Tuesday 17 May 2011

Islamic Invasion - Too long for Facebook

Ehhhhhhhhhhh, I got drawn in again. The facebook curse, someone makes a passing remark, and I respond with an essay. Facebook status updates are not the venue for lengthy diatribes, so here is a snapshot of my quickly-typed opinions regarding Islamic migration, cultural exchange, and national identity. Consider this more conversational than academic.
And forgive the formatting, Facebook is not an ideal platform.


I personally have no problem with the Burqa, it's not too dissimilar to your average slob dressed in baggy jeans and a baggy hoodie with nowt but a fag-end showing (although there could presumably be an attractive person underneath the burqa, and my inner pervert gently weeps), I only have a problem with coercion. And there's no guarantee that someone wearing a burqa is forced to do so *against* their wishes. It's a cultural garment, and so long as it is worn voluntarily, then what business is it of ours to tell someone else how they may dress? In any case, generational exposure to a new society with new norms will have successive generations appearing more and more Ocker (Allah help them =P) and the issue will resolve itself UNLESS the point is forced, in which case the burqa will no doubt remain as an emblem of identity and continuity with a culture where those being targetted actually felt accepted.
For purposes of identification etc. on private property (ie. banks) then this is not an issue of law, but rather an issue of the rights of owners of private property to enforce a sensible dress-code, as such locations are within the private sphere, NOT public, and as such it is unnecessary for legislation to be enacted. France, take note.

Whenever Sharia Law is brought up, it feels like a smokescreen or xenophobic knee-jerk reaction to (heaven forbid!) something different! Cultures from regions heavily populated by Muslims are not a mainstream thing in most western nations, so the debate in the public sphere carries the burden of representation for Muslims, and the quiet moderates who live down the road, tend their garden, follow the footy and enjoy a good halal barbecue aren't sensational enough to grab headlines... "In the news today, Muslim Couple Perfectly Normal, had Lamb Roast on Sunday, Concerned with the Rising Cost of Petrol, settled in to watch Australian Idol... here's Tom with the weather!"
Doesn't really happen, does it? Folks point at terrorists and poorly researched polls (like the one in England that asked the leading question "do you see yourself as British, or Muslim?"... the number of 'Muslim' responses shocked folks who didn't really stop to consider what the result would've been if Christians were asked if they saw themselves as British or rather as Christian), at demogogues and rallies, at violent protests in war-zones and so on, and treat that as representative.
Every time some makes a fuss about the "Sharia law" strawman, it paints the entire collective of so, so many differnet cultures and ethnicities, religious sects and persuasions, with one oriental, alien 'other' brush, the binary opposition at play.
I'm curious as to what spurred your initial post? Most Muslims don't want Sharia Law, no non-Muslim is going to settle for life under Sharia law, and within the grand sweep of Islam there are so very many interpretations of Sharia anyway that it's near meaningless to implement. Honestly, the only religion likely to take hold of Australian law to the detriment of society is Christianity. The moralizing busy-bodies have already afforded fictional people the rights of legal protection from rape or sexual misconduct, that's far more of a worry than the spectre of Sharia Law.

And as for 'becoming Australian', or in my case, becoming a Kiwi, this shouldn't mean discarding your prior cultural identity to conform to some homogenous fiction of national character. People should be themselves, provided they obey the laws as is the social contract, the understanding that you will enjoy the benefits of society provided you abide by the rules and conditions for participation, or else your ability to participate (freedom) will be curtailed.
There's always such concern that foreigners will undermine national values, national culture... this idea that values and culture are static, timeless and universal is complete bullshit. A culture that does not grow and evolve, is dead. And those values we hold dear, we must have faith that they will endure and will influence those who encounter our culture, and those values that do not survive contact, deserve to be lost as they are weak and undesirable values. A point the Americans got right in claiming "We hold these truths to be self-evident", a good idea is a good idea and when we consider things on their own merit rather than basing our judgement on who puts the idea forward, value will show. The only thing that will ensure that bad values prevail is adhering to a binary us-vs-them mentality, tribal mentality, that will not admit to honest analysis and criticism, treating association and exclusivity as more important than robust, rational debate on what is and what ought to be.

If anyone is still awake after reading all that, I commend your steely determination, and denounce your sense of masochism!

3 comments:

  1. Nice blog - you've made a lot of valid points. I guess my original rant was sparked by a story on the news about sharia law. According to the story, a section of the Muslim community - not the entire Muslim community, I note - was pushing for Sharia law to be introduced. This would effectively put one section of our community under it's own law - creating a 'one rule for us, and another for them' scenario. Not a desirable situation - the result would be anarchy.
    I guess all I'm saying, is that everyone should be treated fairly under the law, irrespective of their race, colour or creed. That means we all have one set of rules to abide by. What this means, for example, in the case of the burqa, is that I have drama with it generally. But I object to a person being allowed to wear a burqa, where they wouldn't be allowed to wear a ski mask, or hoodie, etc - as this constitutes 'special treatment', and it this very 'special treatment' which gets up a lot of people's noses and creates tensions.
    My basic premise is this - do what you want behind closed doors. But when you are out in the community, do what you can to try to fit in - this would make life easier for everybody, yourself included. And of course, one rule (and law) for all.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Didn't mean to look like I'm taking issue with you, Bren, I just see a lot of bigoted views and outright wrong-headed assumptions thrown about a lot (like the folks who keep saying "How come we never see Muslims denouncing terrorism?" while I'm reading editorials from prominent Muslim community leaders denouncing terrorism in no uncertain terms, recall the candlelit vigils throughout the Middle East and the Islamic world for the victims of 9/11, former Palestinian 'terrorists' renouncing violence, etc.) so I tend to speak up for this shit because, well, burden of representation and all.

    A push for Sharia law with an exemption from the national law would be wrong, and allowances of any form of judiciary 'sharia court' would also be wrong (this idea is even opposed in South-East Asia where the largest muslim populations in the world are found). Following Sharia except where it clashes with the law of the land would be acceptable, it's a guide to living, a personal code of ethics, with a mixing of law thrown in. But a call for introducing Sharia Law must be denied, as you said, there is one law, as there is one sovereign state responsible for representing all members of society fairly. The problem is this message can often be co-opted by 'dog-whistle' racists who want migrants to deny their cultural identity entirely, to speak English or fuck-off!

    Burqa, in public, allowed. In private, it depends on whose property you're on, provided they have a good reason to ban it. If the bankers say no Burqa, no Burqa.
    There's no need to 'fit in' with the community, only to conduct yourself with an awareness of the people around you, ie. not be a total sociopath or arsehole

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have to say, I agree with you. Rather than using the phrase 'fitting in', perhaps I should have said 'being tolerant of others and their way of life'. And said toleracne would apply to everybody, and I do mean EVERYBODY. You may not like another's way of life, but they has as much right to live their life their way as you do to live yours your way. Basically - let's jmust be nice to each other, eh?

    You're right, too, in that racial intolerance cuts both ways. Just as we expect immigrants to respect our customs, so should we respect theirs. And for the most part, we do - all of us do. But there a re just times when a story gets my goat, and the mention of Sharia Law bit me on the ass pretty hard.

    And I don't mind being singled out, Pete. I think the way I phrased my Facebook post was a little bit more aggressive than I meant it to be, now that I look at it. Ultimately, I think my point has been made, and a stimluating discussion had in the meantime. For me, there's no right or wrong here - just a sharing of opinions. Opinions are like arseholes - everyone has one. And sharing them is a damn good way of influencing other's thought processes, giving yourself food for thought, and killing a few hours in an entertaining way in the meantime.

    Salud!

    ReplyDelete