US and Europa gap in dealing with Islam
"But it is not just luck. The difference between America and Europe in dealing with Islam reaches down to some basic questions of principle, such as the limits of free speech and free behaviour. America's political culture places huge importance on the right to religious difference, including the right to displays of faith which others might consider eccentric. In the words of Reza Aslan, a popular Iranian-American writer on Islam, ?Americans are used to exuberant displays of religiosity.? So the daily prostrations of a devout Muslim are less shocking to an American than to a lukewarm European Christian. American society is open to religious arguments?and to new approaches to old theological questions?in a way that Europe is not.
In general, Americans are more optimistic?or less gloomy?about Islam than Europeans. A poll published this week by the Pew Research Centre says that Americans who see Muslim-Western relations as ?generally bad? outnumber those who take the opposite view by 55% to 32%. Not exactly cheery. But in Germany the pessimists are ahead by 70% to 23%, in France by 66% to 33%, and in Britain by 61% to 28%.
Some things are off-limits even in America. In Britain, for example, members of the radical (but non-violent) Hizb ut-Tahrir movement have appeared on television to express their rejection of the principles of liberal democracy and secular justice. That is unlikely to happen in America. Nor would it be possible, in any American context, to argue for the superiority of sharia?Islamic law?over laws passed by elected law-makers.
But the right to say almost anything on most other subjects is deeply entrenched in America. This means that, whatever weapons the parties in America's religious arguments try to use, they do not usually include attempts to deny the other side's right to speak.
The result is that there is more space for hard religious argument. No law restrains that quite large body of American thought which is critical not just of extreme readings of Islam but of Islam itself?arguing that the warrior ethos of the faith's earlier centuries was one of its essential features, not just a regrettable excess. But the American system also guarantees the rights of those who argue for the opposite view: that Islam is basically a peaceful, universalist faith which restricts rather than enjoins the use of violence." (Economist)
It is the first amendment baby - the right to free speech that actually underline this split between Europe and USA. And so far the US is doing much better in integrating its Muslim population than Europe.
In general, Americans are more optimistic?or less gloomy?about Islam than Europeans. A poll published this week by the Pew Research Centre says that Americans who see Muslim-Western relations as ?generally bad? outnumber those who take the opposite view by 55% to 32%. Not exactly cheery. But in Germany the pessimists are ahead by 70% to 23%, in France by 66% to 33%, and in Britain by 61% to 28%.
Some things are off-limits even in America. In Britain, for example, members of the radical (but non-violent) Hizb ut-Tahrir movement have appeared on television to express their rejection of the principles of liberal democracy and secular justice. That is unlikely to happen in America. Nor would it be possible, in any American context, to argue for the superiority of sharia?Islamic law?over laws passed by elected law-makers.
But the right to say almost anything on most other subjects is deeply entrenched in America. This means that, whatever weapons the parties in America's religious arguments try to use, they do not usually include attempts to deny the other side's right to speak.
The result is that there is more space for hard religious argument. No law restrains that quite large body of American thought which is critical not just of extreme readings of Islam but of Islam itself?arguing that the warrior ethos of the faith's earlier centuries was one of its essential features, not just a regrettable excess. But the American system also guarantees the rights of those who argue for the opposite view: that Islam is basically a peaceful, universalist faith which restricts rather than enjoins the use of violence." (Economist)
It is the first amendment baby - the right to free speech that actually underline this split between Europe and USA. And so far the US is doing much better in integrating its Muslim population than Europe.
posted by Dody G. at 5:51 AM
10 Comments:
Finally we're doing something right!
6:49 AM
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
And this too.
The integration works because no religion is treated being special. No religion is being "protected". You can slam/insult/praise/condemn Islam or Christianity or Wiccan and the government will not intervene.
You can't do violence in the name of religion and be tolerated.
So the dialogues and conversations a bout religions can look and sound ugly but people live for another day to yet refine their ideas or change their mind.
And this also encourage the diversity of interpertation of religions and removes the tyrannical grip of mono intepertation.
7:27 AM
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
7:52 AM
It seems that the research did not consider how people in both US and Europe take religion in general and concentrated on Islam in particular.
First, it is a fact that Europeans are generally indifferent to any religion and are much less religious than Americans. Consequently, we altogether talk less about religion in Europe.
Second, attitude to religion in Europe (although generally more apathetic than in the US) varies greatly from country to country. We have countries, for example, which proclaim in their constitution that there is no state religion whatsoever. And then, of course, there are highly religious Poland, Malta, Ireland, etc.
I think the problem with integration into European societies is not Islam per se, but a much more nationalistic attitude to this question in all countries and a more paranoid stance on the questions of national culture.
7:54 AM
A key part of this article that isn't examined much is the demographic of American Muslims as being generally wealthy.
When a large percentage of a population is wealthy, more often than not, their major complaints are more economic in nature than those of identity or social inclusivity.
For me (and this is something I've noticed in India and China and a few other countries) an economically down-trodden group usually club themselves together based on their shared identity; in this case - Europe's Muslims.
1:01 PM
Aude (SUI) adds on -
...and the rich are more likely to be educated and would better fit into a dialogue process at least (more) often.
1:06 PM
Here in Bulgaria it is currently a huge scandal that two Muslum girls go to school with their heads covered according to their religious tradition.
Indeed I beleive this is an intended display of religious symbols, meant to create unnecessary tension in society. I dunno who has interest in this, but it is a fact that Bulgaria's Muslums and Christians have almost always lived together without any major conflicts.
12:45 PM
Hm, and what about the many Christians wearing a crucifix on their necklace? Okay, it's not necessarily as visible as wearing a headscarf, but still.
In my high school in Switzerland (Lucerne), there was a crucifix in EVERY classroom. I had always found that very odd. I mean, I am a Christian, but I think that could be offensive to every student who isn't.
9:03 PM
i'm just wondering why would a religio us symbol be offensive?
I mean if they do not mean anything to you, why object?
10:59 PM
The religious symbol itself is not offensive.
Problem is that some fanatics have interest to urge people that have lived together without any problems for years, to start religious conflicts. And these people are using the religious symbols to do so.
3:25 PM
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home