What's new

‘Muslims need to assimilate into Europe’

53fd

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
KARACHI, Nov 17: European culture and Islamic culture have different ethos and both are bound to collide unless there is assimilation and compromise.

Anwar Shaheen of the University of Karachi’s Pakistan Study Centre said this here on Thursday on the second day of a two-day international conference on ‘Islam in Europe’ while speaking on the topic of hijab and burqa in Europe. The seminar was organised by KU’s Area Study Centre for Europe in association with the Hanns Seidel Foundation.

Ms Shaheen, who had conducted a survey of Muslim women living in Europe as well as Pakistani scholars to back up her research, said European society was justified in its reaction to Muslim women wearing hijab. She said proponents of the veil considered it a divine commandment while other women faced patriarchal pressure to observe the veil. However, she said many women also wore hijab out of free will.

Those who objected to the veil viewed it as a form of discrimination while others felt it did not conform to “contemporary corporate culture”.

She criticised the “self-righteousness” of some women who observed the veil as “suicidal” and felt many of these women thought of themselves as more pious than those Muslim women who did not veil themselves.

“If Muslims don’t feel comfortable with European laws they should come back” to their countries of origin, she said, while adding that “European governments should not frame discriminatory laws”.

Nigerian scholar Najimdeen Bakare spoke on Islam and European democracy. He said there was no clash of cultures but “a clash of interests”.

He added that it was important for Europe to understand Islam and Muslims as they were a sizable minority in the continent and that the Muslim World was no longer confined to the traditional lands of Islam, but now included those countries which hosted Muslim minorities.

Mr Bakare said there was a need for a “cosmopolitan mazhab” for European Muslims as the community could no longer depend on fatwas originating from Muslim countries. He said the elements defining western, European democratic values were secularism, pluralism, political freedom, liberty, equality, rule of law and freedom of speech.

Referring to secularism, he said western society recognises religion but insists it should be confined to the individual level. He observed there was a history of secularism is Islam, for in both the Umayyad and Abbasid empires there was a clear balance between the state and the mazhabs, which sprang from society.

He said the first generation of Muslim immigrants to Europe following World War II was not very literate and was primarily concerned with their economic well-being. The second generation was confused about traditional family values and values of the host society while the third generation of immigrants sought public visibility and wanted to move from the margins to the mainstream. This included wanting to express their religion publicly. “If western society fails to acknowledge the reality of Muslims there will be discord,” he said, adding that Muslim-majority nations need to have less influence on Muslim minorities.

German scholar Dr Rainer Brunner spoke on ‘Euro-Islam’ and identity formation of European Muslims. He said it was pertinent to ask who spoke for European Muslims. “There is no shortage of pretenders, but it is not clear how much influence they have”.

He said among European Muslim thinkers Swiss academic Tariq Ramadan called for a reform of Islam, returning the faith to its “pristine” roots. This, the scholar said, was reminiscent of conservative Salafi thought. He said Mr Ramadan rejects the concepts of Dar al Islam and Dar al Harb, instead proposing that Europe is Dar as Shahada, which was a concept close to the Muslim Brotherhood’s line of thought. This, said Dr Brunner, was not surprising as Mr Ramadan is the maternal grandson of Hasan al Banna, the Brotherhood’s founder.

He said Tariq Ramadan tries to stick to religious dogma while also trying to reconcile dogma with a western lifestyle, for example equating Muslim immigrants to Europe with the muhajiroon of the early Islamic era who left Makkah for Madina.

He said in Europe different countries had different domestic roles for religion: France was completely secular while in the United Kingdom the monarch was the head of the Church, while in Germany religious education in schools was guaranteed in the constitution.

Mujeeb Afzal of Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, spoke on the post-Cold War West and Islam. He said the Muslim reaction to European dominance over the last few decades has been either of resistance or collaboration, though the collaborationists have prevailed and have “learned from their masters”. He said during the Cold War both superpowers had a negative view of Islam, while the Muslim world was divided between “radicals”, such as Arab nationalists, and “conservatives”, such as the various monarchies that dot the Muslim world. However, revivalism soon emerged, which was less impressed by the West and considered it “decadent”.

Drawn to revivalism
Shia revivalism triumphed in the shape of 1979’s Islamic Revolution in Iran, while Sunni revivalists joined hands with the conservatives and the United States to take on the USSR in Afghanistan. The Soviet defeat in Afghanistan was not only the victory of capitalism, but the revivalists also felt they had a hand in the superpower’s fall, said Mr Afzal. After communism’s demise, “democracy and free-market capitalism were considered the only ‘viable’ systems”.

He said Muslim youths were attracted to revivalism as there was no alternative ideology to capitalism. “Revivalists don’t pose a threat to the West, but to the imperialist hegemony of the West”. However, he observed that “Islam was now part of the West”. Within the West there were two schools where Islam was concerned: accommodationists and confrontationists. The accommodationists feel that Muslim revivalists’ anger is fuelled by the West whereas confrontationists denounce Islam as “anti-secular and anti-modernity”.

Dr Nazir Hussain, also of Quaid-i-Azam University, speaking on perceptions of Muslims post-9/11, said that today, perceptions were shaped by the media, not academics. He said Muslims had played a major role in Europe’s progress over the last 50 years, but now some European leaders were saying that multiculturalism had failed and that immigration had to be controlled.

He said there was duplicity in western policy, observing that Bahrain’s monarchy had been protected against popular protests, while Libya had been invaded. “The western media invented Islam as the enemy. Somebody needed a villain. The media are now policymakers”.

Turkish scholar Dr Ersin Embel spoke on the problems Turks were facing integrating into German life while Dr Amel Boubekeur, addressing the seminar via Skype, discussed the influence of North Africa on European Muslims.

http://www.dawn.com/2011/11/18/muslims-need-to-assimilate-into-europe.html
 
.
Can't agree more, believing in what you wish to is one thing, but trying to follow aspects of a culture that are at odds with what another may allow in the latter's country is a no-no.
 
.
^ Very well said. When in a country of not one's culture, don't overstretch oneself.
 
. .
Such a sensitive subject to some and so many thoughts ( mine) I've had over the years about this. I hope my frank thoughts don't offend ...so here it goes:

One one hand I think there should be constitutional law in Europe, US and any democracy - that if any individual asks to change the countries secular nature( if it is constitutionally secular) then that individual, either being a first generation immigrant or not a citizen, gets deported back to the cave they came from..

you will see these retards quickly shut up. agree? ( i know it's far fetched from happening)

On the Other hand I earnestly believe tha this is an issue with many among some immigrant populations. It does not stop on forcing its religious beliefs on others; it even goes as far as actively wishing ill of the very country they live off on, masked as dissent. In Hindi they call it Namak Halal...

Britain is by far, in my personal opinion, from my travels to Leeds, London, Birmingham etc. facing the most radicalized version of my way or highway on my religious beliefs , crowd - I've come across.
 
.
I agree in the sense of respectfully abiding the laws of the land and would never advocate taking the law into ones own hands. I have lived in the UK and have never had a cross of my religious beliefs with the law of the land and also believe the country i live in has respected my religion and culture.
One has to be extremely careful in using the word "assimilate". I believe the fact that people from a different background coming together and seeing themselves part of a larger family but i also believe in keeping our identity. I don't want my heritage taken away or diluted by me accepting cultural surroundings. Living in a minority in the UK i have learnt to "fall into line" however my identity and my culture are extremely important. So far i haven't been limited however i haven't abused the privileges i have enjoyed.
Last week a group identifying themselves as Muslims against Crusades attempted to disturb the peace by burning of poppies on Armistice Day. They have subsequently got banned. I am dead against events of this nature as it doesn't do our religion or culture any good.
 
.
Again, what does 'assimilation' mean in this context?

Without defining it, how can one argue for or against it?
 
.
Can't agree more, believing in what you wish to is one thing, but trying to follow aspects of a culture that are at odds with what another may allow in the latter's country is a no-no.

If you were born there...or if you have been naturalized..Its as much your country as anyone else's and above all nobody dictates who i want to believe in and what i want to wear and what food i want to eat..Thats for me to decide as all this effects my life and nobody else's so why anybody else should have a problem?

---------- Post added at 08:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:28 PM ----------

Again, what does 'assimilation' mean in this context?

Without defining it, how can one argue for or against it?

It means..Stop practicing Islam..be an atheist or better be a confused mixture of all sort of ideas...and if you are a woman show your cleavage and be proud of it.
 
.
Again, what does 'assimilation' mean in this context?

Without defining it, how can one argue for or against it?

One can only assume she is suggesting that the term used with regard to immigrants and various ethnic groups who have settled in a new land without crossing the line of cultural bounds and redefining their heritage? - but i see your point to what extent and how far do we push the word
 
.
It means..Stop practicing Islam..be an atheist or better be a confused mixture of all sort of ideas...and if you are a woman show your cleavage and be proud of it.

how are your comments above any different from the characters / mis- directed attitudes spoken off in the article ( that's if you intended to be different). you have espoused verbatim the language and attitude of the likes of Ajum chowdary..
 
.
It means..Stop practicing Islam..be an atheist or better be a confused mixture of all sort of ideas...and if you are a woman show your cleavage and be proud of it.

Cheapest post of the day. Where in the article does it encourage women to flaunt their cleavage ?
 
.
Again, what does 'assimilation' mean in this context?

Without defining it, how can one argue for or against it?

I agree another word besides “assimilation” could have been used… but we all get the context (well the ones who replied with an opinion on it here)
 
.
just one question.....if the europrans go to soudi an the likes and flaunt their cultur would the soudi govt accept it?
 
.
just one question.....if the europrans go to soudi an the likes and flaunt their cultur would the soudi govt accept it?

That's apparently justifiable here. But Europeans are considered intolerants despite all the benefits they give migrants.
 
.
I must say, i agree with superkaif bhai's posts. we need to be careful in the usage of the word 'assimilation'. i was not born in America, I only immigrated here about 9 years ago, but i respect it completely, I have total respect for its constitution & its laws, & would never impose my religious beliefs over anything that violates the constitution/law of this country. That's pretty much what I think.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom