File spoon-archives/bourdieu.archive/bourdieu_2004/bourdieu.0401, message 13


From: "john.kaman" <john.kaman-AT-wanadoo.fr>
Subject: [BOU:] Islam
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 10:11:43 +0100


I cannot respond to all of the remarks made in response to my post but I can
try to clarify what emerged as a rather oblique message.

First of all, my remarks were addressed to the integrist form of Islamism
and not to the overwhelming majority of Muslim men and women whom I have
found to be ethical, peace loving and generally kind people.  This is what I
meant when I made the distinction between the sunnite majority here in
France which supports the government's position on the veil as opposed to
the more extreme manifestations of Islam which of course do not.

Secondly, I wholeheartedly believe that Turkey is the best example of a
modern, laic, civilization with Muslim roots; it deserves admission into the
European Union and is being stalled only because of its Muslim past.  In the
meantime, as its society evolves there are stresses and strains between
modernity and medievilism, which I believe the offended poster would admit.

What sets me off however are ignorant remarks by so-called scholars that
Islam is the one progressive force standing between the US and world
domination.  Most Islamic nations supported both Gulf wars, albeit with some
reluctance and internal turmoil; I fail to see how their support of US
imperialism stands between me and US imperialism, a statement that is absurd
on its face.

Furthermore to say that secularism or laicism is a right wing movement is
not ignorant; it is stupid.  Whether France's laic traditions began in 1805
or 1905 is irrelevant; the position is broadly based in France as
demonstrated by recent polls show something like 80% of the population
supporting the government's stand.  By contrast you from the United States
do not seem to object to George Bush's mix of politics and faith which has
resulted in substantial distortions of constitutional rights and represents
a felt danger to the rest of the world. I suppose you think that faith based
programs as an alternative to secularism are progressive.

And it really angers me to see someone who is supposed to be a scholar
manipulating quotations when he thinks he can get away with it.  The url to
a brief Bourdieu statement does not in any way say that France's laicism is
zenophobic--neither the word nor its synomyms appear anywhere in the text.
The subject of the text, roughly translated as "One problem can hide
another" is that the real problem in France is not the veil but the failure
to provide some means for the increasingly large Muslim population to
integrate into French society.  This was true when Bourdieu wrote and it is
true now.  France's failure to accept French born Muslims full rights as
citizens is a national shame and one of the biggest causes of so-called
crime in France.  What are second generation, HLM-based youth to do but
rebel?

I am sure there are things I have not replied to but I am equally confident
that there are those among you who will point out my inconsistencies and
omissions.

John M. Kaman

**********************************************************************
Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005