Spineless French government ignores insolent Muslim provocation

[ag]

And, note another thing. You seem to have an idealized view of the traditional Jewish world. It is not just prohibition to eat pork and a requirement to wear funny hats. It is also, in many cases, the de facto prohibition against men getting <non-religious> education  and gainful employment. It is also the arranged marriages, which you so much deplore. It is, first and foremost, segregation from the outside world. Jews in Europe have been at it for far longer than Muslims - and have gone to far greater extremes in resisting modernity. It is true, that today this phenomenon is more difficult to observe outside of, I guess, US, UK and Israel - but that's because continental Europe has been thoroughly "cleansed" of these traditionalist communities during WWII (of course, Sweden never really had them, in the first place, and in Vienna the effective cleansing of the traditionalists had happened centuries previous, with the survivors either fleeing further East, or choosing to integrate - not that it helped their offspring in the 20th century). 

The only reason my "fellow-tribesmen" (as my late grandfather would put it), are no longer mentioned in the same breath as, say, Muslims, is that, post-Holocaust, this is viewed as obscene. Well, I, for one, do not feel any need to differentiate here. Yes, there is a lot in common between fundamentalist religious sects segregating their members from the modern world, be it Jewish, Muslim or Christian (in Latin America these are mostly represented by the blond and Plattdeutsch-speaking Mennonites in overalls). Yes, I find these lifestyles, to put it mildly, ridiculous.

But, in the end, attacking them and making the members of these communities to feel under attack is counterproductive. And, in the end, once you start down that path, it is difficult to figure out where the modernization pressure stops and the existential pressure starts. The line between an outside modernizer and a persecutor is too often too thin. Let us take care of our own freedom  before we start forcing the rest of the humanity into happiness - they'll deal w/ their happiness themselves.

[Gustaf]

I think you're libertarian approach to this is naive, because it seems to amount to saying that all choices are equally free and valid. I don't think the choices made within certain cultures are particularly free. I think certain cultures constrain people to an undue degree and I believe society has a role to play in aiding people to break free from those cultures.

<...>
Basically, I don't think the choice of a woman not to work, never be seen and marry a man her parents picked up is as important to respect as the choice not to eat pork or wear funny hats. That might make a racist authoritarian in your eyes, but certainly not in mine.

You don't quite get where I am coming from. I am, first and foremost, selfish: I care a lot more about the society not caring about my own choices, than I care about choices of others ))

On a less selfish note, of course it is true that in many cases within closed communities there is a substantial pressure to conform. However, the fact is, that the outside pressure for integration is, usually, as strong or stronger, even in the absence of anything deliberate on the part of the society as a whole. It is when the society at large tries to force things that the wagons get circled and communities close further.

A woman, growing up in Sweden has every opportunity to join the maintsream. In fact, she is likely to be continuously exposed to that mainstream - through the school system, through the mass culture (from which it is hard to isolate), etc., etc. And, no doubt, the secular Swedish world is quite attractive - I, for one, am comfortable enough about the superiority of the, broadly, "western ways" to believe that, in most cases, they'd be winning in the contest of ideas and modes of being.  You've never been a part of a minority - you simply don't realize how strong the pressure to assimilate is.

However, try forcing assimilation/ modernization, and things change. It doesn't have to happen in the context of migration, of course: perhaps, Turkey might provide the cleanest example here. Several generations of Turkish women have been denied secular university education, due to the "religious" prohibition on wearing hidjab in public schools. In fact, come think of it, this has been, probably, the most effective imaginable policy leading to segregation between the "white Turk" secular elite and the "brown Turk" traditionalist plebs. When policies of this nature get introduced in the west, they only serve to push the migrants into ghettos, where the interaction is minimized and the need to choose between tradition and the outside world is reduced.

Women who attend religious Muslim schools, which are legal and publicly financed in Sweden, are a lot less likely to encounter these societal pressures. This is even more so for the many grown women who have not attended Swedish schools but came here as teenagers or adults and are left at home in their apartements, surrounded only by other Muslim immigrants. If you want to stretch it further - I've done volunteer work as a private tutor for children who fare poorly in a godforsaken area of Stockholm. They are all Muslim immigrants. In fact, it seems like pretty much everyone in their area and in the school are Muslim immigrants. Sure, the teacher might say a few token words about the possibilities for women, just like the teacher might say a few token words about the dangers of smoking. I suspect the peer pressure from those around them will tend to be a stronger force.

Also, Sweden has publicly finances education for immigrants in the native language of their parents, which, combined with their poor education in other subjects, usually means they're better at that language than in Swedish. And any area dominated by Muslim immigrants will also be dominated by the satellite dishes bringing in tv channels in their own native language. Again, I'm not saying all of this is bad. But they do tend to be isolated from the rest of Swedish society and given some of the more unpleasant aspects of the culture they're being isolated in, I think that might well be a bad thing.

----------------------

As regards traditionalist Jews...I'm not really following your point here, to be honest. I agree that some of the things I've said here could be applied to some groups of Orthodox Jews. There are many reasons why I don't think these situations are comparable (everyone was a reactionary racist back in the ninenteenth century and at least many of the Jews did very well in Europe - much better it would seem than the Muslim populations of today (I'm aware this is more a Western European phenomenon than an Eastern European one though)).

The most important point though is that these were never the reasons for persecuting Jews back in those days. At least not that I'm aware of. I've never heard an anti-semitic charge making the point that Jews treated their women badly. And that's been my entire point here.

You say those groups will deal with their happiness themselves - I have no doubt that reactionary structures within those groups will deal adequately with those seeking freedom from it. The girl who was murdeded for having a Swedish boyfriend is fresh in the memory of most Swedes, after all. I just don't think that's a moral stance to take, because I think her right to sexual and romantic freedom was just as strong as mine. (And here there's a good example - I know from firsthand experience that the Chinese community in Sweden is about as conservative and about as isolated as the Muslim one. But none of the Chinese girls I know who got boyfriends against the will of their parents were murdered or abused for it)

[Insula Dei]

I think you're libertarian approach to this is naive, because it seems to amount to saying that all choices are equally free and valid. I don't think the choices made within certain cultures are particularly free. I think certain cultures constrain people to an undue degree and I believe society has a role to play in aiding people to break free from those cultures.

<...>
Basically, I don't think the choice of a woman not to work, never be seen and marry a man her parents picked up is as important to respect as the choice not to eat pork or wear funny hats. That might make a racist authoritarian in your eyes, but certainly not in mine.

You don't quite get where I am coming from. I am, first and foremost, selfish: I care a lot more about the society not caring about my own choices, than I care about choices of others ))

On a less selfish note, of course it is true that in many cases within closed communities there is a substantial pressure to conform. However, the fact is, that the outside pressure for integration is, usually, as strong or stronger, even in the absence of anything deliberate on the part of the society as a whole. It is when the society at large tries to force things that the wagons get circled and communities close further.

A woman, growing up in Sweden has every opportunity to join the maintsream. In fact, she is likely to be continuously exposed to that mainstream - through the school system, through the mass culture (from which it is hard to isolate), etc., etc. And, no doubt, the secular Swedish world is quite attractive - I, for one, am comfortable enough about the superiority of the, broadly, "western ways" to believe that, in most cases, they'd be winning in the contest of ideas and modes of being.  You've never been a part of a minority - you simply don't realize how strong the pressure to assimilate is.

However, try forcing assimilation/ modernization, and things change. It doesn't have to happen in the context of migration, of course: perhaps, Turkey might provide the cleanest example here. Several generations of Turkish women have been denied secular university education, due to the "religious" prohibition on wearing hidjab in public schools. In fact, come think of it, this has been, probably, the most effective imaginable policy leading to segregation between the "white Turk" secular elite and the "brown Turk" traditionalist plebs. When policies of this nature get introduced in the west, they only serve to push the migrants into ghettos, where the interaction is minimized and the need to choose between tradition and the outside world is reduced.

Women who attend religious Muslim schools, which are legal and publicly financed in Sweden, are a lot less likely to encounter these societal pressures. This is even more so for the many grown women who have not attended Swedish schools but came here as teenagers or adults and are left at home in their apartements, surrounded only by other Muslim immigrants. If you want to stretch it further - I've done volunteer work as a private tutor for children who fare poorly in a godforsaken area of Stockholm. They are all Muslim immigrants. In fact, it seems like pretty much everyone in their area and in the school are Muslim immigrants. Sure, the teacher might say a few token words about the possibilities for women, just like the teacher might say a few token words about the dangers of smoking. I suspect the peer pressure from those around them will tend to be a stronger force.

Also, Sweden has publicly finances education for immigrants in the native language of their parents, which, combined with their poor education in other subjects, usually means they're better at that language than in Swedish. And any area dominated by Muslim immigrants will also be dominated by the satellite dishes bringing in tv channels in their own native language. Again, I'm not saying all of this is bad. But they do tend to be isolated from the rest of Swedish society and given some of the more unpleasant aspects of the culture they're being isolated in, I think that might well be a bad thing.

----------------------

As regards traditionalist Jews...I'm not really following your point here, to be honest. I agree that some of the things I've said here could be applied to some groups of Orthodox Jews. There are many reasons why I don't think these situations are comparable (everyone was a reactionary racist back in the ninenteenth century and at least many of the Jews did very well in Europe - much better it would seem than the Muslim populations of today (I'm aware this is more a Western European phenomenon than an Eastern European one though)).

The most important point though is that these were never the reasons for persecuting Jews back in those days. At least not that I'm aware of. I've never heard an anti-semitic charge making the point that Jews treated their women badly. And that's been my entire point here.

You say those groups will deal with their happiness themselves - I have no doubt that reactionary structures within those groups will deal adequately with those seeking freedom from it. The girl who was murdeded for having a Swedish boyfriend is fresh in the memory of most Swedes, after all. I just don't think that's a moral stance to take, because I think her right to sexual and romantic freedom was just as strong as mine. (And here there's a good example - I know from firsthand experience that the Chinese community in Sweden is about as conservative and about as isolated as the Muslim one. But none of the Chinese girls I know who got boyfriends against the will of their parents were murdered or abused for it)

How many of the muslim girls you know who got a boyfriend their father disapproved of were tortured or murdered?

[Gustaf]

I think you're libertarian approach to this is naive, because it seems to amount to saying that all choices are equally free and valid. I don't think the choices made within certain cultures are particularly free. I think certain cultures constrain people to an undue degree and I believe society has a role to play in aiding people to break free from those cultures.

<...>
Basically, I don't think the choice of a woman not to work, never be seen and marry a man her parents picked up is as important to respect as the choice not to eat pork or wear funny hats. That might make a racist authoritarian in your eyes, but certainly not in mine.

You don't quite get where I am coming from. I am, first and foremost, selfish: I care a lot more about the society not caring about my own choices, than I care about choices of others ))

On a less selfish note, of course it is true that in many cases within closed communities there is a substantial pressure to conform. However, the fact is, that the outside pressure for integration is, usually, as strong or stronger, even in the absence of anything deliberate on the part of the society as a whole. It is when the society at large tries to force things that the wagons get circled and communities close further.

A woman, growing up in Sweden has every opportunity to join the maintsream. In fact, she is likely to be continuously exposed to that mainstream - through the school system, through the mass culture (from which it is hard to isolate), etc., etc. And, no doubt, the secular Swedish world is quite attractive - I, for one, am comfortable enough about the superiority of the, broadly, "western ways" to believe that, in most cases, they'd be winning in the contest of ideas and modes of being.  You've never been a part of a minority - you simply don't realize how strong the pressure to assimilate is.

However, try forcing assimilation/ modernization, and things change. It doesn't have to happen in the context of migration, of course: perhaps, Turkey might provide the cleanest example here. Several generations of Turkish women have been denied secular university education, due to the "religious" prohibition on wearing hidjab in public schools. In fact, come think of it, this has been, probably, the most effective imaginable policy leading to segregation between the "white Turk" secular elite and the "brown Turk" traditionalist plebs. When policies of this nature get introduced in the west, they only serve to push the migrants into ghettos, where the interaction is minimized and the need to choose between tradition and the outside world is reduced.

Women who attend religious Muslim schools, which are legal and publicly financed in Sweden, are a lot less likely to encounter these societal pressures. This is even more so for the many grown women who have not attended Swedish schools but came here as teenagers or adults and are left at home in their apartements, surrounded only by other Muslim immigrants. If you want to stretch it further - I've done volunteer work as a private tutor for children who fare poorly in a godforsaken area of Stockholm. They are all Muslim immigrants. In fact, it seems like pretty much everyone in their area and in the school are Muslim immigrants. Sure, the teacher might say a few token words about the possibilities for women, just like the teacher might say a few token words about the dangers of smoking. I suspect the peer pressure from those around them will tend to be a stronger force.

Also, Sweden has publicly finances education for immigrants in the native language of their parents, which, combined with their poor education in other subjects, usually means they're better at that language than in Swedish. And any area dominated by Muslim immigrants will also be dominated by the satellite dishes bringing in tv channels in their own native language. Again, I'm not saying all of this is bad. But they do tend to be isolated from the rest of Swedish society and given some of the more unpleasant aspects of the culture they're being isolated in, I think that might well be a bad thing.

----------------------

As regards traditionalist Jews...I'm not really following your point here, to be honest. I agree that some of the things I've said here could be applied to some groups of Orthodox Jews. There are many reasons why I don't think these situations are comparable (everyone was a reactionary racist back in the ninenteenth century and at least many of the Jews did very well in Europe - much better it would seem than the Muslim populations of today (I'm aware this is more a Western European phenomenon than an Eastern European one though)).

The most important point though is that these were never the reasons for persecuting Jews back in those days. At least not that I'm aware of. I've never heard an anti-semitic charge making the point that Jews treated their women badly. And that's been my entire point here.

You say those groups will deal with their happiness themselves - I have no doubt that reactionary structures within those groups will deal adequately with those seeking freedom from it. The girl who was murdeded for having a Swedish boyfriend is fresh in the memory of most Swedes, after all. I just don't think that's a moral stance to take, because I think her right to sexual and romantic freedom was just as strong as mine. (And here there's a good example - I know from firsthand experience that the Chinese community in Sweden is about as conservative and about as isolated as the Muslim one. But none of the Chinese girls I know who got boyfriends against the will of their parents were murdered or abused for it)

How many of the muslim girls you know who got a boyfriend their father disapproved of were tortured or murdered?

But that's not really the point...I never claimed this was a widespread phenomenon touching a majority of Muslims. As a liberal, I think the rights of those individuals who are being abused are in no way increased or decreased by how many others like them there are. But there are wide discrepancies between different ethnic groups when it comes to crime rates. Asian immigrants, for instance, have very low crime rates and very low unemployment and thus Asian migration isn't a huge problem. Among Middleeastern immigrants employment is low and crime is a lot higher.

I have to say that this is precisely one of the issues with the left I mentioned earlier. The left absolutely ADORES structural explanation for individual behaviour. Normally, that is. Just not when it comes to people with darker complexions. Then, suddenly, religion, culture and whathaveyou gets thrown out of the window because it couldn't possible explain any behaviour on the individual level. I'm personally have something of a mix of beliefs on those issues but I find it ridiculous to argue that Muslim (and perhaps more importantly Kurdish/Arabic/Turkish) views on gender, honour and so on do not play a part in some of these events. If a family murders a girl because she slept with a Swedish guy, don't you think the view expoused by the religion and culture where this is approved of played a part? That most Muslims, like most people everywhere, are sane and nice enough not to do such a thing is not something I've ever contested so it doesn't really affect the point I'm making.

[Insula Dei]

I beg to differ on a number of counts.

1) There's a difference between remarking that certain characteristics of Protestantism (the 'Sola Fide' and 'Sola Scriptura' things mainly) encourage religious extremism, or saying that Catholicism's stance on the use of condoms is misguided when iuxtapositioned to the situation in Africa, on the one hand and seemingly believing that Islam encourages high crime rates and huge unemployment on the other hand. While the fact that Islam is the 'religion of submission' might help to explain some of the reasons for the high degree of unemployment ('Inch'Allah'), it can never be the sole reason for such a trend.

2) Yes, we love structural explanations, mainly cause they tend to make sense. There actually have been put forward some of the reasons for the situation of many muslims in Western-Europe in this very thread. The way they have been 'othered' ever since 9/11, which is just an extension of the way we have seen the middle east for centuries. While we never really had a clear vision of the far east beyond the one that's the basis of orientalism, we always have had such an idea of the Near East as a place where, to put it in the words of Disney's  Alladin's theme song, 'they cut of your nose when they don't like your face'. The idea of the Arabic Cultures as being barbarian/heretic/in some other way unpleasant dates back to at least the crusades.

3) Peope always seem to be happy to blame Islam for some characteristics of Middle-Eastern culture in general. I don't think muslim women are less emancipated than those of Hasidic Jews or Armenian Christians.

[Gustaf]

I beg to differ on a number of counts.

1) There's a difference between remarking that certain characteristics of Protestantism (the 'Sola Fide' and 'Sola Scriptura' things mainly) encourage religious extremism, or saying that Catholicism's stance on the use of condoms is misguided when iuxtapositioned to the situation in Africa, on the one hand and seemingly believing that Islam encourages high crime rates and huge unemployment on the other hand. While the fact that Islam is the 'religion of submission' might help to explain some of the reasons for the high degree of unemployment ('Inch'Allah'), it can never be the sole reason for such a trend.

2) Yes, we love structural explanations, mainly cause they tend to make sense. There actually have been put forward some of the reasons for the situation of many muslims in Western-Europe in this very thread. The way they have been 'othered' ever since 9/11, which is just an extension of the way we have seen the middle east for centuries. While we never really had a clear vision of the far east beyond the one that's the basis of orientalism, we always have had such an idea of the Near East as a place where, to put it in the words of Disney's  Alladin's theme song, 'they cut of your nose when they don't like your face'. The idea of the Arabic Cultures as being barbarian/heretic/in some other way unpleasant dates back to at least the crusades.

3) Peope always seem to be happy to blame Islam for some characteristics of Middle-Eastern culture in general. I don't think muslim women are less emancipated than those of Hasidic Jews or Armenian Christians.

I didn't really say that Islam encourages a high crime rate. But I'd love to hear your explanation for why certain immigrant groups display such high crime rates and unemployment rates. And I doubt it is 9/11 - these things were very much present before 2001. And I also don't really buy the otherness. You don't think East Asians have been seen as different? As having cruel barbaric cultures?

On your final point, I'm not sure how you're disagreeing with me. I've pointed out many times that I suspect Middleeastern culture is probably more to blame than religion in many cases. That doesn't really make either of us less racist or othering though, does it?

But just so I get it straight, what is the difference between saying that Christianity is bad and that Islam is bad? I got that the first was ok and the second was racist, but I didn't really follow your reasoning as to why. (because I'm not claiming that Islam is the root of all of society's or even all of Muslims' problems)

[Insula Dei]

But just so I get it straight, what is the difference between saying that Christianity is bad and that Islam is bad? I got that the first was ok and the second was racist, but I didn't really follow your reasoning as to why. (because I'm not claiming that Islam is the root of all of society's or even all of Muslims' problems)

I didn't say that christianity is bad, neither will you ever hear me say so. In part that is because I'm Catholic myself and in part because christianity just isn't 'bad'. The problem is that there are some people out there who appearantly never learnt how to deal with religion in a mature way.

[Gustaf]

But just so I get it straight, what is the difference between saying that Christianity is bad and that Islam is bad? I got that the first was ok and the second was racist, but I didn't really follow your reasoning as to why. (because I'm not claiming that Islam is the root of all of society's or even all of Muslims' problems)

I didn't say that christianity is bad, neither will you ever hear me say so. In part that is because I'm Catholic myself and in part because christianity just isn't 'bad'. The problem is that there are some people out there who appearantly never learnt how to deal with religion in a mature way.

Gotcha. My simple reasoning is that if religion or culture does influence peoples' behaviour then a religion or culture having bad elements is a problem. It may not inherently have bad elements but it's pretty obvious that from the point of view of a liberal democrat like me, islam today is a worse religion than Christianity today. It puzzles me that the left seems to think that pointing this out is racist or should not be allowed because I think it is just as valid as criticizing Catholicism for condom usage in Africa, as per your example.

[Insula Dei]

But just so I get it straight, what is the difference between saying that Christianity is bad and that Islam is bad? I got that the first was ok and the second was racist, but I didn't really follow your reasoning as to why. (because I'm not claiming that Islam is the root of all of society's or even all of Muslims' problems)

I didn't say that christianity is bad, neither will you ever hear me say so. In part that is because I'm Catholic myself and in part because christianity just isn't 'bad'. The problem is that there are some people out there who appearantly never learnt how to deal with religion in a mature way.

Gotcha. My simple reasoning is that if religion or culture does influence peoples' behaviour then a religion or culture having bad elements is a problem. It may not inherently have bad elements but it's pretty obvious that from the point of view of a liberal democrat like me, islam today is a worse religion than Christianity today. It puzzles me that the left seems to think that pointing this out is racist or should not be allowed because I think it is just as valid as criticizing Catholicism for condom usage in Africa, as per your example.

Please cite some bad elements of islam, so we can at least debate substance.

[ag]

Honestly, I just can't figure out the Swedish points here, but let me try ))

1. I fully agree that the government should stay away from religious education: Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Jewish or Flying Spaghetti Monster, for that matter. If the Swedish gov't chooses to pay for religious education - well, that's bad.

2. I don't see what's the problem w/ children learning in whatever language - as long as they are learning whatever the general program prescribes (including the skills in the national language). For that matter, my daughter in Mexico is learning in English at school and speaks Russian at home. She speaks Russian better than Spanish and she reads English better than Spanish. The Spanish teachers are satisfied w/ her progress, though. I do care about her learning Spanish,  I am concerned that she has a slight accent in Spanish, and I would like her to improve. However, if anyone were to try to force me to abandon the other two languages as primary languages of her education, I'd be mad as hell.

BTW, I also teach in English, and have no intention of ever switching to Spanish. I am more comfortable that way, and the university is ok w/ it, and that's all I care about. My own accent in Spanish, after 10 years in the country, is quite heavy. So what?
 
3. I fully agree that any sort of honor killing or, whatever, should be prosecuted - like any other murder. It seems, this is not much of an empirically observed problem (such murders, if they occur at all, are rare and prosecuted).  We also had some sort of a claim, that Muslims force others into workplace segregation - but that, it seems, is also exceedingly rare, if at all happening, so everything seems to be under control.

4. We are also told, that Muslims don't treat women well. For sure, if women (or men) protest, they should be given every help available. They should be given every opportunity to join the mainstream. Do they protest? Is forcing them into better treatment making them any happier? I have no clue, nor do I care to be in a position where I'd have to have a clue.

5. We are told that young children of Muslim migrants do not get opportunity to interact w/ the society at large, so whatever bad things about this culture, it will be preserved by pure isolation. I'd like to see studies showing that. Muslim migration to Sweden is a fairly recent phenomenon, but still, something could be concluded. Overwhelming majority of "unassimilatable" migrant groups in recent history had a lot more trouble preserving their culture, than acquiring the majority culture. There are exceptions: mostly, groups of religious migrants, fleeing persecution. The most obvious examples are the Jews, the German/Dutch Mennonites, the Russian Old Believers, etc. Are Muslims in Sweden more similar to that? Any study?

6. If the latter is the case, and Muslims should be forced to interact, then, ok, what am I, as a Mexican, supposed to do w/ German Mennonites, who've been living in Mexico for 100-150 years, refuse to assimilate, speak bad Spanish (frequently don't write it at all), practice an oppressive religion, which forces women to bear many kids and stay, mostly, at home, denies everyone modern education, frowns at interaction w/ the society at large, etc., etc. ? Very practical question for a Mexican citizen, isn't it? I see those poor kids - they show up in town, sometimes, selling cheese. They are freaks, dressed like it were the 19th century, the look awful, savage. They must lead truly awful lives. What are we to do?  

PS BTW, you are wrong about "some Jewish sects". ALL traditional Judaism was a lot stranger to the then modern world, than modern European Islam. You confuse the modern assimilating "Swedish citizens of Jewish faith" w/ the real Jews. This is a late stage of assimilation - after a millenium of resistance. Of course, nobody cared about Jews mistreating women - Jews treated women better than anyone else around. They mistreated men )) It is the strangeness that was the problem - same as today.

PPS I am not "the left" ) Still less the "Swedish Left" )) I don't care what "the left" thinks, claims, does, whatever.

[Gustaf]

But just so I get it straight, what is the difference between saying that Christianity is bad and that Islam is bad? I got that the first was ok and the second was racist, but I didn't really follow your reasoning as to why. (because I'm not claiming that Islam is the root of all of society's or even all of Muslims' problems)

I didn't say that christianity is bad, neither will you ever hear me say so. In part that is because I'm Catholic myself and in part because christianity just isn't 'bad'. The problem is that there are some people out there who appearantly never learnt how to deal with religion in a mature way.

Gotcha. My simple reasoning is that if religion or culture does influence peoples' behaviour then a religion or culture having bad elements is a problem. It may not inherently have bad elements but it's pretty obvious that from the point of view of a liberal democrat like me, islam today is a worse religion than Christianity today. It puzzles me that the left seems to think that pointing this out is racist or should not be allowed because I think it is just as valid as criticizing Catholicism for condom usage in Africa, as per your example.

Please cite some bad elements of islam, so we can at least debate substance.

The way women are treated. The fact that women in certain Muslim countries are not allowed to drive cars or even be in the same room as men they're not related to. That, in a country like Yemen, you can marry off pre-pubescent girls, some of which who bleed to death after their husband tries to have sex with them. That's a bad element of Islam. Again, it's not necessarily inherently Islamic and I'm aware of that, but the problem is still there.

[Gustaf]

Honestly, I just can't figure out the Swedish points here, but let me try ))

1. I fully agree that the government should stay away from religious education: Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Jewish or Flying Spaghetti Monster, for that matter. If the Swedish gov't chooses to pay for religious education - well, that's bad.

2. I don't see what's the problem w/ children learning in whatever language - as long as they are learning whatever the general program prescribes (including the skills in the national language). For that matter, my daughter in Mexico is learning in English at school and speaks Russian at home. She speaks Russian better than Spanish and she reads English better than Spanish. The Spanish teachers are satisfied w/ her progress, though. I do care about her learning Spanish,  I am concerned that she has a slight accent in Spanish, and I would like her to improve. However, if anyone were to try to force me to abandon the other two languages as primary languages of her education, I'd be mad as hell.

BTW, I also teach in English, and have no intention of ever switching to Spanish. I am more comfortable that way, and the university is ok w/ it, and that's all I care about. My own accent in Spanish, after 10 years in the country, is quite heavy. So what?
 
3. I fully agree that any sort of honor killing or, whatever, should be prosecuted - like any other murder. It seems, this is not much of an empirically observed problem (such murders, if they occur at all, are rare and prosecuted).  We also had some sort of a claim, that Muslims force others into workplace segregation - but that, it seems, is also exceedingly rare, if at all happening, so everything seems to be under control.

4. We are also told, that Muslims don't treat women well. For sure, if women (or men) protest, they should be given every help available. They should be given every opportunity to join the mainstream. Do they protest? Is forcing them into better treatment making them any happier? I have no clue, nor do I care to be in a position where I'd have to have a clue.

5. We are told that young children of Muslim migrants do not get opportunity to interact w/ the society at large, so whatever bad things about this culture, it will be preserved by pure isolation. I'd like to see studies showing that. Muslim migration to Sweden is a fairly recent phenomenon, but still, something could be concluded. Overwhelming majority of "unassimilatable" migrant groups in recent history had a lot more trouble preserving their culture, than acquiring the majority culture. There are exceptions: mostly, groups of religious migrants, fleeing persecution. The most obvious examples are the Jews, the German/Dutch Mennonites, the Russian Old Believers, etc. Are Muslims in Sweden more similar to that? Any study?

6. If the latter is the case, and Muslims should be forced to interact, then, ok, what am I, as a Mexican, supposed to do w/ German Mennonites, who've been living in Mexico for 100-150 years, refuse to assimilate, speak bad Spanish (frequently don't write it at all), practice an oppressive religion, which forces women to bear many kids and stay, mostly, at home, denies everyone modern education, frowns at interaction w/ the society at large, etc., etc. ? Very practical question for a Mexican citizen, isn't it? I see those poor kids - they show up in town, sometimes, selling cheese. They are freaks, dressed like it were the 19th century, the look awful, savage. They must lead truly awful lives. What are we to do?  

PS BTW, you are wrong about "some Jewish sects". ALL traditional Judaism was a lot stranger to the then modern world, than modern European Islam. You confuse the modern assimilating "Swedish citizens of Jewish faith" w/ the real Jews. This is a late stage of assimilation - after a millenium of resistance. Of course, nobody cared about Jews mistreating women - Jews treated women better than anyone else around. They mistreated men )) It is the strangeness that was the problem - same as today.

PPS I am not "the left" ) Still less the "Swedish Left" )) I don't care what "the left" thinks, claims, does, whatever.

1. Fine.

2. I'm not saying it's a problem per se. I even said explicitly in my post that I didn't think that, so I'm not sure why you keep trying to pin fascist opinion on me that I never expressed. There is a policy in Sweden through which the state finances private tutoring for immigrant children in the language of their parents. I'm not necessarily opposed to that policy, but it doesn't seem to be helping integration, nor does it seem to be persecution of the minority, as far as I can see. And part of the problem is that they don't learn Swedish well. They don't manage what the general program prescribes. I've taught many of these kids. They can't solve their math problems because they don't understand the wording of it. In many cases it's quite heartbreaking because it's obvious to me that they're damn well intelligent enough but the environment that they grow up in and study in is terribly destructive.

3. I don't get what point you're making here, to be honest. I never claimed otherwise. I said it was a problem, never that it was a large-scale problem. Of course, I remember reading in the Prospect that honour killing was the most common cause of murder in Turkey. I've no idea as to the accuracy, but the worry is of course that a larger share of Muslims in the population will lead to more of honour killings. Or to their demand for separate, religious-based law (which also exists in a country like Malaysia, for instance) might gain political traction. I'm not one of those fear-mongerers who thinks the Muslims are taking over Europe today (I've even argued against it elsewhere) but it seems to be a problem, even if it isn't a huge one today.

4. There can be many reasons why they don't protest. Again, you can take a libertarian position here, that's fine by me, but you can hardly call the opposing view-point racist. It's commonplace both in the political mainstream and in several academic disciplines to think that individuals can be hampered in their choices by social norms and that it can be an obligation of the state to help individuals break free from such norms. You can oppose it, but calling it racist is frankly offensive to me.

5. Studies have been made in Sweden showing that many of these areas are quite isolated. Of course they are not 100% like their former compatriots in Iraq or Turkey or whatever. That would be a ridiculous claim on my part. And it also varies with specific backgrounds. Iranians are a lot better integrated, since they educate and get jobs to a much larger degree. Take the classmate I told you about earlier. He was born in Sweden. He went to a prestigious high school in the middle of Stockholm where pretty much straight As were required to get in. He still hated the damn Jews who planned 9/11, thought womens' place was at home and couldn't talk proper Swedish. He most definitely couldn't write legible Swedish at all - I know this because we did a couple of projects together. Those friends of his who never left the kind of area he came from - well, they're the kids I come across in my volunteer teaching. They're pretty damn isolated. They have never heard of my university, even though it's one of the better known in Sweden. They hardly know what university studies is. They definitely don't know what economics is. And don't get me started on the boys and how they treat the girls.

But if you don't want to take my word, you could ask Nalin Pekgul, one of the most high-profile politicians with a Middleeastern background in Sweden and leader of the Women's Organization within the Social Democratic party. She moved out of one of these areas with the simple motivation that she didn't want her children to be brought up in such an area, specifically citing the kind of values that get spread there. There has also been a couple of undercover stories done on some of the mosques in these areas and the shocking level of hateful rhetoric that gets spread there.

I fully realize that you can't know much about my Swedish examples. Then again, I don't know much about the details of other European countries either. I would note though, that if I understand correctly I live in a country with a high degree of Muslim immigration (per capita I think one of the highest in the world, excluding countries that are already Muslim, of course) and interact with Muslims on a daily basis whereas you don't?

Anyway, the "Muslims" are obviously a diverse group. I suspect one of the reasons the Iranians do so well is because most of them fled Iran after the shia revolution - thus, they're not particularly religious or conservative. Some have fled religious persecution, some have just fled war in general, like from Lebanon, Kurdistan, Somalia or Iraq.

6. I've no idea what Mexico is to do with a group of people I've never heard of. If they really are oppressed and isolated then perhaps something should be done. I mean, I don't know how much you know about the situation in Sweden, but your mockery leads me to suspect that you're not entirely aware of it. These kids do horribly education-wise. Their grades are absolutely awful. There are schools where the majority of kids aren't passing the requirements for "Gymnasium" (that is the pre-university education that basically everyone in Sweden does). Then after that they don't get jobs, of course. And then many get dragged into crime.

Again, if a group doesn't bother anyone and provide for themselves you would have much more of a point. Then I'm inclined to agree that society should not meddle too much. Or, if you live in a perfect Randian society where you don't have to care one iota about anyone else one way or another, that might also be a valid position. But that's certainly not Western Europe today.

Finally, I'm not only arguing against you, just like you're not only arguing against me. So what I say of the left has nothing to do with you, obviously. You're wrong in another way.

-----------------------

PS: Just to be clear, the way I interpret your argument is that any policy regarding Muslims and Muslim immigration that isn't about accommodating them stems only from the exact same form of racism directed against Jews in Europe over the centuries that eventually culminated in the Holocaust. That's what I disagree with and that's what I'm arguing against. I don't deny that there's an element of that, especially in certain countries (coughAustriacough). But I have friends here in Sweden who have a negative view of Islam and Muslim immigration and who certainly don't have a problem with cultural diversity or anything like that. 

[ag]

If the kids do horribly education-wise in government approved schools, then do something about those schools. It is, clearly, a problem of Swedish educational system - don't pass the blame to the victim.

Yes, I do suggest something like that. More specifically, I suggest that the only reason Jews are no longer treated that way is that, post-Hitler, it is not considered appropriate. Nearly every  argument that I've heard about why Islam and Muslims are bad would apply, with gusto, to traditional Judaism (or, traditional Christianity for that matter). I have no problem w/ that, when it is a matter of private judgement of fundamentalist religion - I am no admirer myself. But the Muslim-batign flavor here is unmistakable.

Until now I did believe - and still believe - that Sweden was different from Austria in this respect. You are rapidly persuading me of the reverse ((

[ag]

But just so I get it straight, what is the difference between saying that Christianity is bad and that Islam is bad? I got that the first was ok and the second was racist, but I didn't really follow your reasoning as to why. (because I'm not claiming that Islam is the root of all of society's or even all of Muslims' problems)

I didn't say that christianity is bad, neither will you ever hear me say so. In part that is because I'm Catholic myself and in part because christianity just isn't 'bad'. The problem is that there are some people out there who appearantly never learnt how to deal with religion in a mature way.

Gotcha. My simple reasoning is that if religion or culture does influence peoples' behaviour then a religion or culture having bad elements is a problem. It may not inherently have bad elements but it's pretty obvious that from the point of view of a liberal democrat like me, islam today is a worse religion than Christianity today. It puzzles me that the left seems to think that pointing this out is racist or should not be allowed because I think it is just as valid as criticizing Catholicism for condom usage in Africa, as per your example.

Please cite some bad elements of islam, so we can at least debate substance.

The way women are treated. The fact that women in certain Muslim countries are not allowed to drive cars or even be in the same room as men they're not related to. That, in a country like Yemen, you can marry off pre-pubescent girls, some of which who bleed to death after their husband tries to have sex with them. That's a bad element of Islam. Again, it's not necessarily inherently Islamic and I'm aware of that, but the problem is still there.

Ok. Women in Iran are allowed to drive cars and allowed to be in the same room w/ men. Does it make Persians Ok?

I can see you problem w/ Saudi Arabia or Yemen - these are awful places. Whatever does it have to do w/ Muslims in Sweden?

[Insula Dei]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is more of a cultural thing, than a religious one. We were talking about how Islam specifically was a religion that obstructed the integration of Muslims in the Western-European society. You might be surprised by how little the muslim community in Western Europe ressembles Saudi Arabia. I am told some don't even beat their wives.

[Gustaf]

But just so I get it straight, what is the difference between saying that Christianity is bad and that Islam is bad? I got that the first was ok and the second was racist, but I didn't really follow your reasoning as to why. (because I'm not claiming that Islam is the root of all of society's or even all of Muslims' problems)

I didn't say that christianity is bad, neither will you ever hear me say so. In part that is because I'm Catholic myself and in part because christianity just isn't 'bad'. The problem is that there are some people out there who appearantly never learnt how to deal with religion in a mature way.

Gotcha. My simple reasoning is that if religion or culture does influence peoples' behaviour then a religion or culture having bad elements is a problem. It may not inherently have bad elements but it's pretty obvious that from the point of view of a liberal democrat like me, islam today is a worse religion than Christianity today. It puzzles me that the left seems to think that pointing this out is racist or should not be allowed because I think it is just as valid as criticizing Catholicism for condom usage in Africa, as per your example.

Please cite some bad elements of islam, so we can at least debate substance.

The way women are treated. The fact that women in certain Muslim countries are not allowed to drive cars or even be in the same room as men they're not related to. That, in a country like Yemen, you can marry off pre-pubescent girls, some of which who bleed to death after their husband tries to have sex with them. That's a bad element of Islam. Again, it's not necessarily inherently Islamic and I'm aware of that, but the problem is still there.

Ok. Women in Iran are allowed to drive cars and allowed to be in the same room w/ men. Does it make Persians Ok?

I can see you problem w/ Saudi Arabia or Yemen - these are awful places. Whatever does it have to do w/ Muslims in Sweden?

Prominent Muslim leaders in Sweden have argued that sharia laws should apply to Muslims, that is different laws applying to different people depending on religion. Then it is obviously a bit worrying to see what that entails in certain countries.

I don't know why you keep using phrases like "Does it make Persians OK?" I never said that certain people are not OK. I feel like you're trying to ascribe certain views and values to me that I do not espouse in order to fit me nicely into your pattern of pre-WWII Nazis.

My point was rather that I have a problem with Islam. I think the problems with Islam influences the behaviour of Muslims. Then again, even that isn't really my argument. My argument is simply that this is possible to believe without being a racist. I find it strange that you would view this as impossible.

Anyway, as for the education system, sure there is a problem. Yet, not everyone fails in this system. The Iranians, Russians, Jews and Chinese to name some do just fine. Better than native Swedes, I believe.

[Gustaf]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is more of a cultural thing, than a religious one. We were talking about how Islam specifically was a religion that obstructed the integration of Muslims in the Western-European society. You might be surprised by how little the muslim community in Western Europe ressembles Saudi Arabia. I am told some don't even beat their wives.

Ok. This is becoming rather frustrating. Until you acknowledge that I pointed this out repeatedly I'm going to assume that I can't reason with you.

[Insula Dei]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is more of a cultural thing, than a religious one. We were talking about how Islam specifically was a religion that obstructed the integration of Muslims in the Western-European society. You might be surprised by how little the muslim community in Western Europe ressembles Saudi Arabia. I am told some don't even beat their wives.

Ok. This is becoming rather frustrating. Until you acknowledge that I pointed this out repeatedly I'm going to assume that I can't reason with you.

Well yeah, but I thought we had agreed that the position of women in the Middle-East had nothing to do with  religion and everything with culture. You explicitly state so in your own post, yet are upset when I point that out and ask you to give me another example, that is a specifical issue of Islam. If you want to argue about specifical problems of Middle-Eastern culture at large don't do so in a thread which explicitly names 'muslim' in its title.

I'm getting irritated because most people have plenty of time to criticize 'Islam', but seem uncapable to give one specific example of the supposed problems of that religion. If you could please direct me to the place (preferably a quote from the Quran) where it is revealed how misogyny is more of an issue with muslims than with Hasidic Jews or other ethnic groups and that can explain that phenomenon from the content of their religion, I'll be mlore than happy to grant you your point.

[ag]

I am afraid, that your attitude to Islam is, mostly, reflective of your lack of knowledge of other faiths )) Judaism is everything Islam is, plus a healthy dosage of nasty xenophobia. As for Christianity.... Well, let me hold off before I am accused of hate speach )) Though, I am an equal opportunity guy. There is, probably, no faith that would be more reactionary and opressive than Tibetan-style Buddhism, and compared w/ caste-obscessed Hinduism, Islam is a veritable Western modernist revolutionary doctrine ) For all these faiths you can find ample examples of fundamentalist sects which preach separation from modernity. Why do you concentrate on Muslims, beats me.

For that matter, you mention approvingly of Russian migrants, without bothering to learn anything about the radically anti-Western, despeakably racist and revoltingly sexist views dominant among them. Is it just  because they are blond and inoffensive looking, almost Swedish in appearance?

And, of course, you don't even have Jews in Sweden. You have some Swedes and other Europeans who happen to be of Jewish faith or of Jewish origin )

But what does any of this have to do w/ migrants from Muslim lands in Sweden?

[ag]

Ok. This is becoming rather frustrating. Until you acknowledge that I pointed this out repeatedly I'm going to assume that I can't reason with you.

It would be a bit easier to discuss this, if you actually made a point that you'd like to discuss ) Because, so far, nothing seems to matter, except "Muslims no good".

[Gustaf]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is more of a cultural thing, than a religious one. We were talking about how Islam specifically was a religion that obstructed the integration of Muslims in the Western-European society. You might be surprised by how little the muslim community in Western Europe ressembles Saudi Arabia. I am told some don't even beat their wives.

Ok. This is becoming rather frustrating. Until you acknowledge that I pointed this out repeatedly I'm going to assume that I can't reason with you.

Well yeah, but I thought we had agreed that the position of women in the Middle-East had nothing to do with  religion and everything with culture. You explicitly state so in your own post, yet are upset when I point that out and ask you to give me another example, that is a specifical issue of Islam. If you want to argue about specifical problems of Middle-Eastern culture at large don't do so in a thread which explicitly names 'muslim' in its title.

I'm getting irritated because most people have plenty of time to criticize 'Islam', but seem uncapable to give one specific example of the supposed problems of that religion. If you could please direct me to the place (preferably a quote from the Quran) where it is revealed how misogyny is more of an issue with muslims than with Hasidic Jews or other ethnic groups and that can explain that phenomenon from the content of their religion, I'll be mlore than happy to grant you your point.

But that's not my point, as I've stated explicitly! It doesn't matter whether it is inherently misogynistic or not. I would say Christianity a couple of centuries ago was decidedly misogynistic. I suspect you would agree. I'm not saying Islam will always be misogynistic.

I would venture to state that the average Muslim is more misogynistic than the average non-Muslim Swede. Of course this in part depends on lack of progress within the cultures that espouse Muslim religion. And it also depends on those cultures (such as Arabic and Kurdish) being misogynistic. What it comes down to is that a religion is largely perceived as what most people professing to believe in it interpret it as. A lot of Muslims clearly interpret their religion as sanctioning misogynistic behaviour, violence against infidels and so on. Back in the days, so did a lot of Christians. Now, most Christians don't, at least not in Western Europe. I know very little of what is written in the Quran. What's written in the Quran isn't really relevant to the point I'm making. The fact that you don't see this tells me that all I've written so far has been in vain, which is depressing...

Anyway, my main point in this thread is that if someone dislikes misogynist people that person might have a negative impression of Islam without being a racist. I'm not necessarily saying that I agree with all of that. Most people don't form their opinions based on advanced historical and sociological analysis, after all.

[Gustaf]

I am afraid, that your attitude to Islam is, mostly, reflective of your lack of knowledge of other faiths )) Judaism is everything Islam is, plus a healthy dosage of nasty xenophobia. As for Christianity.... Well, let me hold off before I am accused of hate speach )) Though, I am an equal opportunity guy. There is, probably, no faith that would be more reactionary and opressive than Tibetan-style Buddhism, and compared w/ caste-obscessed Hinduism, Islam is a veritable Western modernist revolutionary doctrine ) For all these faiths you can find ample examples of fundamentalist sects which preach separation from modernity. Why do you concentrate on Muslims, beats me.

For that matter, you mention approvingly of Russian migrants, without bothering to learn anything about the radically anti-Western, despeakably racist and revoltingly sexist views dominant among them. Is it just  because they are blond and inoffensive looking, almost Swedish in appearance?

And, of course, you don't even have Jews in Sweden. You have some Swedes and other Europeans who happen to be of Jewish faith or of Jewish origin )

But what does any of this have to do w/ migrants from Muslim lands in Sweden?

My point doesn't relate to Muslim faith. I feel like I've repeated this infinitely many times by now. I would say most Jews and most Christians today do not hold particularly oppressive views towards women. I gave you a pretty good example - there are several Muslim societies where oppression of women is part of the law. There is a lot less of that in Jewish or Christian countries. (at least in a Western European context). That Christianity was as bad as Islam in this or any other sense (or worse for that matter) 100 or 500 years ago isn't relevant to my point. Just like the fact that Arab society was wonderfully tolerant 1000 years ago isn't relevant to my point either.

I don't think I spoke approvingly of Russian migrants. I dislike Russia as a nation (I'm Swedish after all, but, again that's not relevant to anything).

I'm frankly getting a bit sick of this. You keep insinuating things about me and my views without bothering to listen to what I'm actually saying. Why the hell would I care about whether people are blond and Swedish-looking? I have a Chinese girlfriend. I never said anything demanding that people be blue-eyed or white-skinned. You assume that I don't know that Russia is a country with deplorable values in many respects. You keep assuming that I'm a racist idiot and then attacking views that I would hold if I had them.

If you want to believe that all the atheist, liberal Swedes and Dutch and whoever who oppose Muslim immigration are just waiting for their opportunity to gas all non-Aryans, fine. I must assume you have some compelling reason for wishing to believe this.

[Insula Dei]

If you want to believe that all the atheist, liberal Swedes and Dutch and whoever who oppose Muslim immigration are just waiting for their opportunity to gas all non-Aryans, fine. I must assume you have some compelling reason for wishing to believe this.

No, but you (if you count yourself among those atheist, liberal Swedes?) want to limit their freedom to stand and go and live where they want, based on the fact that some of them don't share your values. A lot of people also are spewing rhetoric that makes the atmosphere of society grow sour. Whatever that is, it's hardly liberal. It also is something I'm vehemently opposed to. If I engage in debate here it's not because I desperately want to win a debate but because to speak out is the only option that I see as being a possible counterreaction.

[ag]

If you want to believe that all the atheist, liberal Swedes and Dutch and whoever who oppose Muslim immigration are just waiting for their opportunity to gas all non-Aryans, fine. I must assume you have some compelling reason for wishing to believe this.

I don´t. Neither do I believe that most "Aryan" citizens of the 3rd Reich wanted to do this, for that matter. But, I must say, I have a rather negative impression of many  "liberal Swedes' and Dutch" views on the matter: sort of, similar to your views of Islam, I guess ))

Off to a meeting on how to increase foreign migration INTO Mexico. Will respond to the rest later ))

[Gustaf]

If you want to believe that all the atheist, liberal Swedes and Dutch and whoever who oppose Muslim immigration are just waiting for their opportunity to gas all non-Aryans, fine. I must assume you have some compelling reason for wishing to believe this.

No, but you (if you count yourself among those atheist, liberal Swedes?) want to limit their freedom to stand and go and live where they want, based on the fact that some of them don't share your values. A lot of people also are spewing rhetoric that makes the atmosphere of society grow sour. Whatever that is, it's hardly liberal. It also is something I'm vehemently opposed to. If I engage in debate here it's not because I desperately want to win a debate but because to speak out is the only option that I see as being a possible counterreaction.

Where the hell do you get that? Where on this thread have I proposed limiting the freedom of Muslims to stand and go and live where they want?

I have defended the right to wear a veil though. I did so on this forum within the past year. I've actually even debated that issue in front of several hundred people a couple of year ago. I remember the Belgian EU bureaucrat who watched (and who obviously supported the ban on "religious symbols") was very displeased that I referred to the other side as fascists. My team won though - the audience voted with us.

I have to admit though, if you think that I want to restrict peoples' freedom of movement I feel like I've been banging my head against a wall throughout this entire thread. Because I don't. You and ag simply wants to make everything fit nicely into your black-and-white preconceptions by assuming that anyone who disagrees with your respective position must be racist. I have to say that I find that a bit offensive.

(and I'm not an atheist...so I certainly don't include myself in that number, no)