Minaret ban: Switzerland is no more racist than anywhere else
Posted on Monday 30 November, 2009
Filed Under International
I KNOW where Christoph Blocher lives. The billionaire leader of the Schweizerische Volkspartei owns a substantial property – it would probably be fair to call it a castle – that can clearly be seen from the cable car linking Rhäzüns to Feldis, the alpine village where my mother’s ashes have been reburied next to those of her brother and sister.
The SVP, of course, has been the driving force behind the referendum that has seen voters back the call for a constitutional proscription on the construction of minarets on Swiss mosques. Take that as further evidence that Blocher is pushing Swiss politics towards the right, on the back of the growth of a certain ugly xenophobia in a country that has always presented itself as the very model of a successful multinational state.
The Swiss economy has always made use of many seasonal guest workers, and one of my uncles took on Muslims from Turkey and Yugoslavia as well as Catholic Italians at his door factory. Although they had no rights to speak of – they had to return to their country of origin each year – I don’t recall racism being an issue in the 1960s. There was certainly no problem with employees dating the boss’s daughters, for instance. Two of my cousins even married the guys.
Marriage to a Swiss citizen confers the right of residence, and slowly the number of Swiss Muslims began to grow. In 1970 there were just 16,000; today, thanks to a liberalisation of the restrictions on work permits and the arrival fairly sizeable numbers of refugees from Bosnia and Albania, the total stands at 400,000.
As a Swiss national and a fairly regular visitor, I am well aware that the Zwinglian-dominated Germanophone part of the country is naturally conservative on social issues, and unlike some commentators, I am not surprised that the minaret ban won through. But it isn’t necessarily evidence that Switzerland is any more (or any less) racist than anywhere else.
While the decision was clearly the wrong one, the significance may not be that great in practice. There are some 150 mosques and Muslim prayer rooms, all still accorded freedom of worship in accordance with the standards of liberal democracy.
But it is the symbolism is worrying. One day a rightwing populist party, perhaps with mass repatriation as part of its platform, will surely win an election and form a government somewhere in western Europe. That’s when the social fabric will be tested.
<<Go back
Comments
84 Responses to “Minaret ban: Switzerland is no more racist than anywhere else”
Here is the range of opinions at Socialist Unity’ and is SO-O-O disappointing!
http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=4939#comments
Someone tried to interest the readers of SU in the issue of WHERE is the icepick used to kill Trotsky in Mexico City – it was, supposedly, offered for sale not so long ago – but there was little or no interest in so significant a historical artefact.
On the joys of elections and their results, from the absurd micro-world of Sark:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/dec/01/barclay-brothers-lose-appeal-sark-constitution
Is that the same johng who contributes to SOCIALIST UNITY or someone else?
Mental am I? Don’t make me laugh. How the anti-democracy shower expose themselves, frothing at the mouth about a decision taken in another country. Yes, how dare the Swiss refuse to be ‘multicultural’ and how dare they refuse to endorse unmitigated free trade! How dare they disagree with the great and the good. I didn’t upport the IRA, or Irish terrorism in general, but you’ve got to hand it to the Irish, they did issue warnings before they detonated their bombs. (I think they still do.).
Free speech? What’s that? It’s allowing people to express political or religious opinions that you may not hold yourself. Dave T, in the years I have known him through Harry’s Place (never met him in person) has been a consistent liberal, I sometimes think he is too liberal for his country’s good, but then that’s me a mental patient.
Interesting that SimonH uses religious language to suggest a ‘punishment’ for Andrew Coates (who I have known personally for many years): he suggests he should be ‘excommunicated’. But, Andrew is not and has never been a Catholic. I happen to know that his mother’s family were of good Hugenot stock. His immediate nuclear family were the backbone of the Bounds Green Humanist Society, so I don’t think the Pope has got anything to do with it.
I see some tame committee of the UN has called this ban ‘discriminatory’. When are they going to take up the plight of Christians and minority religions in the Islamic world? They’re not…what a surprise.
By the way Simonh, the normal phrase in the labour movement for shunning a transgressor is ‘sent to Coventry’. As Andrew has already lived in Coventry (he attended Warwick University), I don’t know what he will feel about returning there. He might welcome the chance.
Seems like Sue R and Bill Corr are an item.
They appear to be providing the definition of ‘Islamophobia’ that we’ve been anticipating for a long while.
Sue R. deserves to be sentenced to attend a few illegal Christian services in Saudi Arabia. Once the thrill of virtuous illegality has worn off and the boredom and embarrassment kick in the minutes begin to seem like hours.
Being in someone’s front room on a compound while people hold hands in a circle and say nice things about God is not to everyone’s taste.
Nor is being in the stock-room of a tyre warehouse while the same long prayers are gone through in Tagalog, Tamil and various south Indian languages.
A few years ago someone leaving the country was caught at an airport with video recordings of such services and various periods of imprisonment were awarded.
Nobody gained a martyr’s crown, though.
Sue,
I was referring to your treatment of Dean on the previous thread when I called you mental, and your response to Ann on seemed to another example of your misleading style.
You said,
“I see some tame committee of the UN has called this ban ‘discriminatory’. When are they going to take up the plight of Christians and minority religions in the Islamic world? They’re not…what a surprise.”
So the UN is a bastion of Islamic interests is it Sue, biased against the Western world is it? And I suppose the EU is a Germanic-Franco conspiracy.
Why then is the UN not imposing sanctions on Israel for its nuclear programme but threatening Iran with all sorts of things?
Why has the UN not put on trial one single war criminal of US imperialism?
Have you not heard of the UN human rights index or seen any of its reports or are you just building up straw men to justify far right attacks on Muslims?
I think your comment is proof that some of those imperialist apologists are indeed anti Muslim with far right sympathies, as many of us suspected.
And on the democracy front, yes we shouldn’t ignore that this was a majority vote, however that doesn’t mean it legitimises the action in our eyes. We, therefore, should work to persuade people to our position. That for the left should be where the debate begins.
I mean what was your reaction to the Californian proposition 8?
Marko,
Do you always use the word “mental” to insult people?
Haven’t you ever thought that mental distress is not a joking matter and certainly shouldn’t be used as an insult.
A word to the wise, eh?
Who’s experiencing a logic failure round here? Soomeone who extrapolates my attitude towards same-sex marriage from my opinions on mass immigration. Your prejudices are showing, mate. Isn’t free and frank discussion just that? Why do you Respect/Green/SWP lot always descend into vitriol and personal abuse at the drop of a hat? Is it because you haven’t got the politics? The other day I commented on Andrew Coates blog on a piece he had written about the fallacies of Terry Ramadam. All I said was that I had been cheered up immensely by the strike in Turkey by public sector workers’ demanding the right to strike. I was stunned to see that I was replied to by ‘ramadan’ telling me that I had problems. How come a great scholar has time to trawl the further reaches of the blogosphere? Interesting though, Islamacists don’t mind what attacks you make on their ideology, they are well insulated from that by their own sense of religous righteousness, but confront them with reality and politics and they blow a gasket. Go figure (as the Yanks say). By the way, in opening the link to ‘ramadam’, my computer was infected with a virus, so don’t try this at home.
Sue,
Your dishonesty is quite astonishing.
I brought up proposition 8 because of your argument that the Swiss vote was democratic and this somehow should make it acceptable to the left.
Let me remind you of your quote again,
“How the anti-democracy shower expose themselves, frothing at the mouth about a decision taken in another country”.
My attitude to propostion 8 was despair, just the same as my attitude to the Swiss ban on Minarets.
Your attitude to the Swiss story was “that’s democracy, accept it” but your position on proposition 8 seems to be “forget democracy, this is an injustice”. Therefore it is your prejudice that is being exposed.
Just to remind you of my comment again,
“And on the democracy front, yes we shouldn’t ignore that this was a majority vote, however that doesn’t mean it legitimises the action in our eyes. We, therefore, should work to persuade people to our position. That for the left should be where the debate begins.
I mean what was your reaction to the Californian proposition 8?”
Notice how I start the sentence with on the democracy front??????
You really are an embarrassment and quite loopy.
Marko: Who’s ‘we’? Are you claiming that the refusal to allow same=sex marriage will lead to the murder of gays and the burning down of their clubs? The people who claim that no being allowed to build minets in Switerland is an attack on freedom of religion, need to explain how come that the Swiss are not shutting down mosques? Shouting hysterically at people and calling them silly names isn’t going to convince any reasonable person of anything. I’m sorry I embaress you. That’s the sort of thing I expect my kids to say. Can’t you come up with a more intellectual insult than that?
By the way, when it comes to human rights, let’s not forget that the Muslim countries don’t subscribe to the UN Declaration, they have their own ‘The Cairo Declaration’ that interprets human rights through Islamic dogma.
Bill Corr: I am not a Christian, I just believe that people should have the right of freedom of conscience, a good old fashioned socialist value.
“The people who claim that no being allowed to build minets in Switerland is an attack on freedom of religion, need to explain how come that the Swiss are not shutting down mosques? “
Let me have a go then.
Firstly, let me state that I assume that most here would oppose the English Defence League, even when they use these types of issues?
Secondly, socialists, feminists and other progressives have long been aware that right-wing groups will use provocative measures to stir up xenophobia and push their own agendas, and nowadays we shouldn’t forget that.
Thirdly, socialists and others should be able to see the similarities between the EDL’s actions and the Swiss People’s party (SVP). Any cursory investigation of the SVP would indicate their right-wing nature.
Finally, if you can see through the provocative actions and racial shit stirring when the EDL does it, then isn’t it obvious that the SVP are doing similar?
So Sue R, taking your main point.
The SVP doesn’t have to have a plan to close down all mosques, it could be trying out piecemeal measures to intimidate and alienate Muslims. Equally, it could be ad hoc, what is clear is that, from the evidence, a climate of fear and intimidation is facing Muslims in Switzerland.
Thus, it is beholden to socialists and others to support religious freedom and freedom of religious expression in this instance.
I hope that explains it sufficiently?
Will Bill Corr take his defence of ethnic expulsion and single-ethnicity states to its logical conclusion? I mean, why stop at the examples given?
Why not let the Poles boot out the few remaining Jews from Poland? After all, if Hitler couldn’t finish the job properly, how about Mr Corr advocating its completion? Then there’s all those Russians in Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. And what about all those non-Russians in Russia?
Yugoslavia surely hasn’t gone far enough: there are still Serbs and Croats in Bosnia-Hercegovina; a few Serbs left in Kosovo; and all manner of non-Serbs in Serbia.
And what about those people with no specific ethnically-defined homeland: say, the Roma of Romania, Czechoslovakia and Hungary (I imagine that Mr Corr’s pals there have some ideas on the subject); the Kurds of Syria, Turkey, Iran and Iraq?
And as this thread started with Switzerland; why, we can’t have that: three different people, each with their own language. Are the German Swiss to boot out the French and Italian Swiss, or will it be the French ones booting out the rest, or the Italians, etc?
Finally, why should Mr Corr worry so much about the South African Whites? They aren’t exactly the original inhabitants, are they?
Exaggerating anyone’s argument for comic effect is called ‘reductio ad absurdum;’ at present the Swiss get along just fine with their interesting mix of French, German, Italian and hillbilly Latin. This is because of their intelligence and political maturity.
Sad to say, the Belgians and Canadians get along with one another rather less fine. Despite this, Third Worlders of every hue are eager to squeeze into both countries. If one’s coming from Somalia, a little armed gang warfare in Toronto is hardly a disincentive to a determined would-be immigrant.
KURDISTAN
It is now well over two years since I was in Erbil / Hawler under the Kurdish flag but a map on display there – on every second lamp-post in the city – showed a greater Kurdistan with an outlet to the Mediterranean. All the Kurds need to do is establish a really unified political entity in Erbil, grab a little more of Iraq, including the Mosul oilfields, dismember Turkey, Syria and Iran [plus seize a slice of detached Azebaijani territory] and they’re sound.
THE ROMA
Links given here don’t work, so Dr Paul can check out for himself what JOBBIK in Hungary and ATAKA in Bulgaria think of Roma. ATAKA has an English-language website.
When anyone’s car, motorcycle, bicycle, fridge or telly goes missing in Bulgaria, the police often check the local Roma ‘mahala’ to see if the missing item might, somehow, have found its way there.
Some Czechs suggesting repatriating the Roma in the Czech Republic to India, their original homeland having been Sind and Gujerat and Rajasthan, but this was probably meant as a leaden-footed Central European joke of sorts.
SOUTH AFRICA
The first inhabitants were the Hottentots / Bushmen. The Bantu came down from the north within the early European historical period in southern Africa. As in the Americas and the Antipodes, sheer weight of numbers guaranteed victory to those with most feet on the ground. The Bantu have the upper hand.
Some of the comments on this thread totally vindicate my hostility to the pro war left. (Though for once Modernity has provided the best analysis)
It is a demonstrable fact that a far right Europe wide coordinated attack on Muslims is taking place, of which the Minaret ban is an early victory and a huge warning sign to socialists. It matters not that said Muslim is ‘moderate’ or a ‘fundamentalist’ or is a man or a women, adult or child, all that matters is that these people are different and their skins are dark.
The positions taken in response to this by the likes of Andrew Coates and SueR would make it impossible for any socialist group worth its salt to allow them to continue as members within its ranks. They would have to be told to take their free speech elsewhere; it is that black and white.
See that’s what I am on about, condescending ultralefts such as JimD, unable to contain his own petty hatred he mixes invective and bile when what he should be doing is trying to argue, logically, reasonably and with the degree of thought.
If you spend your life shouting at other socialists then you’ll end up like the WRP, a pile of isolated cranks, incapable of building anything or talking to anyone outside of their protective bubble. That approach leads to failure.
If your intent, however, is to fight xenophobia and racism then a less adversarial approach to other socialists, etc is required, shouting at people doesn’t make them take your argument seriously.
It has nothing to do with petty hatred but a fundmental point of principle. No socialist organisation could accept the ‘arguments’ put forward by SueR, Andrew Coates or Bill Corr or Nick griffin.
Typical as an ultraleftist, JimD is quick to disregard other socialists, without even arguing with them, the Heallities use to do similar things, and all that was left in their wake is wreckage and division.
I assumed the obvious reason is that the contemporary political climate doesn’t educate young socialists in the necessity to argue their politics, rather the SWPerisation of things has meant that shouting slogans, picking unnecessary fights and looking out for ‘heretics’ becomes the norm.
And yes, have a look at the state of the British Left, it is small, fragmented and a shadow of its former self (which at the time 30 years ago wasn’t very big at all). Hardly a great tactical success, eh ?
So if you are truly against racism and xenophobia then you’re obligated to argue with fellow socialists and others about politics, put aside the petty politics of denunciation and try to build something positive. That’s the way, build some big, something meaningful.
Denunciations lead only to the WRP school of political failure.
I do not understand why arch-secularist Andrew Coates is happy for the bourgeois state to impose religious restrictions. Is there an aspect of the separation between ‘church’ and state that I have missed?
I simply do not follow Sue R’s line of reasoning at all, other than it appears she treats all Muslims as a unified block. Thus the actions of Islamic states become relevant to a discussion of the Swiss state’s restrictions on Islamic religious buildings.
JimD. You are clearly out of touch with reality. Do you expect people not to react to other people strapping bombs on their bodies and blowing themselves up hoping to kill many in the process. And all for something that does not exist. Perhaps JiMD YOUR FORM OF SOCIALISM IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS ISLAM. The brainwashing and control of the human being.
Hang on, James Glasgow, what has the action of suicide bombers got to do with right-wing antagonism towards Muslims? And when did JimD bring up the matter of religious terrorism?
For xenophobes and racists the connection is clear – ‘they’, the ‘other’, do bad things. That’s considered a good argument in racist circles.
That states, parties and fringe groups justify their actions in the name of a particular religion is true, but that does not mean that all co-religionists are therefore responsible for those actions.
How that (nonsense) reasoning justifies a state ban (or tight restriction) on particular religious buildings is something that only a racist ‘understands’.
Take away this idea of collective guilt, and you see nothing but ugly xenophobia. You don’t need to be a socialist to see that.
Lobby. It has nothing to do with right or left wing antagonism. It is just that people observe what is happening. The practical reality of religious brainwashed people. Islam is a political religious dictatorship. They do not deny it. They have their agenda. Just like the looney left and right. Seems they all have one thing in common. Dictatorship!
“The other day I commented on Andrew Coates blog on a piece he had written about the fallacies of Terry Ramadam. All I said was that I had been cheered up immensely by the strike in Turkey by public sector workers’ demanding the right to strike. I was stunned to see that I was replied to by ‘ramadan’ telling me that I had problems. How come a great scholar has time to trawl the further reaches of the blogosphere?”
Has Sue R completely lost her marbles? Does she seriously think that Tariq Ramadan posts comments on Andrew Coates’ blog?
Islam is a political religious dictatorship.
Who is this nutjob that has started posting on here?
I suppose all Jews are engaged in a worldwide conspiracy as well?
I think Jimmy Glesga is a friend of Modernity, I was taking Jimmy to task for his right wing statements but Modernity lept to his defence and surprise surprise called me a middle class ultralefists for doing so.
I have since watched in amusement as the bile spews forth from Jimmy’s keyboard.
Remember folks, this guy is a trade union activist, though unlike one I have ever met!
JamesT,
You are an illiterate gobshite.
I didn’t leap to anyone’s defence.
And if you read my comments with any care, I am against the ban, I am against any xenophobic attacks on Muslims in Switzerland.
I’ll repeat because, as a Labour Party member and would-be Marxist, you seemed to be apolitical and have incredibly poor reading skills:
I’m against the ban, I’m against the SVP’s attempts to alienate Muslims in Switzerland.
I am against anti-Muslim bigotry.
Is that clear enough, you thickarse, JamesT?
I have done a few posts on this topic, so stop your lazy and cretinous misrepresentation of my views.
Now feck off and learn to read/think, if you can.
Mod,
I have seen your views on the issue and accept what you say but there is another side to this and that is confronting the actual racists. This was what our previous argument was all about, in my opinion it is not enough to just state ones own view, you have to challenge the views of others.
I think the latter is maybe the more important task and on the occasion in question you took the side of Jimmy and against me. I.e. you supported the xenophobe.
Listen up JamesT,
If you weren’t such a cantankerous ultraleftist then you might get support from people generally but you don’t and as a result you are isolated, bitter and thick.
You can’t read, and what you read doesn’t make sense, so you don’t understand it when I say, I don’t read all comments.
But typically you can’t accept that, now fuck off and take “Jimmy Glesga” with you.
Mod,
Abuse and speculation mixed with paranoia. I mean is “Jimmy Glegsa” in quotes becuase you think that is me, this is one hell of an attempt to deny the fact you stuck up for the old xenophobe and took me to task for questioning him.
JamesT,
What do you expect? That your stupid comments were going to win me over, or piss me off?
Which is more likely? Come on, even you can work that one out
On the simplest things you get it wrong.
I put the quote marks around “Jimmy Glegsa” cos it is obviously not his real name.
You really haven’t got a clue, have you?
JamesT & Mod. Please explain how one can be bigoted against something that does not exist. Stop pretending to be socialists. Opium of the people chaps, remember! Another 60 blown up in mosques today in Pakistan and Somalia. All for something that does not exist. Poor people brainwashed from cradle to grave. Switch on folk.
Mod, ‘How shall I fuck off’. Mod you and JamesT should always look on the brightside of life.
I note this Tariqu Ramadan wants a re-interpretation of Islam. How you can re-interpretate an ideology of violence, corruption and dictatorship beats me. What is written is written. Thats like the pretend socialists re-interpretating Marx for their own benefit. Which they have a habit of doing.