Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Anti Muslim Immigration Ban Rhetoric

Anti Muslim Immigration Ban Rhetoric

Ratings: (0)|Views: 7|Likes:
Published by elaine cullen

More info:

Published by: elaine cullen on Jul 23, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/22/2010

pdf

text

original

 
In the last few days, an anti-Muslim politician in the Netherlands, Geert Wilders head of the FreedomPolitical Party, stated that he would be forming an international alliance, working to ban immigrationfrom Islamic countries to other nations. Wilders gave no indication how he would or could definenations as Islamic countries since Islam is a personal religious belief system and is not identifiable bynationhood. In fact most nations have those who practice the religion of Islam and in countries whereIslam is the predominant religion, they all have citizens who do not practice or believe in the faith orbelong to other religions.Wilders stated that he would launch this movement later in the year initially in five countries, theU.S., Canada, Britain, France and Germany. Wilders has not stated why he felt as a Dutch politician, heshould be fronting a movement in other countries in regard to their immigration policy which hasnothing to do with Geert Wilders personally and nothing to do with these other nations in regard toGeert Wilders position as a member of the Dutch government. As a Dutch citizen and Dutch politician,Wilders has the right to publicly propose any immigration policy for the Netherlands he wants, howeverhe has no right to be involved in the immigration policies of any countries outside of the Netherlands.There is the issue, as well, of what right Wilders has to discriminate against people from a specificnation due to the religion of a majority of the people in that country. According to Wilders, he definesanti Islam and discrimination against Islam as being for freedom, stating that The fight for freedomand (against) Islamisation as I see it is a worldwide phenomenon and problem to be solved.(
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/16/geert-wilders-netherlands-far-right
)Clearly this discriminates against the freedom of nations who have a majority of Muslim religiousbelievers to travel or be able to move freely in the world and also discriminates against those of othercountries who are not predominantly Muslim in terms of their population, from having discourse andcontact with those who live in Islamic predominant countries.Wilders is incorrectly defining existing secular nations as religious rather than civil secular, includingcountries that have a predominantly Muslim population and those that have a predominantly Christianpopulation, in this case, the nations of Europe, the United States and Canada.The countries of the Middle East are not Islamic nations they are nations. The countries of Europeand the U.S. and Canada are not by definition Christian nations they are by definition, specific nationsof Europe, in the case of Wilder home nation, the Netherlands. The Netherlands is not by definitionas a nation Christian. It is by definition Dutch.Wilders goal to form a movement to ban immigration to and from countries, based on religion,serves to shift the identity of nations and a sovereign national right, power and function to set their ownnational immigration policy from national to the identity of the majority religion of the nationsinhabitants as the criteria to be used to set immigration policy from other countries. Furthermore, itserves to set in conflict nation against nation in discriminatory immigration policies based on thereligious practices of their population, rather than the historical reasons for immigration policy based onthe actions and relationship of these nations individually as individual nations.Furthermore, it serves to give foreign countries illegitimate and unconstitutional powers, rights andprivileges in other countries in coercing them to set immigration policy that they want, based on thecriteria that they choose, rather than the immigration policies that the individual nations, their citizensand governments choose, based on what they determine is best for that nation.
 
Geert Wilders has no right, either as a Dutch citizen, or certainly as a Dutch politician, to press anyother nation to set their immigration policies to suit his goals. He also certainly has no right to pressthem to work to ban immigration from countries that have a majority population of a specific religion.His actions are one of a number of actions being seen by some individuals recently in European nationsand the U.S. and Canada that appear to seek to have these nations defined and treated as religiousnations and Christian nations rather than the secular, democratic, nations they are. As well, thesesame individuals appear to be working to set the nations of Europe and the U.S. and Canada in conflictwith those nations that have predominantly Muslim populations, based on that criteria alone, ratherthan the actions of these nations and their people in regard to the individual countries of Europe, theU.S. and Canada.Disturbingly, these individuals criticize and rightly so, the actions of some in Muslim predominantcountries who appear to be working to push to make their nations more Muslim religious centered inidentity, rather than the civil, secular nations they have been and that their citizens wish to be. At thesame time, a number of people like Geert Wilders appear to be working to do the exact same thing inthe nations of Europe, the U.S. and Canada.The nations of Europe, the U.S. and Canada are not theocracies. They are democracies that areinclusive of all the people who are citizens of their nations, no matter what their religious beliefs.Furthermore, those people such as Geert Wilders statements and actions are deliberatelyconfrontational, racist and hateful toward those of the Muslim faith and the religion of Islam andshouldnt be tolerated on that basis. In an interview about an anti-Muslim film that he made, calledFitna, Wilders called Islam retarded.(
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0jUuzdfqfc
)Wilders actions appear to have the goal of setting the Christian religions in conflict with Islam andincorporating the nations of the world that have majority Christian and Muslim populations to aconsolidated with each other stance in conflict with each other, on that basis. These types of actionsare no different and no less destructive than the actions of some of those of the Muslim faith who arepushing for Islam as the criteria for what should be the sole identity for their nations in terms of governance and in conflict with other religions, and it is no less destructive. It is in and of itself racistand discriminatory whether in regard to the religion of Islam in Islam predominant countries orChristianity in Christian predominant countries.There has, in other countries, been a process of conflict and dispossession being practiced againstothers, based not only on religion, but also on racial, tribal and ethnic identity, particularly in the last 15years. In these other countries there have also been claims that these places are and should only beidentified and occupied by those of that particular ethnicized group and that all others should be notonly banned from being there but in many cases, driven out of these regions so that they can be madeethnic monolithic regions. Often these claims and actions are carried out along with violence bymilitias formed to deliberately drive those not identified as belonging to that ethnicized identity out of the regions that those involved claim are for only those of a specific religious, racial, tribal and ethnicgroup. We have seen this horrific process in Yugoslavia, between Serbs, Croats and Bosnians andKosovoans. We have seen this same process in Rwanda between Tutsis and Hutus. We have seen thissame process in Iraq between Kurds, Shia and Sunni. It is not an acceptable process there and it is not an

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->