Multicultarism and Political Correctness in the Netherlands
Reader comment on item: Europe's Epochal Elections
Submitted by Robert (United States), Dec 11, 2016 at 13:55
According to our American-English canonical dictionary, Merriam-Webster, "Ethnic" entered our dictionary in 1941; "Ethnicity" in 1950. Why is this significant? Because it was a Neologism at the time when the United States was still infected by "Racial Discrimination." And it is a vocabulary Coined not by Historians, but by Sociologists and Anthropologists. These two terms (1941, 1950) have their roots, as I understand them in Great Britain where its Colonies were studied by their Human Scientists, not exactly in an Unbiased fashion.
The related terms which were coined and disseminated by much broader forces are Nation, State, and Country, if one restricts oneself particularly to the Anglo-American Language, English.
Why is all this important?
The Criminal Code of the Netherlands prohibits and criminalized Speech that is deemed Insulting and Inciting on the bases of Race, Religion, Sex, Sexual Orientation, or Handicap.
In contrast, in the United States, all Speech is protected by the Constitution, except Libel and Slander of a Person, not even a Group; however, we do have anti-Discrimination Law (Constitutional and Statutory) which deprives Citizens or Residents (even Illegal Residents) of the material needs, including Work, Housing, Health, etc.
How lucky we are that we have such strong Institutions and Constitutional protections, that we can permit the Fringe of the Nazis and the KKK
We also have strong Individualism and Libertarian principles. So the unhistorical labels of Ethic Group and Ethnicity are only of use to the Elite Intelligentsia of our Left Professorial "population" that lectures on college campuses to freshman students.
Women, Gays, and Paraplegics are still struggling to get on the ladder to economic prosperity and social acceptance. But they do not need, nor have they sought, the mere inadequate remedy of silencing the prejudice mouth the hatred of which is provably impressed on the impressionable child.
In this country of ours one can ask publicly if the people want more or less Moroccans or Mexicans, both members of which demography have a Country of their own in which they can live as Nationals and Citizens fully expressing that Identity.
But there is this idea in our wonderful country that somehow renouncing Islam or Muslims who practice it is somehow un-American. When the Irish in 1846-1848 first stared immigrating to the United States in noticeable numbers the Press began depicting Bishops on the Shores as Crocodiles invading this land. The fear was expressed loudly that the Roman Catholic Pope would rule America.
There is nothing in our tradition to prohibit the depiction of Mohammad in drawings, paintings, or statues - yet to do so might provoke a lone wolf Muslim to commit Murder.
Who would think of prohibiting a person's attire in public spaces in this country. The covering of the face only occurred in Hollywood Westerns when a bank rubbery was about to go down. A person's identity is in her Face, and to Tolerate such practice is to condone the notion that a Woman is Inferior to a Man. Why aren't man going about in Covered Faces to show their Modesty? Perhaps the Beard is the method to do that. I ask that of Islam expert Dr. Daniel Pipes - what is the source and status of Muslim men who wear beards? Perhaps we should suggest that Muslim women wear false beards, making them man-like in their modesty.
There is no, and there shouldn't religious reverence in the secular or public discourse. Reverence belongs in the sanctuary: the Church, Synagogue, or Mosque. But in Holland one is no longer permitted to discriminate against Islam, which breeds Terrorists, on the absurd ground of violating the principles of Enlightenment Tolerance
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (7) on this item
Comment on this item
Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes