Accidental Blogger

A general interest blog

While direct democracy is an enticing concept, it is always troubling when the fate of minorities is left to the decision of the majority – think recent voter initiatives on gay marriage in several US states.  Here is another, from Switzerland, the directest democracy in today's world.

GENEVA — In a vote that displayed a widespread anxiety about Islam and undermined the country’s reputation for religious tolerance, the Swiss on Sunday overwhelmingly imposed a national ban on the construction of minarets, the prayer towers of mosques, in a referendum drawn up by the far right and opposed by the government.

The referendum, which passed with a clear majority of 57.5 percent of the voters and in 22 of Switzerland’s 26 cantons, was a victory for the right. The vote against was 42.5 percent. Because the ban gained a majority of votes and passed in a majority of the cantons, it will be added to the Constitution.

The Swiss Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, but the rightist Swiss People’s Party, or S.V.P., and a small religious party had proposed inserting a single sentence banning the construction of minarets, leading to the referendum.

The Swiss government said it would respect the vote and sought to reassure the Muslim population — mostly immigrants from other parts of Europe, like Kosovo and Turkey — that the minaret ban was “not a rejection of the Muslim community, religion or culture.”

Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf, the justice minister, said the result “reflects fears among the population of Islamic fundamentalist tendencies.”

Is putting the kibosh on minaret building in any way comparable to the head scarf ban in France? The French threw in all conspicuous religious symbols in the mix to deflect attention from the fact that Muslim head scarves were probably the only real target.  So, what were the Swiss thinking? That allowing Islamic architectural symbols will gradually lead to the spread of the Islamic dress code, demand for Sharia laws and if not granted, to domestic terrorism in pristine Heidiland? I don't know. But it sure appears that the propaganda of the rightist  Swiss People’s Party, or S.V.P. may have led voters to fear just that.  My two years stay in northern Germany taught me the extent to which the Teutonic races worship and enforce uniformity and order. I was wondering if the Swiss are merely objecting to the aesthetics of culturally alien structures among the Alpine landscape. But the right wing poster depicting minarets as missiles tells a different story, more like the Danish cartoon showing Prophet Mohammed with a bomb ticking in his turban.

On the other hand, in today's virulent "sauce for the goose and the gander" style global religious tensions, here is a similar story from a different part of the world (link: Louise Gordon). I want to know how many Islamic countries (granted, most are not democracies) allow the building or the exhibition of non-Islamic symbols, icons or architecture? Forget Saudi Arabia, Iran and other theocratic / totalitarian Islamic nations.  Malaysia is supposedly a democracy. So is Pakistan.  At least, they have parliamentary elections. I know they tolerate Christian churches somewhat grudgingly although bombing them from time to time is commonplace in Pakistan.  But can one easily (or at all) build a Hindu/ Buddhist / Sikh / Jewish temple in Pakistan today? I would like to know. What about in Malaysia, Egypt, Iraq or Turkey?

Swiss Minarets

Posted in , ,

8 responses to “Direct Democracy – Unintended(?) Fallouts”

  1. Here’s a bunch of older Hindu temples in Malaysia, and the ones photographed at this blog appear to be more recent (within 50 years or so).
    All the above may well have been ‘grandfathered’ in, but I don’t think the authorities would be make it easy for new construction. Maybe a reader from Malaysia could chime in with more information.

    Like

  2. prasad

    “My two years stay in northern Germany taught me the extent to which the Teutonic races worship and enforce uniformity and order.”
    The German speaking parts of Switzerland have in fact voted for this ban more than the French – Zurich was for, Geneva against. It’s also possible though that there are threshold effects with Muslims being numerous enough to be threatening mostly in the German region. Note though that Muslims aren’t dramatically concentrated in any one region in Switzerland.
    On a different note, say all you will about Alabama et al, but I doubt such a hideous referendum would pass anywhere in the US (plus unconstitutionality would render the point moot anyway.) Where do these charlies get off lecturing anyone about human rights?

    Like

  3. prasad

    Oh, here’s the cantonal vote map.

    Like

  4. narayan

    I was trying to recall a Swiss film of the 70s that had a hilarious scene (all I can remember) of a man in a streetcar who decides to piss off his fellow whites by breaking out in loud song in gibberish Arabic. A quick search leads me to conclude that the film is Alain Tanner’s “Jonah who will be 25 in the year 2000”. The film was shot in Zurich, but the locale is not identified. Here’s an excerpt from a review :
    “In fact, there is little presentation of Swiss social reality in the film, and no reason to know that the film takes place in Switzerland and not in France or in some other European country. There is no mention or evidence of a Swiss labor movement (except Mathieu’s references), a women’s movement, the controversy raging in Switzerland about foreign workers (a Swiss purity movement has grown up, demanding the expulsion of all foreign workers), or the European-wide recession. Everything is localized and individualized: an anonymous city impinges on a few isolated individuals.”

    Like

  5. narayan

    … also a recent TV show on a proposed Turkish mosque in Cologne. A small right wing group opposed to the mosque managed to convince the city to limit the height of the minarets. Muezzins, like church bells, can either disturb or reassure. When I visit Bangalore I look forward to being woken up early by the call to prayer from a mosque a few blocks from my mother’s flat.

    Like

  6. It’s also possible though that there are threshold effects with Muslims being numerous enough to be threatening mostly in the German region. Note though that Muslims aren’t dramatically concentrated in any one region in Switzerland.
    fivethirthyeight says over 50% of the variance can be explained by religiosity (more religious = more pro-ban). add language dfferences, and you get 80% (more german = more pro-ban, though italians were the most pro-ban). OTOH, more muslim = less pro-ban. this goes against the valence of right-wing parties in other parts of europe, where more foreigners = more nativism. it probably has to do with the dual track of the swiss economy (international commerce vs. agriculture) according to nate silver.
    personally, this ban seems symbolic and insulting. but that was the point. europeans are terrified of muslims. it seems plausible that the swiss vote was a proxy for a general threat, most of the local muslims are relatively mild balkan refugees (i.e., “white muslims”).
    personally, as someone who is scared of muslims* making it harder for conservative muslims to immigrate to lands where sexual liberty and blasphemy are taken for granted would probably help. that way, local muslims could westernize their values. the immigration pause after 1925 in the USA (yes, pushed through by nativists) resulted in the assimilation of catholics and jews into “white” as immigration was not replenished. the cultural gap between the muslim world and europe is big enough that assimilation is necessary. i’ve read swiss muslim tariq ramadan’s work. he’s not salafist or fundamentalist, but it is clear that he looks to a future where europe will accept the truth and way of islam in totality. pretty much equivalent to evangelical christians in the USA. and those are moderate muslims.
    * i was a contributor to a muslim american group weblog for a few years as the resident atheist. the more and more i heard muslims talk about themselves as they would among muslims the more and more islamophobic and anti-muslim i felt. that was the main reason stopped contributing, since my basic presuppositions were just way outside of the bounds of discourse.

    Like

  7. i think the muzzeins are gonna be banned anyway. it as a symbolic issue. the sikhs opened a temple. muslims, who are way more numerous, wanted in.

    Like

Leave a reply to razib Cancel reply