France

“Muslims don’t defend Islam”

Particularly in multi-ethnic societies, such as France, we must insist on the principles of the rule of law, says sociologist Marieme Helie Lucas. Everything else undermines the rights of the Weaker.

DW: Mrs Helie Lucas, you are one of those French Intellectuals who have signed in the newspaper “Libération” a Text with the title: “With all the Republican Strict against radical Islam”. Already in the first lines of the undersigned protest against the term “Islamophobia”. The term, object, to the Undersigned, to be used to defame any criticism of Islam. What’s your opinion with the term?

The term “Islamophobia” was invented by the representatives of the so-called “radical Islam” and spread. Already therefore you don’t should use it at best. The arguments put forward by its inventor, runs on the following: If you criticize radical Islamists, their world view, their actions and their crimes, referring to the criticism on the Islam and not on their positions. From this they derive the right to self-defense, and even the use of violence. They declare themselves the only legitimate representatives of Islam. All who do not share your opinion, for you “non-believers” (“kufr”), who deserve death. The majority of the people living in the Muslim countries, all Muslims, are of a different view, as they belong to you, as well as agnostics, atheists or members of other religions.

The Republic from their enemies to protect. Demonstration against the onslaught of Right-wing extremist in Berlin in may 2016

You prefer in relation to these groups, than to the representatives of the “radical Islam” but of the “extreme Muslim Right”. Why?

With this term, I emphasize less the Religion than the political positioning of these groups – which have a lot in common with fascism and national socialism together. So you share the Belief that they represent unlike the Nazis, although not a superior race (the Aryan), but a superior Religion (Islam). And, as with the Nazis, the alleged Superiority is based on a fictional glorious past. Through the appeal to you, you feel both entitled and obliged to destroy so-called “sub-humans” physically. And how the Nazis saw for women “children, kitchen, Church” as an appropriate employment, and the extreme Muslim rights for women, the house and the mosque as the proper places.

There are relationships between the European and the Muslim, Right?

They have strong similarities. Both groups work towards a confrontation, you want to cause a bloodbath to their members to radicalize and recruit more followers.

The extreme right in Europe, based on your “white” or “Christian” origins, don’t fight Islam as an ideology and a philosophical-religious belief system. Much stronger and attacks a citizen, you are defined on the basis of their origin as “Muslims,” without any respect for the principle of freedom of religion and conscience. We can talk about the dangers of the extreme Right, nor as small as their strong growth.

That is why we must defend all those that apply to the Rights as “Muslims”. All the more since they represent a minority. This is what we need to do on the basis of human rights. However, we must not do it by defending Islam as such, or even those of the extreme Muslim Right.

The editorial recommends

Islam and violence

Why do we need about Islam and its potential for the mobilisation of violence. A series in collaboration with Islamic theologians, scientists, journalists.

Comment: France, the Republic and freedom

The Republic is the art of managing diversity politically. Diversity is not for everyone. That is why the Republic is, for many citizens, a disgrace. But one that offers tremendous opportunities, writes Kersten Knipp. (10.07.2016)

With the Republic against Islamism

French intellectuals are calling for a Manifesto for the defense of the Republic against Islamism. They fear this width. Especially a new tactic in the Islamists are alarmed. (01.07.2016)

Self-Empowered Jihadists

Islam has a violence problem? Self-proclaimed warriors of God have brought a world religion into disrepute. This makes a critical examination of the Koran is necessary. (18.06.2016)

What is the appropriate response to these two forms of right-wing extremism?

The European Left, liberals and humanists, this basic conceptual distinction, which to add to the progressive and humanistic resistance within the Muslim countries themselves considerable damage. Because in the end you defend those who murder the progressive forces. The fight should be led about on two fronts simultaneously: against the extreme Muslim rights on the one hand, and against the traditional right-wing extremists and racists on the other side. All you have to rely on the universal human rights.

The undersigned of in the daily newspaper “Libération” published a call to refer to the Republic as the basis of living together. What is the Republican idea?

Currently, the extreme Muslim rights in Europe calls for the introduction of laws and measures for religious minorities – think of the England that was already active “Sharia courts” that are now calling for the rights of Muslims in Canada. In view of this development, the common matter of all citizens, it is very important to support the “Republic” – the “res publica” as it is called in Latin,. You have to remember that the laws in a democracy for all citizens, without exception. All have the same rights. These rights are not issued by the religious representative in the name of a God. Instead, the citizens are represented by their elected representatives and not by priests, rabbis, imams or other representatives of its own called religious “communities”.

For as vulnerable, you hold to the idea of the Republic?

You can be in a state that different communities rely on different public orders, which leads to the fact that not all citizens enjoy the same rights. This contradicts the essence of democracy. So a divorced British citizen, in front of a Muslim religious court in respect to alimony, custody of the children, division of joint property did not have the same rights as a British citizen, and is addressed to a state court. The Same is true for the law of succession: The daughter gets brought in such a court just half of what the brother receives. And an adopted child is excluded from the Inheritance. Many examples prove it: Stand in front of different courts, they are treated unequal.

The Republic, therefore, is the order, for the rights of the Weak?

Yes. Because it would be idle to assert, that the Concerned, free will throw up a religious court. Not to accept would be to misjudge the social pressure on the women, if the state defends them. The for all citizens, the law knows only one law that applies to all. Thus, the most Vulnerable, those who are least able to protect it just to assert their rights against the reactionary forces in their “community”.

Marieme Helie Lucas, sociologist of Algerian origin. She is the founder of the international network “Women living under Muslim laws” (wluml.org) and “Secularism Is A Women’s Issue” (siawi.org).