Muslims in the Netherlands have to deal more and more with discrimination, violence and Islamophobia, according to a report of the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance.
The tone of the debate about minorities has gotten dramatically worse. The commission is very critical of the politicians and media: the language of politicians is straight out racist, the media is prejudiced.
At the same time, antisemitism is also increasing in the Netherlands. Denial of the Holocaust, especially by youth, is not alien any more. The commission reports to the Council of Europe.
Source: NOS (Dutch)
10 comments:
Of of the things it is, 'phobia' it is not.
That's a pejorative and dishonest term that people needs to start wising up to and rejecting.
what is it then?
Phobia is defined as 'an exaggerated usually inexplicable and illogical fear of a particular object, class of objects, or situation'
There is nothing exaggerated, inexplicable, or illogical' about concerns about a culture that has openly demonstrated misogyny, death threats, and has produced over 10,500 fatal terrorism attacks worldwide since 2001 and chants 'death to the West' (or whatever country happens to be the subject of the outrage du jour).
What an individual 'feels' about is largely up to the individual.
Some may feel justified fear. Other weaker individuals may indeed feel a bit paranoid. But me, I feel righteous anger - not fear.
I know I shouldn't go into this, as it will only provoke heated replies, but I would just say that you have a pretty warped view of individual and "culture".
Culture doesn't chant.
And speaking of definitions, you're simply wrong. Etymology does not always equal usage. Oxford English Dictionary distinguishes between phobia as noun, and -phobia as combining form, in which case it is described as "Forming nouns with the sense ‘fear of ...’, ‘aversion to ...’."
You must then be (according to your own words; unless your anger is not "intense"?) an Islamophobe: 'A person who has an intense dislike or fear of Islam or Muslims.'
George Orwell had much to say on the manipulation of words and language for politcal purposes. I'd encourage you to take a look at his work (though I do suspect you are already quite familiar with Orwell -- and hopeful that others are not.)
Wikipedia has a discussion on the controversy surrounding the terminology, so there's no point in redundancy here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobe
'Islamphobia' and 'Islamophobe' are relatively new tactical constructs invented to obfuscate and deflect. Similar to the terms 'racist' and 'fascist', it is a fairly reliable indication that its user is not nearly as interested in honest debate as they are about shutting it down prematurely. It actually reveals much more about its user than it does its target. In the end, I consider it dishonest terminology. Others refer to it as 'loaded'.
P.S. in deference to your pedantic streak, you are correct, a culture itself does do not chant. I should have said 'some cultures produce masses of people that chant for death and destruction'. Wait, I should to correct that in the interest of precision. It's not 'some'. There's only one culture producing that behaviour.
Chalons, you can't go about being pedantic about definitions, and then complaining when others do the same. Oh, wait, you can - you just did!
Yes, I will admit I am being particular about the central point, that being clarity regarding the term 'Islamophobia' and why I believe it's a dishonest term.
A grammatical error elsewhere is beside the point, but you are not incorrect to point it out. I'll make a note that I should be more careful with proofreading - and deny red herrings an opening.
Cheers!
Culture is the expression of beliefs, ideas or customs of a particular group. If it is the custom of a group to ululate that is part of their culture. If a people express their emotions through symphonies & opera then that is part of their culture.
If a culture expresses itself through chanting then that is part of their culture.
Many primitive cultures do express themselves through chanting. It may not suit the ears of someone attuned to the profundity of a Beethoven or a Verdi but if chanting pleases them then that is their culture.
Except that it wasn't a red herring, was it?
Islam, to you, at least as it speaks from your words, is a monolith, which is headed for one direction only, and doing a particular set of things, such as chanting, issuing death threats, etc; while in contrast non-Muslims are individuals, who are capable of differing, individual opinions or emotions (read your second post again, and please correct me if I'm wrong).
I happen to know quite a number of Muslims (and these are not the proverbial exceptions who justify the rule) who have never "demonstrated misogyny", made "death threats", carried out attacks, or chanted "death to the west". They condemn these things. They do, however, on a day to day basis suffer the Islamophobia (or hate/resentment of Muslims, however you want to word it) that is rampant in the Netherlands, and which was the subject of the original post on the blog.
That was what I meant with a warped view of individual and "culture".
Post a Comment