A Racism Of The Anti-Racists
That's multiculturalism, writes Pascal Bruckner, in a fantastic piece about how Ayaan Hirsi Ali is condemned by Ian Buruma and Timothy Garton Ash for committing "an unpardonable offence" -- for taking democratic principles seriously.
To the multicultis, Hirsi Ali's offense is daring to speak out against the backwardness and barbarianism commanded by the Quran, and to daring demand the end of female circumcision and the vile treatment of women under Islam. Bruckner writes, in a long piece at signandsight:
Multiculturalism is a racism of the anti-racists: it chains people to their roots. Thus Job Cohen, mayor of Amsterdam and one of the mainstays of the Dutch state, demands that one accept "the conscious discrimination of women by certain groups of orthodox Muslims" on the basis that we need a "new glue" to "hold society together." In the name of social cohesion, we are invited to give our roaring applause for the intolerance that these groups show for our laws. The coexistence of hermetic little societies is cherished, each of which follows a different norm. If we abandon a collective criterion for discriminating between just and unjust, we sabotage the very idea of national community. A French, British or Dutch citizen will be prosecuted for beating his wife, for example. But should the crime go unpunished if it turns out that the perpetrator is a Sunni or Shiite? Should his faith give him the right to transgress the law of the land? This is the glorification in others of what we have always beaten ourselves up about: outrageous protectionism, cultural narcissism and inveterate ethnocentrism!This tolerance harbours contempt, because it assumes that certain communities are incapable of modernising. Could it be that the dissidence of British Muslims is not only a function of the retrograde rigorism of their leaders, but also stems from a vague suspicion that all the consideration show to them by the state is little more than a subtle form of disdain, basically telling them that they are just too backward for modern civilisation ? Several communes in Italy are planning to reserve certain beaches for Muslim women, so they may bathe unexposed to male eyes. And within a few years the first "Islamic hospital," complying in all points with the prescriptions of the Koran, may open in Rotterdam. Anyone would think we are reliving the days of segregation in the southern United States. Yet this segregation has the full backing of Europe's most prominent progressives! Theirs is a fight on two fronts: minorities must be protected from discrimination (for example by encouraging the teaching of regional languages and cultures and adapting the school calendar to religious holidays); and private individuals must be protected from intimidation by the community in which they live.
Finally, one last argument militates against Anglo-Saxon multiculturalism: on the government's own avowal it doesn't work. Not content to have serves as an asylum for Jihad for years on end, with the dramatic consequences known to all, the United Kingdom must admit today that its social model based on communitarianism and separatism doesn't work.
...How could we tolerate in Islam that which we no longer tolerate in Catholicism? Secularism, which incidentally is written into the Gospels, is based on a few simple principles: freedom of religious affiliation, peaceful coexistence, neutrality of the public space, respect of the social contract, and the common acceptance that religious laws are not above civil ones but reside in the hearts of believers. France, said the philosopher Hannah Arendt, treated its colonies both as brothers and subjects. Happily, the time of colonies is over. But the republican egalitarian ideal postulates that all human beings have the same rights, independently of their race, sex and confession. This ideal is far from being realised. It is even in crisis, as the riots of November 2005 proved. Nevertheless it seems to be a better guiding light than the questionable worship of diversity.
We get this all the time with leftie visitors to Israel.
No peace agreement will ever be enforceable as long as an international chorus of "progressives" excuses any and all Palestinian behavior.
Asking these "progressives" how we are supposed to actually live next to the Palis - besides "feeling their pain" and self-negating ad infinitum - results in blank stares.
Ben David at January 1, 2011 11:44 PM
While I appreciate the exploration of the double-standards that allow Muslims to get away with things that we wouldn't tolerate from anyone else, the racism of anti-racists is nothing new.
How do you think Obama got elected? Do you actually believe that the Democrats would even consider a white candidate who spent 20 years as a faithful congregant of a white supremacist's church? Especially when he has his epiphany about the divisive nature of his pastor's rhetoric just when he happens to be running for president?
Yet they actually become outraged when someone like Glenn Beck suggests (accurately) that Obama has a deep-seated hatred of white people.
Liberals are so full of shit. Racism is only wrong to them when it's directed against someone who ISN'T white. Or at the very least, they have a much greater threshold of what they'll tolerate when it's directed toward whites. (Clinton actually directed some ire at Sister Souljah's suggestion that blacks should take a break from killing each other and kill whites.)
Regarding fundy-Muslims, I'm fine with them here. However, we're not making tolerances for their barbaric practices. You wish to circumcise your daughter? You so much as announce your intention to do so, you'll be charged with child abuse and your daughter will be placed in foster care and she'll get the best foster parents that can be found for her, who will not necessarily be Muslims.
Your wife (you only get one) will not wear a burqa and she will have the same rights as you. If you attempt "discipline" in the form of beatings, you'll be charged with domestic battery and your religion will not be your defense. Honor killings will get you charged with first degree murder.
You want to live here? Then do so, but you will live in the 21st century or brave the consequences.
Patrick at January 2, 2011 5:21 AM
Patrick, it took a long time for me to recognize the inherent racism in leftism's approach to minority groups. But it might actually be the worst kind of racism. The KKK could never in their wildest dreams have thought that they would ever destroy the black family the way that leftist welfare and entitlement have. It strikes me that the demands in Europe to accommodate radical Islam are essentially the same as the American Left's implied demand that we accept welfare-motherism as being "normal" for blacks. In both cases, the assumption being pushed by the leftists is that the people in question are genetically incapable of living up to Western standards.
Cousin Dave at January 2, 2011 7:50 AM
The soft bigotry of low expectations. Makes leftists feel better because it gives them someone to control, which is what they really need to feel fulfilled in life.
brian at January 2, 2011 8:25 AM
I think many "progressives" despise their own cultures, and fear their own fellow-citizens, to such an extent that they are willing to align with any other culture, no matter how depraved, in an alliance against same.
david foster at January 2, 2011 9:07 AM
"How could we tolerate in Islam that which we no longer tolerate in Catholicism?
Cowardice. The Catholics aren't going to kill the creator of the piss Christ. The anti-Mohammed cartoonists get death threats.
MarkD at January 2, 2011 9:12 AM
This? Would be The Big Lie.
If you are going to move to the UK, Sweden, The US... why do you want to do that if you don't wish to become Brittish, Swedish or American? There are Legal and Cultural norms that you will have to accept to live in a place, If you don't like them, THEN DON'T MOVE THERE.
But, if you DO move there, and then you DEMAND that you bring your own norms, and laws, even if they violate the laws of the new land...
It is pretty clear then, that you are trying to conquer and convert that land from the inside. You are doing with stealth what you could nver hope to do with war. Oddly enough there seem to be plenty of self loathing sheeple to help you out.
I don't see how my logic is flawed there. And yet most progressives will assert that this cannot possibly be true.
SwissArmyD at January 2, 2011 10:03 AM
Cousin Dave: In both cases, the assumption being pushed by the leftists is that the people in question are genetically incapable of living up to Western standards.
Do you think the left's assumptions are truly genetic or is it perhaps just rigorous adherence to culture and the left self-righteous demands that we accept it? Not that I think quarter should be given either way, but it might gain more traction if they argued for the cultural aspect rather than assume that minorities are innately inferior...because the latter is a textbook example of racism.
My own thought is, if lightning is going to strike, it isn't going to decide, well this person has had it difficult and is an underprivileged minority, so I'll strike the rich white guy instead.
Nature does not make allowances. Neither should we.
And if people want to live in America, then they can live like Americans. No allowances for 7th century barbaric customs. They can honor their culture only to the extent that it doesn't conflict with our laws.
Patrick at January 2, 2011 11:07 AM
"Happily, the time of colonies is over."
Not really, colonies still exist. Now the former imperialists are letting themselves be colonized.
Immigration? No, its outright migration with no assimilation at all, because there is little need to. The immigrant rallies a few years ago in various state capitals on may day or whatever were a wake up call for anyone paying attention. Sadly many were not. The truth was broadcast until a few PR flacks told the immigrant protesters/supporters that waving the Mexican flag while crying for rights wasn't helping their cause here in the USA.
Its like me the typical gringo going down to Mexico City (or Stockholm or Tokyo) and starting a parade while waving the stars n' stripes and chanting for more rights while spitting on Mexico's culture/laws.
Sio at January 2, 2011 1:19 PM
An "interesting" side effect of the Left's views is that Christians are one of the groups they [frequently] choose to subjugate into second place status. While this violates their fundamental law that all cultures/religion/people must be treated equally it never seems to apply to Christians. I'm guessing that this is because Christians are frequently identified as conservative voters. And let's face it, there's no one that those "enlightened" folks on the Left H-A-T-E more than conservatives!
The opening of this video by Canadian broadcaster, Michael Coren, drives the point home very succinctly.
Robert W. (Vancouver) at January 2, 2011 6:11 PM
This is really disappointing to me. The thought that some pig of a man could wipe out his own family just because he wants a new one is sad to me. Especially when there are laws that protect animals better than people here. For example, in my county (in rural indiana, no less), as of 2008, you are not allowed to kill any livestock you raise in certain areas of the county. For example, on the edge of town limits, you are allowed to keep a certain number of poultry birds and perhaps a pig. But, if you want to eat them, they have to be taken further into the county to be slaughtered (it's too cruel to do in your garage, after all). Even if you belong to some off the wall commune that believes in the honor killing of a chicken to guarantee you a place in heaven next to Colonel Sanders, you will go to jail, religion be damned. But we let a dominating muslim man murder his children in the name of religion and he gets to go about his business? We need to get our country back. If you get off that boat, you need to abide by the laws where you land, period.
Jessica at January 3, 2011 4:55 AM
What makes me uncomfortable is the idea that one can agree to sign one's rights away.
For example, if both parties agree, they can get married and divorced in Islamic courts. Obviously, this is not so hot for the women. On the one hand, if people want to sign their rights away, that is their business... on an individual level. But when you've got a whole lot of people doing just that, it gets scary.
Especially when you start having kids born into it. A little Muslim girl doesn't get equal rights because she is born into the wrong family? Messed up.
NicoleK at January 3, 2011 6:58 AM
"Do you think the left's assumptions are truly genetic or is it perhaps just rigorous adherence to culture and the left self-righteous demands that we accept it?"
Patrick, that's a good question. But I think I'm going to stick with my assumption. Reason why: look at what happens when someone comes along that violates the Left's perception of how people of that person's ethnic group ought to behave. When I lived in Florida, one of my co-workers was a black guy from Jamaica. He was a great guy, smart and well-spoken, with that sort of island-British accent that a lot of people from the Caribbean have. He used to tell me about how American lefties would accuse him of not being "authentically" black; they would actually demand to know if he was of mixed race or had a white parent because "you obviously aren't a 'blood".
Cousin Dave at January 3, 2011 10:43 AM
"The KKK could never in their wildest dreams have thought that they would ever destroy the black family the way that leftist welfare and entitlement have."
Repeat that.
1850: Blacks do not marry, work only when they are told, have no education. Are forbidden to do so by the powers that be.
2010: Blacks may marry, large numbers do not, are told they do not have to work or get an education. Are discouraged from coming off welfare because that would lower the budget of the agency.
This is touted as some kind of fairness because you don't have to be black to be a single mother of four. Funny how the numbers work, though.
When you can satisfy people by letting them speak (trumpet those 1st Amendment rights!), you discharge any tendency they might have to actually do something.
Radwaste at January 4, 2011 7:27 AM
Leave a comment