Muslims are Bearing Most of the Historic Burden of European Racism - Term Paper Example

Muslims are Bearing Most of the Historic Burden of European Racism Introduction The cultures and the countries of Europe have historically been heterogeneous and diverse in the religious, ethnic and social composition. The opening of borders, the globalization of production and markets as well as worldwide migration will keep the trend going, despite the attempts by extremist and populist forces, to increase antipathy and to mobilize nationals against cultural heterogeneity. Outsiders in Europe are the targets of prejudice. The groups subjected to prejudice include Jews, black people, Muslims, homosexuals and women. These groups are faced by group-focused enmity, and they are most often, the victims of structural disadvantage and deliberate discrimination. Further, these groups are the targets of extremist violence and right-wing populist campaigns, which argue that outside cultures are not compatible (DellaPergola, 2010). Being the continent that experiences the highest inward migration, Europe should be least concerned by prejudicial perspectives towards immigrants. For example, in the case of Britain, many of the immigrant groups come from their former colonies, including the Caribbean, India and Pakistan; lately there are labor migrants coming in from Poland. In the case of Germany, many foreigners are those from Turkey, after they went there as temporary labor migrants. These examples demonstrate that the perception of foreigners as outsiders does not ordinarily depend on their origin, country of birth or citizenship. Additionally, foreigners belonging to non-Christian backgrounds are quickly considered outsiders, due to the overwhelmingly Christian orientation of Europe. For example, France has the highest ratios of Muslims, making about 10 percent. In Netherlands and Germany, Muslims comprise about 7 and 6 percent of the general population. This paper will discuss the question; whether Muslims are the foreign group bearing the highest burden of European racism. Discussion of the burden of European racism borne by Muslims Migrant and Muslim populations in Europe, as a percentage of the overall population Country Muslims Migrants Main origin countries France 10.0 10.4 North Africa, particularly Algeria Germany 7.0 12.3 Eastern Europe, Former Soviet union and Turkey Netherlands 6.0 10.1 Morocco, Indonesia, Turkey and Surinam Great Britain 4.0 9.1 Pakistan, South East Asia, Poland and Caribbean Islands Italy 2.1 4.3 Africa and Romania Portugal 0.14 7.3 Ukraine and Africa Poland 0.07 1.8 Eastern Europe, particularly Ukraine Hungary 0.03 3.1 Former Hungarian territories and Romania Source (Kettani, 2010). The experience of Discrimination In 2008, the European commission created a special account of the discrimination experienced in Europe, using the measure survey branded, “Eurobarometer’. It was meant to establish the number of people that view themselves as members of a minority groups. The report, also, explored the prevalence of the experiences of discrimination among the groups considered foreign or outsiders. The figures reporting the contact of individuals with outside groups, from the Eurobarometer show that 61 percent of Europeans reported having acquaintances from other religious groups or the people from other ethnic origins. Further, a third of the population (34 percent) reported that they kept an acquaintance or a friend who identified as homosexual. Particularly, better-educated and younger individuals were more likely to report a higher likelihood of keeping contact with the people from another ethnic origin (Mayer, 2003). Also, those living in urban areas, as well as those belonging to other ethnic minority groups were more likely to report relations and association with the members of the often discriminated groups. The larger majority of those surveyed during the study (87%) gave information that they did not belong to a minority group. There is also the question of perceived discrimination, where many Europeans give information that, members of minority groups fall victim to the discrimination. Sixty-two percent of the people contacted during the study reported that discrimination due to the ethnic origin of minority group individuals was common. Fifty-one percent of the informants pointed out that the sexual orientation of members of society was enough grounds for discriminating them. Forty-two percent of the respondents reported that the larger proportion of discrimination could be traced to the religious or the faith-based inclinations of the different groups. Another group that was commonly faced with discrimination was those that were disabled; gender was another area that determined the discrimination of members of society. Among the respondents that gave reports about racial and cultural discrimination levels in their society – those that reported the highest levels of discrimination included the Dutch, Germans, the British and Hungarians. The respondents from Poland and Portugal reported comparatively fewer levels of discrimination against others. The statistics showed that a close relationship existed between the respondent’s experience of discrimination and the discrimination levels reported. In general, 15 percent of the European respondents gave information that they had suffered harassment or discrimination during the previous twelve-month period prior to the study, due to their disability, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age or religion. The ratios of France and the Great Britain were higher than the mean for Europe as a whole (Mayer, 2003). While exploring the question of anti-discrimination levels and strategies in Eastern Europe, 48% of European respondents reported that very little was done to resolve the issue of discrimination, based on racial or other grounds, at their country. This was the opinion expressed, particularly among those that expressed the views that discrimination was widespread throughout Europe or their particular country. Among the respondents, only 11 percent reported that the measures put in place were substantial enough to counter discrimination. The sensitivity to discrimination and racism reported among the respondents was highly dependent on whether they had witnessed discrimination or experienced it themselves (Mayer, 2003). Sensitivity to racism and discrimination, also, varied in levels from one European country to the other. Among the groups that view that enough has been done to counter racism and discrimination are the members of the right-wing extremist and populist groups. This group went as far as sabotaging the actions implemented to counter the discrimination and the racism felt in European countries. These groups used group-targeted enmity to rationalize racism and the discrimination targeted at the different groups. Racism and Discrimination as core elements of Right-wing extremist and Populist ideologies There are a number of definitions of right-wing populism and extremism, but the most obvious one is that, treating outsiders and a foreign group as inferior is an important aspect of their general outlook. In the view of Wilhelm Heitmeyer (1987) extremist right-wing inclinations are guided by the ideology of inequality, with reference to the use of violence, which distinguishes them from right-wing populists. The ideology of inequality is expressed through the treatment of other groups as inferior, in racist categories, extreme nationalism, totalitarian norms and social Darwinism – emphasizing in-group homogeneity. The justification of using violence as a legitimate strategy of controlling conflict shows its acceptance for use (Zick and kupper, 2009). On the basis of qualitative and quantitative data collection from eight European countries, the Siren project pointed out four core elements of right-wing populist social attitudes, including in-group favoritism, out-group negativity, the rejection of the establishments of representative democratic rule and authoritarianism (Hentges et al., 2008). According to Wilhelm, right-wing populism is fundamentally comprised of anti-Semitism, anti-immigrant ideologies, and aggressive authoritarianism, where focus is directed towards law and order (Zick and kupper, 2009). Therefore, the treatment of different groups as inferior is a central outlook of right-wing populist and extremist ideological complexes. Current trends among many European nations depict that anti-Muslim attitudes have grown into a central component of right-wing extremist propaganda and populism. The prejudices propagated by extremist groups at the different European countries depend on the historical origin of the different groups, the prevalence of ideologies justifying unequal treatment, as well as the history and the culture from which they develop. Further, extremist and populist movements embrace unification in the prejudices and the group-focused enmity propagated. The intolerance of others, which covers the violation of norms among insiders and outsiders, is among the instruments used. This instrument is used very effectively, because it attracts the groups that share common sentiments and a powerful system for the reinforcement of cohesion among the insiders (Pettigrew, 2009). Due to the fact that these practices permeate day to day life and the power of prejudice in Europe is more intense than it is believed to be. Overt and Covert prejudices Prejudices may be perpetuated openly or in a subtle manner, which is indirect and often hidden. One example of the subtle types of prejudice is the refusal or the rejection of sympathy for the Muslim group, or the exaggeration of the cultural differences between the Muslims and European groups. For instance, there is the common prejudicial outlook that Muslims are more inclined towards becoming terrorists. Covert prejudices covers a chain of arguments, which on closer review, turn out to be commonly presented, irrespective of the group that the prejudices are targeted against (Pettigrew and Meertens, 1995). The negative traits of covert or overt prejudices are ordinarily the same, pointing out different groups as being vulnerable to laziness, stupidity, deviousness, indolence, uncleanliness, psychological instability, physical weakness, criminality and slyness. These prejudices will often cover double standards, where the issues which are criticized is dismissed or ignored as not important from the group. One example is the wide European outlook that Muslims promote gender inequality; while the support accorded to traditional gender roles in the population’s outlook is ignored (Zick, Kupper and Hovermann, 2011). Further, the prejudicial outlooks of Europeans share the common outlook that all the members of the group share in the actions of one member, or that the entire group is responsible for the actions in question. One example that shows the extreme outlook of European countries towards Muslims is the prejudiced view that all Muslims are Muslims, because of the terrorist attacks committed by radical individuals or minorities from the Muslim fraternity (Mendelberg, 2001). Old-fashioned racism, which is evident among many European countries, expresses negative attitudes that are generalized historically. In most cases, the targets of the prejudice are accused of threatening the in-group (Zick, Kupper and Hovermann, 2011). For example, the high populations of Muslims in France and Germany are accused by the right-wing extremists, of stealing the employment opportunities that would, otherwise be taken by the in-group. Overt prejudices, commonly involve attributing the group in question to blame, where the common outlook is that, the behavior of the group in question is responsible for the persecution or the prejudice they are subjected to. European Anti-Muslim attitudes Anti-Muslim attitudes are targeted at the people that are believed as being from the Muslim faith. Further, it may extend to cover all the people affiliated to Islam as a religion, irrespective of whether the people that are subjected to prejudice are religious and with no regard for the Islam branch they belong to. Among the European countries, where Muslim immigrant numbers are high, there seems to be a common trend that views immigrants as Muslims. The outlook extends to the level that equating the status of an immigrant with being Muslim, touches all Muslim individuals and groups, irrespective of their place of birth or their citizenship. Additionally, like the Jew population in Europe, the Muslims in Europe are viewed as a foreign group, and not a primary component of the majority society. These anti-Muslim attitudes are evident from the general impression of Europeans that, there are too many Muslims in the different countries, the view that Muslim groups make so many demands, and the wide-reaching critical outlook of Islam as a religion which is characteristically intolerant. From the study of the varied informant group from the different countries, many Europeans view Islam as a religion that promotes intolerance. However, from the survey of the respondents from Netherlands and the Great Britain, there was agreement below 50 percent that Islam was a religion that promotes intolerance in society. Among the respondents from the different European countries, more than half of all the respondents expressed the sentiments that many Muslims make too many demands from the society (Sassenberg et al., 2007). The inferences from Portugal were comparatively different, suggesting that about a third of the Muslim population was the one that could be identified as being demanding upon the society. From the survey, the statement that there were too many Muslims was supported by a quarter of Portugal’s population and the same was confirmed by a third of the French population. From the case of Germany, the Netherlands and Great Britain, above 40 percent of the population complained that there were too many Muslims living in their countries. From the statistics of Hungary, 60 percent of the population held the opinion that there were very many Muslims living in the country. From the survey, the information collected showed that a majority of Europeans find the Muslim culture as incompatible to that of other European groups in general. Among 17 percent of the respondents from Poland, it was expressed that the culture of the Muslims was not compatible with that of other cultural groups (Zick, Kupper and Hovermann, 2011). Among the German respondents covered by the study, 19 percent held the same opinion. Among the respondents from France and Portugal, about half of the total respondents’ number held the views that the Muslim culture was intrinsically not compatible to that of other European groups. One area, which 70 percent of the European respondents questioned, was the view of women from the Muslim culture, which they felt, that were highly incompatible with the values of other European groups. Further, many of the informants held the idea that the attitudes of Muslims towards women are totally not compatible with their own cultural values. Generally, one third of the European respondents held the views that Muslims view terrorists like heroes, despite the fact that a majority of the respondents held the views that the terrorist activities of extremist Muslims found moral support from the general Muslim society and fraternity. Among the respondents from Germany and Netherlands, less than 20 percent and 30 percent of those from Hungary felt that terrorism is supported by the moral guidelines of Muslim. Therefore, the common thread between the European anti-Muslim attitudes shows that, Europeans in general, view that the culture of Muslims are generally not compatible with those of other European groups. These cultural views lead to the generalized racial outlook of Europeans towards Muslims, which has been worsened by the view that they are inclined and are usually in support of terrorism. Europeans are generally united in the rejection projected towards Islam and Muslims. The widely embraced anti-Muslim attitude and societal outlook are common in Hungary, Germany, Poland and Italy, followed by Great Britain, France, and Netherlands (Zick, Kupper and Hovermann, 2011). The anti-Muslim attitudes are least present among the Portuguese, as evident from the statistics collected from the respondents. However, the differences between the eight European countries, in terms of their levels of anti-Muslim attitudes towards Muslims and members of the Islam religion in general are minimal. The perception of Inequalities towards Muslims in Egypt From the survey of the different European countries, the prejudice, racism and the anti-Muslim attitudes uncovered are similar to those observed before, from countries like Germany. With regards to the issues of equality, the social outlook is losing ground among the different countries surveyed. From the different countries, group-focused enmity is not only a marginal problem, but also a problem that extends into the fabric of the European community. Irrespective of the many years of immigration into the continent, negative opinions about immigrant groups like Muslims are widely evident and felt in Europe. Further, despite the long immigration history and the considerably minimal immigrant population, the conception among Europeans that they “are being swamped” still holds a great level of support. Therefore, the willingness to exclude immigrants, especially Muslims is strong, which is evident from the support of immigration restrictions. This outlook is relatively different from the respondents from Italy and Netherlands (Riek et al., 2006). The racist and the discrimination tendencies held against Muslims vary from one country to another, and the prejudiced outlook is less evenly spread throughout Europe. Among a majority of Europeans, there is a considerable sense of distance, mistrust and suspicion targeted at Muslims and Islam in general. The generalized suspicion targeted at Muslims cannot be explained, based on the numbers of Muslims living in Europe. This shows that anti-Muslim attitudes are widely generalized, even without the presence of the Muslim. For example, from the case of Eastern European countries, where the numbers of Muslims are minimal or negligible, prejudice and the discrimination of Muslims is highly prevalent (Zick, Kupper and Hovermann, 2011). The case demonstrates the strength of European Anti-Muslim prejudice, which exists and is evident, irrespective of presence or the absence of contact with the general European community. This imaginary prejudice and discrimination is particularly evident, where the information about Muslims is rejected and contact is avoided, therefore leading to a lack of real experiences that can help the people in refuting the prejudice and racism. The racist prejudice and discrimination of Muslims is not only traceable from the fact that they are considered an out-side group, but also the European view that their religious differences plays an instrumental role (Zick, Kupper and Hovermann, 2011). A majority of Europeans hold the opinion that the Islam religion is highly intolerant – which is exceedingly widely accepted. For example, among the majority of the respondents from Poland and Germany held the belief that Islam is incompatible with their own culture. An example is the widely accepted cultural outlook that the attitudes of Muslims towards women are contradictory to the values of Europeans (Redersdorff and Guimond, 2006). The intrinsic belief that the culture and the religion of the Muslims is not compatible with that of other European groups places them at a higher disadvantage, when compared with other groups that are subjected to prejudice. For example, among the blacks, religion and culture play a less intrinsic role in distancing them from the mainstream European community, because they can reach common grounds in the two areas (Pettigrew and Tropp, 2006). Additionally, the association of Muslims as a group, to terrorism raises the apprehension of the general European community against them, therefore deepening the racist, prejudice and the discrimination that they face at different spheres of life. For example, towards the checking of terrorist activities, Muslims in Europe are likely to be subjected to more intensive inspection and restrictions (Zick, Kupper and Hovermann, 2011). Conclusion The cultures of Europe have been historically diverse and homogenous, in the areas of ethnic, religious and social compositions. However, the opening of Europe’s borders has not ended the prejudice targeted at foreign groups, including immigrants and citizens of diverse ethnicities. Some of the groups that face the prejudice include Jews, blacks, Muslims, women and homosexuals. However, of these different groups, European prejudice and racism has remained higher towards Muslims. Among the countries with the highest percentage of Muslims include France, Germany, the Great Britain and Netherlands. Racism and discrimination in Europe is highly linked to right-wing extremist and populist ideologies, which justify inequality and the use of violence to maintain the societal balance desired by the acceptance of European superiority. The prejudicial and the racist tendencies of Europeans towards Muslims among other outside groups are either overt or covert. Examples of overt racist activities are the view that Muslims are more likely to become terrorists, when compared to other groups in Europe. European anti-Muslim attitudes are targeted at Muslims, as well as members of the Islam religion in general. These anti-Muslim attitudes include that there are too many Muslims living in Europe; Muslim is equated to the status of immigrant, irrespective of citizenship and place of birth, and that Muslims are foreigners to Europe, unlike other European groups. These attitudes are compounded, in the case of Muslims than that of other groups; by the fact that many Europeans believe that the culture and the religion of Muslims are not compatible to that of other groups. Also, the attitudes are compounded by the outlook that Muslims are inclined to terrorism and that their culture is not tolerant. References DellaPergola, S., 2010. World Jewish Population 2010. Current Jewish Population Reports2. Hentges, G., Meyer, M., Flecker, J., Kirschhofer, S., Thoft, E., Grinderslev, E. and Balazs, G., 2003. The Abandoned Worker: Socio-Economic Change and the Attraction of Right-Wing Populism. Vienna: SIREN. Kettani, H., 2010. World Muslim Population: 1950–2020. International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, 1 (2). Mayer, N., 2003. ‘Democracy in France: Do Associations Matter?’ In Generating Social Capital: Civil Society and Institutions in Comparative Perspective, Ed. M. Hooghe and D. Stolle, 43–66. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Mendelberg, T., 2001. The Race Card: Campaign Strategy, Implicit Messages, and the Norm of Equality. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Pettigrew, T. F., 2009. Secondary Transfer Effect of Contact: Do Intergroup Contact Effects Spread to Noncontacted Out-groups? Social Psychology, 40, 55–65. Pettigrew, T. F., and Meertens R. W., 1995. Subtle and Blatant Prejudice in Western Europe. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 57–75. Pettigrew, T. F., and Tropp, L., 2006. A Meta-Analytic Test of Intergroup Contact and Discrimination: A European Report. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. (Online) Available from: http://www.uni-bielefeld.de/ikg/IntolerancePrejudice.pdf [Accessed July 14, 2013] Redersdorff, S., and Guimond, S., 2006. ‘Comparing Oneself over Time: The Temporal Dimension in Social Comparison’. In Social Comparison and Social Psychology: Understanding Cognition, Intergroup Relations, and Culture, ed. S. Guimond, 76–96. New York: Cambridge University Press. Riek, B. M., Mania, E. W., and. Gaertner, S. L., 2006. Intergroup Threat and Out-group Attitudes: A Meta-Analytic Review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10,336–53. Sassenberg, K., Moskowitz, G., Jacoby, J., and Hansen, N., 2007. The Carryover Effect of Competition: The Impact of Competition on Prejudice towards Uninvolved Out- group’s. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 529–538. Zick, A., and Küpper, B., 2009. ‘Rechtsextremismus: Erscheinungsformen, Strat-egien und Ursachen’. In Diskriminierung und Toleranz: Psychologische Grundlagen und Anwendungsaspekte, ed. A. Beelmann and K. Jonas, 283–302. Wiesbaden: Verlagfür Sozialwissenschaften. Zick, A., Kupper, B., and Hovermann, A., 2011. Intolerance, Prejudice and Discrimination: A European Report. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. (Online) Available from: http://www.uni-bielefeld.de/ikg/IntolerancePrejudice.pdf [Accessed July 14, 2013] Read More