THE alleged native-born Norwegian alleged mass murderer, Anders Behring Breivik, highlights a growing problem in a Europe troubled by weak economies, rising unemployment and the demonstrable failure of the policy of multiculturalism, with 9/11 and the Al-Qaeda movement demonising Muslims. Breivik might have been an extreme case, but the climate in Europe for people of dark pigmentation is distinctly chilly as they become a handy scapegoat for the continent's ailments.
The irony is that the traditionally tolerant countries and regions such as the Netherlands and Scandinavia have sprouted right wing parties even as the nations with heavy intakes of people of their former colonies such as Britain and France have been swayed by the anti-immigrant wave. And the far right parties are doing well in elections, in contrast to earlier times when they were mere fringe phenomena in the political spectrum.
Even as the world is growing closer, thanks to the technological age among other factors, the European continent is experiencing curious jitters composed in large part of fear — fear of dark strangers taking over, fear of losing their jobs and, above all, fear of being deprived of new post-war prosperity in a rejuvenated Europe coming together in a European Union for the first time in history.
Indeed, the Coal and Steel Community leading to the European Economic Community and ultimately the European Union were historic developments, as was the decision by several of the members to have a common currency. There were differences and doubts over how close the Union should be and the difficulty of using a common currency when there is no single economic overlord. It is no coincidence that doubts on the future of the Union and the euro currency have never been as widespread as they are today. Three member-countries have had to be given bail-outs, with Greece tottering under its debt burden.
On the political plane, perhaps the greatest problem is that while one country after another has declared the failure of multiculturalism, they have still to find an answer. To begin with, there are fewer or greater numbers of immigrant population in Europe that came in the wake of the empire builders. In Germany's case, migrants, especially from Turkey, were invited in to help build the country's economic miracle. Which brings us to another crucial question that will not go away: European society is ageing fast and must bring in young people from elsewhere to keep their economies running. These young people are most plentiful in the developing world.
Breivik's long and meandering thesis on the state of Europe and the world might be the confused thoughts of a xenophobe, but they express the kernel of an argument that has been clothed in various hues, ranging from the American treatment of blacks in the deep south to the Dutch settlers' evolution of apartheid in South Africa. It is that Europeans — or generally the white race — are different from, and superior to, people of dark pigmentation. Once the 9/11 tragedy in New York and Washington DC was factored in, the explicit or muted proponents of white supremacy had tangible targets to hate.
The problem is: how should Europe and the world deal with these very unhealthy developments that could prove disastrous for the continent and peoples elsewhere? The answers are not so simple because the solution cannot be to ship millions of people where they came from — in a large number of cases, the young were born in their adopted countries and would be strangers in their parental homes. Although many migrant communities tend to live as segregated communities by choice, any system of apartheid would make nonsense of the Renaissance and liberal thought Europe stands for.
France has a point in banning face veils in public, in that it totally separates women from society although the order has been lightly policed. Here again the problem is that in the French scheme of things, hard secularism implies integration and that can only lead to multiculturalism, which has become a dirty word. Over the decades, I have discovered the change in French attitudes to blacks from being equal citizens if they possessed good knowledge of French language and literature to becoming the butt of jokes in private conversations. In the Netherlands, the levels of tolerance the people displayed towards migrants and the advantages they received in social welfare benefits were generous by any standard. Today even liberals decry migrants as being lazy and sponging on the state.
Britain has always had a tinge of racism expressed bluntly or euphemistically, but in fairness it is one of the few countries in Europe that debates the problem more honestly than other societies. The tragedy in Oslo brings perhaps the greatest surprise of all. Societies that were believed to be havens for the unfortunate or tortured, welcoming them with open arms, have become carping of the dark-skinned, sprouting extreme right parties that are becoming inseparable from the haters of non-whites.
These attributes are dangerous for Europeans as they are for the rest of the world. The world cannot adopt a form of apartheid after it has been legally abolished in South Africa. Nor can we reverse technologies that inevitably bring peoples and countries closer. Nor can the label of extremism be applied to all Muslims because of the deeds of those who speared the twin towers with hijacked passenger planes and Al-Qaeda. Obviously, Europe must look for solutions elsewhere.
To begin with, European politicians and leaders must have the courage to go against the tide in explaining to their peoples the consequences of their prejudice. In other words, liberal politicians must take on the extreme right in each country to prevent them from expanding their political base in electoral politics. Second, if multiculturalism is a dirty word, political parties must get their brains to train on what kind of development would be self-fulfilling for the migrant communities and non-threatening to the natives. In the end, it boils down to enlightened and bold leadership.
The irony is that the traditionally tolerant countries and regions such as the Netherlands and Scandinavia have sprouted right wing parties even as the nations with heavy intakes of people of their former colonies such as Britain and France have been swayed by the anti-immigrant wave. And the far right parties are doing well in elections, in contrast to earlier times when they were mere fringe phenomena in the political spectrum.
Even as the world is growing closer, thanks to the technological age among other factors, the European continent is experiencing curious jitters composed in large part of fear — fear of dark strangers taking over, fear of losing their jobs and, above all, fear of being deprived of new post-war prosperity in a rejuvenated Europe coming together in a European Union for the first time in history.
Indeed, the Coal and Steel Community leading to the European Economic Community and ultimately the European Union were historic developments, as was the decision by several of the members to have a common currency. There were differences and doubts over how close the Union should be and the difficulty of using a common currency when there is no single economic overlord. It is no coincidence that doubts on the future of the Union and the euro currency have never been as widespread as they are today. Three member-countries have had to be given bail-outs, with Greece tottering under its debt burden.
On the political plane, perhaps the greatest problem is that while one country after another has declared the failure of multiculturalism, they have still to find an answer. To begin with, there are fewer or greater numbers of immigrant population in Europe that came in the wake of the empire builders. In Germany's case, migrants, especially from Turkey, were invited in to help build the country's economic miracle. Which brings us to another crucial question that will not go away: European society is ageing fast and must bring in young people from elsewhere to keep their economies running. These young people are most plentiful in the developing world.
Breivik's long and meandering thesis on the state of Europe and the world might be the confused thoughts of a xenophobe, but they express the kernel of an argument that has been clothed in various hues, ranging from the American treatment of blacks in the deep south to the Dutch settlers' evolution of apartheid in South Africa. It is that Europeans — or generally the white race — are different from, and superior to, people of dark pigmentation. Once the 9/11 tragedy in New York and Washington DC was factored in, the explicit or muted proponents of white supremacy had tangible targets to hate.
The problem is: how should Europe and the world deal with these very unhealthy developments that could prove disastrous for the continent and peoples elsewhere? The answers are not so simple because the solution cannot be to ship millions of people where they came from — in a large number of cases, the young were born in their adopted countries and would be strangers in their parental homes. Although many migrant communities tend to live as segregated communities by choice, any system of apartheid would make nonsense of the Renaissance and liberal thought Europe stands for.
France has a point in banning face veils in public, in that it totally separates women from society although the order has been lightly policed. Here again the problem is that in the French scheme of things, hard secularism implies integration and that can only lead to multiculturalism, which has become a dirty word. Over the decades, I have discovered the change in French attitudes to blacks from being equal citizens if they possessed good knowledge of French language and literature to becoming the butt of jokes in private conversations. In the Netherlands, the levels of tolerance the people displayed towards migrants and the advantages they received in social welfare benefits were generous by any standard. Today even liberals decry migrants as being lazy and sponging on the state.
Britain has always had a tinge of racism expressed bluntly or euphemistically, but in fairness it is one of the few countries in Europe that debates the problem more honestly than other societies. The tragedy in Oslo brings perhaps the greatest surprise of all. Societies that were believed to be havens for the unfortunate or tortured, welcoming them with open arms, have become carping of the dark-skinned, sprouting extreme right parties that are becoming inseparable from the haters of non-whites.
These attributes are dangerous for Europeans as they are for the rest of the world. The world cannot adopt a form of apartheid after it has been legally abolished in South Africa. Nor can we reverse technologies that inevitably bring peoples and countries closer. Nor can the label of extremism be applied to all Muslims because of the deeds of those who speared the twin towers with hijacked passenger planes and Al-Qaeda. Obviously, Europe must look for solutions elsewhere.
To begin with, European politicians and leaders must have the courage to go against the tide in explaining to their peoples the consequences of their prejudice. In other words, liberal politicians must take on the extreme right in each country to prevent them from expanding their political base in electoral politics. Second, if multiculturalism is a dirty word, political parties must get their brains to train on what kind of development would be self-fulfilling for the migrant communities and non-threatening to the natives. In the end, it boils down to enlightened and bold leadership.
No comments:
Post a Comment