Europeans Have Stopped Defending Their Values
 

I know Basam Tibi from several of his books, and he is on regular TV shows. I am split in opinion on him, for I am willing to see his well-meant intention, but I also see him loving to hear himself talking, and filling his books with plenty of repetitions after he made the point of his agument, making reading them tiresome and boring, And I think he has some dangerous illusions about "his faith". Nevertheless, sometime sit is worth to think about some of his words.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,440340,00.html

INTERVIEW WITH GERMAN ISLAM EXPERT BASSAM TIBI

"Europeans Have Stopped Defending Their Values"

For years, political scientist Bassam Tibi has been urging Muslims to integrate into European societies and Europe to stand up to Islamists. He spoke with SPIEGEL about the weakness of Europe, the orthodoxy of Islam and what Germany needs to do to open up.







http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,707917,00.jpg








SPIEGEL: The administrator of one of Berlin's opera houses, the Deutsche Oper, has cancelled the Mozart Opera "Idomeneo" out of fear of an Islamist reaction. Is this the first sign of Germany bowing down to Islam?
Tibi: It's not the first sign, but rather a repeated one. Recently we have been seeing more and more acts of submission, the most recent case being the Pope's apology. When it comes to Islam, there is no freedom of the press nor freedom of opinion in Germany. Organized groups in Islamic communities want to decide what is said and done here. I myself have been dropped from numerous events because of threats.
SPIEGEL: You are trying to say that critics of Islam are systematically silenced in Germany?
Tibi: Yes. Even the comparatively moderate Turkish organization DITIB says there are no Islamists, only Islam and Muslims -- anything else is racism. That means that you can no longer criticize the religion. Accusing somebody of racism is a very effective weapon in Germany. Islamists know this: As soon as you accuse someone of demonizing Islam, then the European side backs down. I have also been accused of such nonsense, even though my family can trace its roots right back to Muhammad and I myself know the Koran by heart.

(Skybird: Oh jajaja, Bassam, I believe you - even during the first century after Muhammad, already several thousands of families draw their blood lines back to the hero himself, trying to gain prestige and and bolster their authority and their local policies, "as being given by the Quran", by that. First time I noticed that was when studiyng the history of the emerging and forging of the first Quran versions [different to what Islam tries to tell people, there were many-many local variations caused by local leaders pushing for their keeping of interests by wanting to justify themselves with the Quran - different interests led to different distortions of the great man's original word... :D] If all these family histories would be true, than Muhammad would have needed to climb on virgins and making several thousand babies from sunrise to sunset and then during all night, which would have left him with not much time left to dictate the Quran and commanding wars...)

SPIEGEL: You have said numerous times that the conflict between the Western world and Muslim groups here is an "ideological war."
Tibi: The result of a conflict between two sides is that people politicize their cultural backgrounds. In Germany representatives of the Islamic communities try to hijack children who are born here, along with the entire Islamic community, to prevent them from being influenced by the society which has taken them in. Children born here are like blank sheets on which you can write European or Islamic texts. Muslim representatives want to raise their children as if they don't even live in Europe.
SPIEGEL: Many Germans believe that communities should live together peacefully without any parallel societies. Is it therefore right to compromise in order to avoid antagonizing Muslims unnecessarily?
Tibi: Quite the opposite. The Islamic officials who live here are very intelligent and view this as weakness. Muslims stand by their religion entirely. It is a sort of religious absolutism. While Europeans have stopped defending the values of their civilization. They confuse tolerance with relativism.
SPIEGEL: When something insults Muslims, we often tend to just back off -- doesn't this help defuse the conflict?
Tibi: No. That is simply giving up. And the weaker the partner is viewed by the Muslims, then the greater the anger which they express. And this anger is often carefully staged. The argument over the cartoons for example was completely orchestrated. Nothing was spontaneous. A lot of people don't know if Denmark is a country or a cheese. Where did they get the Danish flags? Protests like these are weapons in this war of ideas. Or take another example: The president of the Iranian parliament was visiting Belgium where he had an appointment with a female Belgian colleague. He refused to shake her hand, so she didn't meet with him. He left Belgium and accused her of racism. The accusation of cultural insensitivity is a weapon. And we have to neutralize it.
SPIEGEL: Can the Islam conference which the German minister of domestic affairs, Wolfgang Schäuble, organized in Berlin last week, help in this regard?
Tibi: No, because the biggest taboo is that there even is a conflict at all. Everyone denies that. Instead people talk about misunderstandings and how these should be resolved. But a conflict of values is not a misunderstanding. Islamic orthodoxy and the German constitution are not compatible. And that is why the Islam conference failed.
SPIEGEL: So what's the answer then?
Tibi: Muslims have to give up three things if they want to become Europeans: They have to bid farewell to the idea of converting others, and renounce the Jihad. The Jihad is not just a way of testing yourself but also means using violence to spread Islam. The third thing they need to give up is the Shariah, which is the Islamic legal system. This is incompatible with the German constitution. There are also two things they need to redefine.
SPIEGEL: Which are?
Tibi: Pluralism and tolerance are pillars of modern society. That has to be accepted. But pluralism doesn't just mean diversity. It means that we share the same rules and values, and are still nevertheless different. Islam doesn't have this idea. And Islam also has no tradition of tolerance. In Islam tolerance means that Christians and Jews are allowed to live under the protection of Muslims but never as citizens with the same rights. What Muslims call tolerance is nothing other than discrimination.
SPIEGEL: How many of the 3 million Muslims living in Germany would agree to these demands?
Tibi: A few thousand perhaps.
SPIEGEL: And what about the organizations at the Islam conference? After all, they all clearly said that they accept the German constitution. They also stated that it is allowed to change religion or to have no religion at all, even though the Shariah punishes a loss of faith with the death sentence. Is this a credible statement?
Tibi: I doubt that these statements are correct. Only representatives of organized Islam went to Schäuble's conference. Schäuble's problem is terrorism. And when the organizations tell him: "We are against terrorism," then everything is hunky-dory. But that is not a policy.
SPIEGEL: So who should Schäuble talk to? To you? For many years you have been a proponent of an enlightened form of Euro-Islam -- a topic which has been much discussed. But you are pretty much a lone voice.
Tibi: I support reforming Islam and I am not alone in this. Next month I'm meeting 20 other Islamic reformers in Copenhagen. We are trying to reinvigorate the tradition of enlightening Islam. But our mistake is that we are not united.
SPIEGEL: And apart from these scientists and thinkers?
Tibi: It would be much more important to have enlightened Imams. But when the Alfred Herrhausen society wanted to invite a German-speaking Imam with European ideas to a discussion, no one could be found. In the end they took the Grand Mufti of Marseille. And why are there such people in France and not here? Because the French state and French society has worked on developing them.
SPIEGEL: So the German state should reform Islam?
Tibi: Of course not. But the French state helped set up a council of Muslims which was completely in line with European values. If the French state had not been involved, the council would have probably been in the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood. This is a challenge facing civil society, but the state also has to help. By staying neutral, as is the case here in Germany, you are handing victory over to the Islamists.
SPIEGEL: Schäuble is looking for partners who can help in the teaching of Islam in schools and the training of Imams.
Tibi: That is a good start. The important thing is that the teachers must be trained here and that the state and the society decides on the curriculum.
SPIEGEL: You have often said that the integration of Muslims in Germany has failed. And that integration can only be achieved by "educating a civil society." But who should do this and who decides who needs to be educated?
Tibi: I am thinking in particular about the re-education programs which were carried out in Germany after the Third Reich. Social studies teachers and political science faculties were given the task of turning young people into democrats. That worked then. Why shouldn't we have a similar model for Muslims? In youth clubs, or during Islamic instruction in schools. Of course it takes a long time, 50 years say, but we have to start.
SPIEGEL: But how do you expect to draw the third generation away from the influence of the mosques?
Tibi: I don't have any clear idea either about how this should be done. The situation is this: young Muslims want to be "members of the club," part of German society. But they are rejected. And parallel societies provide warmth. It is a vicious circle.
SPIEGEL: But what is astounding is that you see yourself also as an example of failed integration. You have been working for 30 years at a German university, you have written 26 books in German and have been awarded the Federal Cross of Merit. Why, out of anyone, are you not integrated?
Tibi: It's more to do with a feeling of belonging. In Germany it is not a contradiction to say, Mr. Tibi is Syrian and has a German passport. In France however it is. And in America it would be a reason to take someone to court, as you are excluding them from American society. Even after 40 years here, I'm still not German. I also believe that I have not progressed higher as a professor here because I am a foreigner. When I retire I will be leaving Germany and going to Cornell university.
SPIEGEL: That sounds quite sad. What should Germany do?
Tibi: We need to see a change in culture among Germans too. We must change this idea that only those who are born here and have ethnically German parents, are seen as German. Almost 20 percent of the people living in Germany today have a foreign background. The problem is that Germany can't really offer foreigners an identity because the Germans hardly have a national identity themselves.

(Skybird: we also can't offer that national identity not only to foreigners, but to our own children)

That is certainly a result of Auschwitz.

(Skybird: and WWII and it's horrific experiences in general, and the attempt, also assisted and demanded by the Allies, to prevent that national sentiments ever will raise again in Germany, and triggering the third great war in a row. German contitution is designed to prevent strong central governemnts, and making them vulnerable to the federaal states. beside the general trend in all the West to a two-party(block)-system, this is the reason why reforms are so often bogged down in germany: on no level of the nantional structure there is enough strength concentrated to force them through. Seen this way, Germany is a very "weak" state structure today.)

America's strength is that it is capable of accepting people into its communities.

Interview conducted by Cordula Meyer and Caroline Schmidt

Translated from the German by Damien McGuinness



Question remains if the model that Bssam Tibi argues to be a refoming of Islam could result in an Islam that is any Islamic at all. Defining Islam by it's own self-understanding, and thta means': on the basis of Quran, Muhammad, Sharia, Medina-model, it is not, but something totally new. If your rip the heart out od something, you hardly can argue the remaining torso is a reformation. Muhammad has forseen this danger of reforms weakening his idoeology. That'S why he tried so hard to implement the laws that forever and all times rule out any rejection of just some parts of his set of teachings and ideology. "Unitty makes us strong, treachery weakens us", so to speak. Ergo: "death to all traitors leaving Islam". For the same reason it is not allowed to leave Islam alive - the simple fact that somebody rejects it and leaves it is a challenge to Islam's most vital interests, self-understanding of being the total revelation of God that is superior to all and everything, and existential fundament. If one leaves Islam it means to leave God - how could that be if God is omnipresent and allmighty?? It means: that one could see things different than Islam - and that is something that Islam cannot accept for reasons of it's own inner nature and essence. that'S why I recognize Tibi'S honest intentions - but I think of him as a dreamer who must ignore some vitaland grim parts of Islam in order to keep his dreams alive. By that he shows me that he already is no real and true Muslim anymore - which is good. Nevertheless following his arguments I consider to be suicidal for european culture, and thus unacceptable.

holy crap thats a long post!:)

Even as a dreamer that's 10x better than your usual Islam/Muslim expert.

The Middle East will never allow Islam to reform in Europe or elsewhere. They've allowed it to deform enough in Indonesia and that's as far as it will bend.

Islam has retreated back to the Middle East and apologized when confronted succesfully by superior military forces. In this battlefield of values, would Islam behave just the same? It's worth a try.

Tibi is wrong believing that the French muslims council is in line with European values. Dalil Boubakeur has no power over the radicalizes muslims in France, they don't even see him as worthy representative of the muslims.
The increasing violence in France made by that ethnic group is an example. The muslim brotherhood is more active than Tibi might think. Tibi believes France has them under control, but they don't, and never will, and that goes for anywhere in Europe, or the rest of non-muslim countries for that matter. Poor Tibi for that issue. :nope:

I completely agree on the criticism of Tibi's view on France. As I said, Tibi closes an eye on some things in history and Islam and contemporary society his attempts to "be reasonable" cannot deal with. however, his intentions are honest and much of what he also has to say, is worth to think about. As long as one realizes thta athere are also some thinking errors.

This weakness may have something to do that he teaches political sciences, thus is a theorestist, and academics often get lost in the maze of their own splendid thinking models - which is especially true for pllitcial sciences, and - as I know by own experience - social sciences (psychology, sociology, pedagogy/educational science). I would have less reason to worryabout islam in the West if the clear and very solid majoirty of Muslims would share his opinions. but as he says himself: of the (officially) 3 million muslims living in German, he estimates only a few thousand to agree to the demand for pluralism and tolerance.

He is right in describing Germans as very hesitent to accept and embrace foreigners like other people may do that. that is a question of mentality, but also a history centuries before the Nazis came and WWII crushed any nationalistic pride in Germany. It also derives from a time when Germany did not exist, the land was scattered with many small kingdoms and often were at war with each other and thus, "foreigners" likely meant "enemies". But today, I hear that time and again in private talks, it is also about Germany clearly seing that many of our foreign "guests" simply do not care to integrate themselves, and try the best they can to be different in language, clothing, habits, behavior. Like Tibi said, muslim elites try to raise their children isolated and in a way as if they even were not stationed in europe. The ignorration of europe being around only can mean that they see themselvbes on a mission to colonize a hostile environment, cultural terraforming, so to speak, not to immigrate and integrate. And that such a huge ammount of especially young ones are behaving pretty arrogant and "typical turkish" on the street today and are also find by professional observers to be less (!) integrated than their first generation parents are, is something that understandably does not raise German sympathies anymore. We clearly see that many come to Germany and do not wish to become German by heart and mind at all. Now, if you immigrate to the US, this would simply be demanded from you. To Germany people come who simply want the passport, and the better money from the different living environemnt. Beyond that, they do not care much for Germany and being German. Why are Germans expected to wish to see such people here? Being German (or American or English or whatever) should be more than just a bureaucratical formality. But that is what being German is today: a stamp on a document, and that is all. That is absurd, and that raises more and more hostility of native Germans - and mine, too. That Brussel also pushes for a policy that negates national and cultural diferences and replaces cultural and historical identity with a mere formal status labelled on a document does not help in any way, of course.

concerning the Islam conference here: I am not interested, I don't mind, and I think it cannot work, for the reasons Tibi has pointed out. It bores me, and islam bores me as well. I am not intersted in teaching germans about the speciality of muslim culture. And I see nothing in it that is so wonderful that it must be merged and squeeezed into european culture. what is it that should be so special when politicians talk of cultural exchange and an enrichment of our own culture? Döner? Their terrible music? Their way of clothing, which I personally do not like at all? The whole dialogue thing is needless, useless, and not wanted. There are certain principles, values, things in usual life, and basics they have to accept, fully, uncompromisingly, and other that they have brought from their homes (their former homes - or their still true homes...?) they have to give up. They accept that, or they have to leave, that simple it is. These values and rules and laws and principles are not negotiable, period (at least they should not be...). No need to talk about that, no need to have a dialogue on that, no need to ask them for their agreement on that - they have to agree and fully live by that, or they have to leave. It is a thing of a simple Yes or No from them. What need there is for another fourty years of one-sided dialogue - which effectively is a monologe od the west's self-declared intellectual and/or left "elites"?

That is nothing compared to other opportunities we have seen in the last five years! :lol:

It would help dramatically on your own argumentation if you could somehow... condense it. It is a tiresome brick to read. I guess Tibi isn't the only one who can be tiresome. Can we get a news at 11 bulletin version too?

Ok, since I myself can be considered an immigrant ...let's say that I'm from a country A in Europe, and for work reasons I move to country B in Europe. I live there, I pay my taxes there, I abide to the laws of the host country. Let's say that I'm lazy and don't want to learn the language because I do not intend to take the citizenship of the host country or because I don't need it. Or, let's say that I learn the language and after the time prescribed by the law I decide to take the citizenship of the host country.
Whose business it is if I decide to keep the culinary costumes of my country A, or if at home I speak in my native language A or if I teach my children the culture of my native country A (which they couldn't know living in country B)? Or should I ask permissions to the people of the host country if I want to do one of the above mentioned things? Is it not sufficient to live by the laws of the host country? Or the immigrant should be stripped of the culture of his native place? Or what you have written above is only valid for muslim immigrants? And if so, why should they not be entitled to live their private life the way they want, provided that it does not break the law of the host country?

an extreme example: in a far away country it may be habit to walk on the street naked. That woudl not only be prohibited by law in europe (most countries, I assume), but I would take offense from somebody meeting me on teh street and being naked. That is not his private issue, but that of all people needing to deal with him.---

More realistic example: burkhas. Soince two or three years I notice that the occasion Im eet a woman on street in complete diguise, including the face, are happening more and more often. I take offense from such kind of dressing. If people talk to me, I demand the not to hide their face. It is a question or habits: we do not consider it to be polite or trustworthy to hide one's face.---

For many muslims, admitteeldy or not, wearing headscarfs is not only a cultural habit (whose basis in Quran can be questioned, but it is a politcal issue as well. It deisplays the message that one is in defense of parts of the poltiical message of Islam and intentionally tries tom provoke the order of values of the hosting nation, trying to make it back down for what reasons so ever. If that would be the case, the next stage woild begin and something else would be done to try to make it back down again. And after that again, and the next stage, and more. Toibi said i corrctly: backing up is no sign of tolerance, but of giving up, and Islam correctly perceives that as weakness. Islam NEVER has become hesitent when being dealing with a weak opponent. Weakness is a clear message to Islam to attack and push even stronger.

I do not want to need to realize half a hundred different cultures around. This is MY home, not the home of these culutres - they have their own places. I want to have the feeling of walking in my country, in my home, in my culture. I am not on holiday and far-away-travelling whne going to the supermarket. The original inhabitants of a given place and region have the right to reject foreigners from far away, you cannot burst into a foreign community and say: okay, here I am, now accept me for I want to be here, no matter if you like me. A forfegner has the right to ask for being accepted, and the community has the right to reject him, or to tell him: okay: you can stay, but you have to fulfill these and these precoditions and have to adopt to our way of living, for we are not interested in being contantly reminded of your different being. The house owner sets the rules of the house, the guest complies, or leaves. Period.---so to answer your question: no it is not enough to simply obey laws. I insist on immigrants only coming to Germany if they want to become German by heart and mind. If you wish to immigrate to the US, a state representative will ask you a lot of question during a certain interview. The demands go so far that you need to will to defend the US with a wepaon in your hand if you want to gain access, if you do not agree to that, unconditionally, you don't get over that hurdle! Even more, you are desired to coinfess that you at least believe in the one, single God, no matter how you name him! This is no exaggeration by me. They once showed a 1,5 hours docu about the immigration process and the difficulties for new arrived people in the US, and the state lawyer - I think it is lawyers doing these interviews - in depth commented on this procedure. Well, Americans have the right to raise criterions by which they select who may enter their community and who not. And I totally accept that. If one take it for granted that this questionaire is always honstely answered, is something different, of course. But doing it with an immiogrant gives him a clear message, and that is the npoint: "you either become one of us completely, with all your heart and mind, or you don't - this is no half-heartedly decision. You take ours, and give up yours, or you don't." Many countries in europe come to that, too.they declare their intention and right to ask immigrants what advanatge or potential they have to offer their newly-selected community in return for being allowed to enter. Well - what is wrong in that? When I make a party,. I declare the right zo select my guests, and leave others out, or kick them out if they do not behave and do not follow my house rules.---

You think it is only about visual superficial details: clothing, how parents deal with their children on the street, they way they behave and talk. but if they do it too differently from the native's standards - then they make themselves different from them. They raise hurders, they widen the gap, they prevent integration. ---

Read again what Tibi said about confusing tolerance with relativism, and pluralism with diversity. A community can only accept a certain degree of diversity, if there is too much diversity, the structures that define and identifiy what holds a community together brake apart. There is no such thing as unlimited tolerance - that would directly lead to the absence of any rules and laws, and the rejection of any categoeirs, for all differences get relativised. That is a state of anarchy, and no the most tolerant and reasonable survives in an anarchy - but the strongest. And exactly this is the growing and boiling problem in all juvenile subcultures in densly populated metropoles where native teenangers and teenagers from families with an non-integrated immigration background are colliding at school as well as in the general city neighbourhood. Which I know from first hand from Frankfurt and Berlinn, since due to my former profession as psychologist I still have some contacts with social workers and professionals working in that field.

Well, hello again.
I understand your point. But having lived abroad for a long time now, I have a different opinion.
In my mind, integration is one thing, to loose one's roots it's another. In my mind, integration in a different society is participating to the life of the society, contributing with you work, your achievements, your income, your taxes etcetera. What a person does in his private life, it's his business and, as long as he doesn't break the laws of civil coexistence, he's allowed to live his life as he pleases.
The rules of "the house owner" that you were mentioning are the laws of the country. What other rules there are to be applied anyhow?

"The rules of "the house owner" that you were mentioning are the laws of the country. What other rules there are to be applied anyhow?"

Well, those parts of one's life that are at the interface or borderline were private life meets interaction with the community that surrounds one. Islamic extremists can live in germany and obey our laws - and still be hostile towards us, look down on us, resist integration and hate germany with all their heart and want to change it into a muslim nation based on the laws of sharia. so, your definition of obeying laws and leave private life to one's private life obviously is to short-longing. It is exactly the kind of understanding a national citizenship as a bureaucratical formality only that I have criticised above. Your hint at not wanting to loose one'S roots is legitimate, and I know what you mean. This I did not demand. One can even offer the hosting people/nation to bring in from one's roots what maybe is compatible with the hosting nation'S rules and ways of living, which then is a benefit and a gift. but the local way of living and rules and values goes first, if it is not compatible, the immigrant'S values have to step back.

So, if you live your pirvate life, what you consider to be that, in a way that you raise hurdles between you and your hosting nation/people, if you live it in such a way that you are perceived by the others as being separate, different - then you do not integrate yourself, but accentuate your status of being different. And this is when i would tell you: you either change your attitude, or you leave.

I would also demand you to have a believable wish to become german, not only because it gives you economical advantages, or legal protections you may not know in the nation you come from - for escaping political violance and help you in a state of emergency, you may request a status of asylum, you must not be accepted by us to be given citizenship and stay forever. If you do not have a non-material strong interest to live in Germany and live your life according to the "German way of living" and do not have a very strong sympathy and love for German culture and history and identity that is greater than that you had for your old home - then I wonder why you wish to live in Germany...??? If it only would mean for you to leave what you like more, and go to what you like less? I also would ask you what you have to offer us in return that could make it wishable for us to have you with us - a kind smile maybe is not enough, even less so when you still like the value system of your original home more than ours, for example.

It would be of different difficulty for you, depending on where you come from. If you come from central Africa and withoiut a family, then it is diufefrent than if you came from central africa and have seven children with you. Or you come from the Middle East and considers yourself to be a reasonable muslim. If you were coming from northamerica, and yopur ancestors once immigrated from Europe, it would be the most easiest for you, since you would only find different living habits, but no general contradiction in values and cultural traditions. That'S why -beside all my unforgiving criticism of American policies - I will always consider america to be much, much closer to my traditional cultural background than for example that of Bassam Tibi, not to mention a new arriving guy from let's say Afghanistan. Despite all our differences and angry debates, we all nevertheless share the same cultural background in western europe and Northern America - although we sometimes forget that :lol:

All in all I see it as your effort and responsebility to integrate yourself - not that of the people in your nation of choice. that people's choice is only if they are goodwilling and give you a fair chance to prove your willingness to integrate, or if they raise as many hurdles as possible to discourage you and get rid of you. But the effort to integrate yourself is your effort, not theirs. Because you want something from them (staying with them in their place, and be perceived as one of them) - they want nothing from you. You need to prove your value for them. If I would immigrate into the US, I would be in the same situation, and would accept it. I better would need to know in advance what enterprise I have started.

I do not talk of Germany only. Replace the term with any nationality you want.

wow........thats long (longest ive seen yet is on the joke thread

In the context of this thread I recommend this interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali, which unfortunately is German language only.

http://www.faz.net/s/RubCF3AEB154CE6...~Sspezial.html

She talks about the desaster of the "realistic foreign policy" in the traditioon of kissinger, the sneaking of Sharia into the West, the West's failure in confronting Islam with bitter truths, the basis of violance in Quran and Hadith, and the overall importance of becoming independent from Muslim oil.

Read and weep, though Noob will certainly feel he's in good company now:

Has the West been silenced by Islam?