The European Dilemma

The creation of the Islamic danger

Does hate belong to the soul of Europe?

Despite the many warnings against this extreme right wave, it seems hard to stop the train, one that is leading to an "enlightened" Kristallnacht (the night on which the German parliament was put on fire and the beginning of the Holocaust). After the so-called Jewish danger, it now is the Islamic danger that is being created as to neglect the real problems that the European society faces. A society that survives on racism, exploitation, and blaming the other — these days, the Muslims.

The mayor of Brussels, the de facto capital of the European Union, Freddy Thielemans, did not give his permission to the anti-Islam demonstration, for the sake of public safety. Immediately many politicians and intellectuals stood up against the banning of the demonstration, saying that it is a violation of the right of expression; one of which is Marc De Vos, professor at the University of Ghent and member of the Independent Thinking Tank 'Itinera Institute'. In an article published on August 12, 2007, by Belgian newspaper De Standaard, he wonders "Why to ban a demonstration that wants to protect the soul of the European identity?”

Does hate belong to the soul of Europe? And what about the freedom of expression? The Danish organizer of the demonstration calls to censure parts of the Qur'an. Isn't this somehow hypocritical?

Is Europe Secular?

Hypocrisy is central to the whole debate on the anti-"Islamization" demonstration. Stop the Islamisation of Europe (SIOE), the organizer of the demonstration, is not reacting against certain Islamic movements, but against Islam as a whole. On SIOE's website,  it is clearly written that Islam is the enemy of Europe:

Islam and democracy are incompatible due to teachings within the Koran itself and some of the hadiths which comprise sharia law.

According to SIOE, there are no moderate Muslims and Islamophobia is not a result of racism, but of "the height of common sense." Also, in the texts published on the website "Muslims" are synonymous for "Islamists." The anti-Islamization demonstration is thus an anti-Islam demonstration. 

In an imperialistic manner, the organizers define what is Islam — which makes us wonder: Where is the freedom of opinion of the 1.6 billion Muslims worldwide? — and that Islam is not compatible with Western secular values. Again Professor De Vos states, "Europe — does it need to be mentioned? — knows a disestablishment between religion and state."

But that secular Europe is not to be taken for granted. For instance, the Queen of the UK is also head of the Anglican Church; also, in Scandinavian countries, state religion plays an important role.

Moreover, within Islam itself some are familiar with the separation of state and religion. Ali Abd Al-Raziq (1888-1966) says that Islam is a message of God and not a system to govern a worldly state. According to this interpretation, Islam can fit in whatever political system that its citizens choose — a nice example of democracy.

Also, Islamism or political Islam is familiar with democracy. It is important to distinguish between different movements within political Islam. Its founders, the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood in the 1930s, represented the voice of the people against a dictatorial and colonial regime. While in many countries in Europe the emancipation of the working people was inspired by Marxism, in Egypt Islam was a binding factor. This first wave of Islamism was based on knowledge, not on social class. Now, this would be called modernity.

Anti-Judaism Demonstration

Thus, the European monopoly over democracy, modernity, and freedom are a myth. Those values are, even within Europe, applicable only to a certain group: Those who do not challenge the imperialist status quo and do not question Europe's "character."

What was the demonstration on 9/11 about? Was it about the Islamic danger? Which Islam? Is it the "petrol-Islam" that is fully supported by the West? Is the demonstration about the danger that faces European values?  Which values and for whom? Was it about the "danger" of  Shari`ah? What is Shari`ah? There is not one clear answer to that, because Shari`ah is not a static law book as it is known in Europe. Shari`ah is a complex set of rules that is applied according to the context. And those countries that apply it in a suppressing, non-Islamic way are supported by the West.

The culmination of hypocrisy is that Muslims are now being expected to support the anti-Islamization demonstration as a proof that they agree with the freedom of expression and that the demonstration is about European values, not about creating hate against Muslims. European Muslims are asked to legitimize a fascist-inspired demonstration. As if a demonstration for the colonization of Africa would be legitimate if some African people participate in it. Whoever speaks out against a ban of the anti-Islam demonstration should also agree in principle to, for example, an anti-Judaism demonstration — something that will not be easily accepted in Europe. Otherwise, Europe's hypocrisy and racism will be exposed, if it is not already clear.

Eva Vergaelen lives in both Egypt and Belgium and works as a freelance journalist, with special interest in gender politics and identity. She wrote a book on female immigrants in Belgium. Eva studied African culture and obtained a master's in governance and development. She embraced Islam in 2004.