Swiss banks is notorious. Also it’s been my experience that most people consider neutraliy to be a little weasally, particularly from a country smack dab in the middle of Europe which has had so many wars.
Though I think that a lot of people are so sick of socialist countries that they are glad fo Switzerland for that reason.
aengus on December 2, 2009 at 2:21 PM
take over=only take over
aengus on December 2, 2009 at 2:22 PM
So given an understanding of the Koran, do you not understand what the full goal of this ‘religion’ is?
Muslims will be nice to you bcs they want to convert you.
Just like evangelists, baptists, etc.
But the similarity ends there.
Under full muslim rule, you will treated like they think of you in private: a slave or dead.
It is perfectly clear what is written in the Koran: they will LIE TO YOU bcs it’s OK since you are an infidel.
They will talk nicey nice to you all day long.
But the moment your back is turned, you are a filthy infidel who must be subdued, converted, or killed.
I cannot make it any clearer than this.
Muslims in this country should not be disallowed to practice their religion, just like Satanists are not.
But once they start enforcing the rules of their Koran: that should be it.
There will be no caliphate, or anything close to it, ever established in this country.
Which is why immigrants need to assimilate by becoming citizens, taking an oath of allegiance to their new country or they can get the hell out & go back to where they came from.
Western countries have a right to demand this.
Badger40 on December 2, 2009 at 2:24 PM
right4life:
This guy went to Iran carrying a giant cross and didn’t have too many issues. This guy did the same and had the same result. His Iran experiance used to be online. but now you have to get the book to read about it.
dave742 on December 2, 2009 at 2:34 PM
That would be correct if it was for the fact that countries in Europe are often too politically correct to take the proper action. Heck, we can see traces of it over here with the Fort Hood incident.
I’m trying to be honest. Everyone, even the Muslims, know that there is a BIG problem with Muslim extremists. These same people use their religion to validate what they do. These people exist in Muslim society. However, if you dare to mention that specific threat, you are met with charges of racism, religious intolerance, etc. And authorities (politicians and lawmen alike) are too frightened by lawsuits to pursue anything. This is why I believe you have such frustration amongst Europeans.
This minaret thing was stupid, I’ll admit. But if nearly 60% of the people were willing to vote for it, that sends a clear signal of where a lot of people are in Switzerland regarding Muslims. I don’t think it’s bordering on racism… yet. But Swiss politicians need to get more serious about dealing with Muslim extremists within their borders. No more PC BS. If they do not address the real issue- this ridiculous notion of Sharia law in freaking Switzerland- then they will have an out and out race war.
xax on December 2, 2009 at 2:45 PM
“Orthodox Christians in Iran celebrated Easter with a religious procession, ringing of bells…”
TASS
April 11, 2004 Sunday
Orthodox Christians in Iran, Tunisia celebrate Easter
BYLINE: By Ravil Musin
Ringing bells!! That should be outlawed! It’s noise pollution! They are trying to project their dominance with noise!
dave742 on December 2, 2009 at 3:49 PM
Church bells ringing through the valley! Lighting up the sky with fireworks at midnight! Obvious displays of Christian dominance! This should be outlawed!
dave742 on December 2, 2009 at 4:02 PM
Why are all hippies exactly alike? All this Muslim love, but if they decide to colonize your precious little suburb or trendy urban neighborhood, then it’s all NIMBY.
When the Muslims get militant here in the USA, like they already have in Europe, it will be the poor people who suffer most – the ones who can’t afford the rent where you live.
Liberals should just stop pretending to give a damn about the poor and oppressed. Those are the people who take it right on the chin so you can feel morally superior while nestling in your book discussions groups and country clubs.
Hypocrites.
Venusian Visitor on December 2, 2009 at 4:38 PM
Mentioning the few token celebrations these countries allow for publicity purposes does not change the fact that they are brutal, intolerant conquerors of Christians & Jews.
The saying “First comes Saturday, then comes Sunday” is alive and well in muslim nations.
You will be among the first wave of dhimmis caught up in the tide of subjugation, if it ever happens here.
Badger40 on December 2, 2009 at 4:39 PM
Discrimination on a religious basis (which this is NOT) has nothing to do with racism.
Being a muslim is not being part of a particular race.
It has nothing to do with race.
Badger40 on December 2, 2009 at 4:49 PM
so why do you hate israel and the jews so? you support iran and their drive to get a bomb, and the iranians want to eliminate the jews and israel.
right4life on December 2, 2009 at 5:43 PM
oh yes I can see why this ‘guy’ would be allowed to carry the cross…
gee what a surprise!! and they had a ‘guide/interpreter’ isn’t that nice? oh yes another iranian/muslim apologist, just like you!!
this ‘guy’ is a real piece of trash.
THANK GOD FOR THE CRUSADES!!
right4life on December 2, 2009 at 5:47 PM
you are such trash.
link
right4life on December 2, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Sure, because nothing says awesome like a series of useless wars that resulted in mass death and a stalemate. Oh and when all the kids died in the children’s crusade, that was pretty cool too. And hey, remember when the crusaders slaughtered a whole bunch of Jews and Orthodox Christians in Europe? That must have been good as well. Don’t let historical facts get in they way of your hatred of Muslims or anything. Moron.
HeroesforGhosts on December 3, 2009 at 9:15 AM
Islam is a socio-political system which is light disguise as a religion. Its principal document has every chapter (except the ninth) starting out by telling that allah is compassionate and merciful. (I’ve never understood why allah, the supposed author, is talking about itself in the third person.) Then, in many chapters we get on with the killing of infidels, abuse of women, dividing up of booty and slaves.
Violence aside, the qur’an tells us how to run the justice system, how to punish crimes, how to settle inheritance. what part of our wealth to give to allah; in his time Moe took care of allah’s cut.
Until Islam is dealt with for what it is, a cult based socio-political system whose objective is world domination, the problems it presents can never be successfully addressed.
Annar on December 3, 2009 at 10:40 AM
It didn’t end in a stalemate, hippie, the West lost. But that doesn’t mean that an attempt to retake formerly Christian territory conquered by Islam wasn’t worth the effort.
Botched and flawed as the execution of the Crusades were, they managed to keep Byzantium going until 1453. By 1453 the barbarian West had become much more literate and was ready to benefit from the texts brought by Greek churchman and scholars. Those texts included, among many other priceless documents, most of the writings of Aristotle that have survived.
The infusion of these documents into the West brought about the Italian Renaissance, and that brought us all kinds of wonderful things like great scientific advances and the beginnings of the secular humanism that you hold so dear.
None of this would have happened if Constantinople fell in the eleventh century. The West had, after the fall of Rome, declined to the point where literacy was almost completely extinguished. Charlemagne managed to stop the decline in 800, but real advances did not begin in the West until the twelfth century.
The Crusades were botched because the West was only half-civilized at the time. There was no central authority that could control the Crusading forces so as to prevent the tragedy of the Children’s Crusade and the catastrophic diversion of the Fourth Crusade to Constantinople. Given what they had to work with, which was more like local gang lords than organized nation-states, the Crusades went about as well as could be expected.
Flawed, absolutely. Useless, absolutely not. We would live in a radically different world had the Crusades not been attempted. Islam could very well have destroyed Western civilization in the eleventh century rather than the twenty-first, and you would now be praying on a rug somewhere facing Mecca without a thought in your head.
And, seriously, you should have a better understanding of History than you can get out of Wikipedia before you hold yourself out as an expert. Hippie.
Venusian Visitor on December 3, 2009 at 10:53 AM
if it wasn’t for the crusades, you’d be wearing a long robe, or a burkha…dumba**
right4life on December 3, 2009 at 1:06 PM
As an amateur, voracious reader of history-
I salute your wasted efforts on the trolls who are muslim apologists.
It’s funny how none of us ever said we hated muslims.
Our hate is inferred by them simply bcs we point out the voilent & intolerant nature of muslims’ civilzation destroying ‘religion’ called Islam.
Badger40 on December 3, 2009 at 1:15 PM
Badger40:
What about you little friend asking me this:
When did I say I hate Jews?
dave742 on December 3, 2009 at 1:20 PM
Hippie? That’s your cutting insult? But sure, let’s take your arguments one step at a time.
Byzantium and Constantinople are the same place. The Crusaders kept it going by overthrowing it in 1204 and killing their fellow Christians. So both catastrophic and the main achievement of the Crusades? Wow.
The Greek churchmen that the Crusaders killed. Pope John Paul II apologized for it. Also the Crusaders burned quite a few of those documents when they invaded.
This is fairly accurate. You don’t mention any of the Muslim documents or ideas that also led to the Renaissance, but I suppose that doesn’t fit your narrative.
You’re right about the nation states, but you fail to mention the Pope who did nothing to stop any atrocities and had influence enough to at least do something.
Pure speculation. We could debate all day about whether or not they would have invaded Europe again after what happened at Tours. I doubt it, but there is no proof either way.
History major from a Catholic college who has read multiple books on the subject, and has taken classes about the crusades, but nice try.
HeroesforGhosts on December 3, 2009 at 1:40 PM
Switzerland now has four hundred thousand Muslims?
OMG.
RD on December 3, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Didn’t they teach you that “Byzantium” is commonly used to refer generally to the civilization of the Eastern Roman Empire? Byzantium the place was a Greek town that existed near the site of the later city of Constantinople.
And, yes, the sack and temporary capture of Constantinople by the crusaders after the Venetians diverted the Fourth Crusade was catastrophic. And, yes, preservation of Byzantine civilization until the fifteenth century was the main achievement of the crusades.
The Crusaders did indeed kill Greeks aplenty, layman and churchman alike. And this was a travesty. But the Greeks they killed in 1204 were not the same Greeks that fled to the west laden with priceless documents after the fall of Constantinople in 1453. And I can’t help but notice that your sympathy for murdered Greek Orthodox does not seem to extend to the victims of the Turkish government in modern times.
Much of the surviving classical learning did indeed filter into Western thought from Islamic sources via Spain, but most of this happened much earlier and were generally in the form of Arabic translations. There weren’t many Westerners who could even have read the Greek originals until after Constantinople fell.
Which pope? Urban II, or all of the popes and antipopes that passed through Rome and Avignon during the following centuries of the Crusading era? The papacy declined in power during this period so dramatically that it was practically impotent. What do you suppose the popes had influence enough to do? They couldn’t even get themselves out of the Babylonian captivity in France.
Nonsense. They continued their attack on the West even after seizing Constantinople until they were finally halted at the gates of Vienna. So they did in fact invade Europe again in the fifteenth century – and they are doing so now, moving into the vacuum created by the disintegration of Western Civilization. If this is not somehow reversed, it is quite possible that your great-granddaughter may be stoned to death for some minor immodesty. If you have the stomach for it, you can see Islam in action here: WARNING: NOT FOR THE SQUEAMISH.
http://www.apostatesofislam.com/media/stoning.htm
And that’s what we’re really talking about. Do we want to live in that culture or not? Islam is intent on spreading worldwide, and doing nothing will not keep Islam out. How do these barbarisms jive with your liberal worldview? Unless you can explain how they harmonize, your bickering over the details of my analysis is nothing more than sophistry.
My apologies; based on your prior posts I assumed that you had attended the West Texas School of Veterinary. Hippie.
Venusian Visitor on December 3, 2009 at 4:57 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4