Prev
Next

Fear, change, and the rise of the right as the world shrinks

James Arvanitakis

by James Arvanitakis

28 Jun 05:40am

Must Reads

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge - this is a caption

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

38

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread? - this is a caption

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

92

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref - this is a caption

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

71

Filed under: Border Protection, Elections, Europe, Far Right, Globalisation, Immigration, Politics

52 comments

Walking through the streets of Amsterdam, one of Europe’s most vibrant capitals, it is easy to get caught up in the cosmopolitan nature of the city. Being World Cup time, the city is not only awash in Dutch flags, but an array of other nationalities hang their national banners alongside the recognisable orange of the Dutch team.

Against the tide. Anti-nationalist party protestors rally in The Netherlands. Picture: AP.

The backpackers, tour groups, sightseers and locals politely wrestle for space in the crowded streets and bars, while cars with engines smaller than 50cc and motor scooters share bike lanes. On the bikes, no one wears a helmet, people smoke, talk on their phones and sometimes can be spotted drinking beer. Here, everyone rides: from the men and women in expensive suits, to girls dressed in glamorous outfits on their way out to club, as well as families of four on various sized bikes, and young Muslim women wearing hijabs.

I sit in a café (as distinct from the famous Amsterdam ‘coffee shops’) and speak to various politically active young people. Telling them that I am slowly falling in love with their city and pointing to Geert Mak’s fascinating historical account of Amsterdam, we turn to the political landscape of the Netherlands and the rest Europe.

It becomes very clear, very quickly, that while on the surface things are quite merry, you do not have to look far to see the emerging tensions.

The most obvious manifestation of these tensions is the growing political influence of nationalist, right wing and reactionary parties. In the week I have been here, elections in both Holland and Belgium have seen such parties emerge as powerful political forces. This follows the rise of such parties in Austrian elections (2008 where far right parties gained 30 percent of the vote), in the European elections (2009) where ultra-conservatives gained over 15 percent in Denmark and Slovakia, as well as the British Nationalist Party (BNP) wining two seats in the European Parliament.

While the Belgium election is complicated by a separatist element, in the Netherlands, the big winner is Geert Wilders and his populist right wing Freedom Party. Not only is it openly anti-Muslim, but is generally antagonistic to all foreigners.  Their message leading up to and during the election was clear: the Netherlands is for the (white) Dutch only. They achieved 15 percent of the vote that translates to 24 seats in parliament and making them a real political force.

The rise of Wilders did not eat into the traditional right-wing vote, with the right-of-centre party, VVD, which takes a strong anti-EU stance achieved 20 percent of the vote (or 31 seats) and is most likely to front the next government.

Why has Europe seen a revival of right wing politics?

It would appear that the answer is that the very processes of globalisation that promised a smaller, closer and tight knit world are, paradoxically, the ones that seem to be behind the rise of nationalism and a lurch towards isolationism.

At the turn of the millennium, the promises of globalisation were everywhere. The then treasurer, Peter Costello , raved about the economic possibilities of tighter economies while chastising ‘anti-globalisation’ protestors. More recently, US political commentator, Thomas Friedman, declared ‘the world is flat’, and only last month The Economist spoke about the continued globalisation of banking as something that is inevitable.

Globalisation is a complex phenomenon that is driven by the decisions that we all make: from investment bankers in New York to consumers in Jakarta. Consequently, there is nothing pre-determined or inevitable about it, and the rise of nationalistic movements and reactionary parties should be enough to show us that there are as many doors closing as ones opening.

There are three key reasons why this is the case.

The first is loss of control. If there is one fundamental characteristic of globalisation, it is that decisions that affect our lives are made further and further away, and this is something that makes us feel vulnerable. The decisions of investors overseas have real impacts on our lives – impacts that they can never appreciate.

The second is that this vulnerability is aggravated because the many promises made have failed to materialise. The interlinking of economies was supposed to bring peace, stability and opportunities. In an age defined by terrorism, financial instability and environmental devastation, the optimism has quickly vanished.

Thirdly, globalisation means change – and rapid change at that. If we throw this in as the third ingredient, we can see how the flow of migrants that accompanies closer economic links is changing the nature of communities and has been identified, for political expedience, as a destabilising force. 

Far right parties have been quite adept at taking advantage of this situation by promoting a sense of fear and insecurity even if they offer no solution beyond an imagined ability to end immigration. Even if they fail to gain votes, the problem is that centre parties begin to echo some of the more reactionary language.

In Australia, this has been aimed at refugees and genuine asylum seekers . In parts of Europe, it is more indiscriminate – a real concern for many here given Europe’s history.  It is a slippery slope, however, and if the Government and Opposition do not ensure a ‘race free’ election, fear of difference and outsiders, this may mark Australia’s next phase of globalisation.

Most commented

427Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself
375There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin
313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
304Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer
262Who murdered the Arts degree?
246A big day for Thomson, who thus far is guilty of nothing...
231Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia...
231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.

52 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Eric says:

      05:59am | 28/06/10

      The rise of the “Right” is due to people who ignore very real issues and paint those who are concerned with the brush of racism and xenophobia. They fail to understand the forces at work, and so they cannot counteract them.

      A country such as The Netherlands, where artists are murdered for daring to criticise Islam, has every right to be worried about the surge in unassimilable immigrants. Only those ignorant of history and the teachings of the Koran could fail to see the problems arising.

      While our politicians and intellectuals bury their heads in the sand, increasing numbers of ordinary people are becoming aware of what is going on.

      Reply

    • T.Chong says:

      07:38am | 28/06/10

      Yes, but Eric, why paint all Islam with the same brush ?
      Fanatical Muslims exist , just like fanatical Christians, yet we dont condem all Catholics and Protestants due to the bloodshed in Ireland.
      Africa has its share of extremeist murderous christian based militias, whos trade mark is to coerce children to kill, in the name of christianity.
      The worlds largest Muslim country exists mere kilometers away from our northern border, yet they pose no threat.
      In general,- for most people,( no personal inference to any Puncher) , “there are few opinions held more tightly, than that we know least about.”

    • Macon Paine says:

      08:28am | 28/06/10

      @ Eric

      You bring up a good point, there are legitimate concerns about immigration and the example of the Netherlands is a shining example of how not to shape a countries immigration policy. Although i’ll probably be called racist by certain people here for saying that.
      Australia may have problems but we are doing a hell of a lot better than the Europeans on this issue. Anyway I saw a movie by US Comedian and noted Liberal/Agnostic Bill Maher called “Religulous” which includes a section where he travels to the Netherlands to speak with some local Muslims about the Van Goff murder etc and it was startling to see how some of them just flat out lie to him on camera about virtually everything. Anyway it’s certainly worth a watch as he ridicules almost every major religion and in many cases gets them to make fools out of themselves, the creationist science section is hilarious.

      @T. Chong
      Yes T.Chong you have a point it is wrong to paint all of Islam with the same brush. Most religious people, I hope, are appalled at the actions of various groups acting in the name of their religion. Not sure about the Northern Ireland example, is that conflict due to immigration? I thought it was more a sectarian conflict.

    • Arthur says:

      10:34am | 28/06/10

      T.Chong
      the agressive nature of Islam is not reserved for the extremists, unless you would consider the thousands of muslims who attend mosques in Australia and listen to their mufti preaching hatred of christianity and western culture to be extremists.
      Indonesia may not be a threat to Australia from a military point of view,
      but the threat of terrorits acts on Australians within Australia or Indonesia certianly exists. Have you forgotten about the Bali bombings Already?

    • papachango says:

      04:13pm | 28/06/10

      T Chong - I agree its grossly unfair to assume all Muslims are terrorists, but you can’t really compare with fanatical Christians. People are fond of pointing out that there are Christian fanatics who bomb abortion clinics in the name of Jesus, and that’s awful, but how many clinic bombings have there been over the last ten years? I’d say probably only one or two nutters, who are roundly condemned by the majority of Christians and agnostics.

      Compare that to the number of killings in the name of Allah, and the extreme reluctance of most of the Muslim community to condemn or even distance themselves from these nutjobs. You have mobs like Hizb ut Tahrir in Australia who claim that ‘moderate Islam’ is something the Western world is trying to force upon them to dilute their true faith, and whose explicit aim is a global Islamic caliphate.

      You have to admit that while historically Christianity has had its share of fundamentalists, currently the Islamic world has a much bigger problem with extremists keeping them in the Dark Ages.

      You mentioned Indonesia as an example of a country where Muslims aren’t a threat, and I’d agree as well as adding Turkey to that list. However these two are an exception rather than the norm. It’s no coincidence that they are about the only two majority Muslim countries that have a secular political system; almost everywhere else is a theocracy with seventh century values.

      That’s the root of the problem - Islam badly needs a global Reformation and its own Martin Luther. I fear it’s going the other way - the (relatively) liberal societies of Turkey and Indonesia are under pressure from a Saudi-influenced and funded school of Islam to adopt sharia law.

    • Eric says:

      08:09am | 28/06/10

      Dear Mr T, there are significant differences between Islam and other major world religions. This is why I specvifically mentioned the history of Islam and the teachings of the Koran.

      The Koran divides the world into two regions - The House of Submission (Dar al-Islam) and the House of War (Dar al-Harb). These names themselves reveal much of the Islamic world view. The 1400 year Jihad against everything that is not Islam reveals the rest.

      Further study will show that it isn’t “extremist” ideas that fuel Islamic violence and expansionism, but the literal words of the Prophet himself. Indeed, many people hold tightly to the opinion that Islam is harmless - typically, they are the ones who know least about its teachings and history.

      Reply

    • Crash says:

      03:46pm | 28/06/10

      You show me any quote from the Koran inciting violence and I’ll show you an equivalent one from the Bible.  It is ludicrous to try and maintain that Islam is any more violent than Christianity and to do so merely reveals that you do not really understand what you are talking about.  Both holy books incite violence and hatred in equal measure, both holy books preach war against unbelievers, both holy books tell us that women should be treated like property. 
      In actuality, as much as people would like to deny it, the Afghan and Iraq wars are both largely Christian fundamentalists (Certainly at the level of government that is responsible for the war) versus Islamic fundamentalists.  We just have bigger guns, so we can pretend that’s not what it’s about. 
      In fact, it’s kind of funny you should talk about the ‘1400 years of Jihad against everything that is not Islam’, especially when that period covers several Crusades,  the Catholic church wiping out native religions in South America and several other countries and sundry other violent Christian movements to kill or convert anyone that’s different

    • annie says:

      08:15am | 28/06/10

      yes okay but it wasnt radical christians who flew planes in the twin towers or blew up the train spain, or tried to blow up a plane with explding underpants. or threaten to kill and kill anyone who uses the name of image of allah in and sort of cartoon, or blew up the underground train in london, or who stone to death women who without proof of infidelity, or shoot 8 year old boys who they claim is a spy for the americans. you could just go on and on. Chritianity has moved on from the dark ages but islam is still in the sevent century.

      Reply

    • PaulB says:

      08:24am | 28/06/10

      You should do a little basic research on 911 Annie, instead of just accepting the dung fed to you by our corrupted, controlled media without question.  You may get a surprise that knocks apart your over-simple view of the world.  Clue:  Don’t waste time with websites that talk about holograms, they’re there for a reason.

    • Macon Paine says:

      08:55am | 28/06/10

      @ PaulB
      Wait are you saying annie is wrong over 9/11? It wasn’t extremist muslims? What is wrong with annie’s inference of radical muslims causing 9/11? Thats what happened right? Please clarify.

    • Adam Diver says:

      08:50am | 28/06/10

      You can’t just ignore the race issue and hope it will go away. We cant all just hold hands and sing Kumbaya.

      The reason the right has such support is because the moderates are too afraid to make a stand on the issue. They simply stay to the left in order to not come across racist or xenaphopic and then nothing gets done to address the issue.

      Some cultures are incompatible with our way of life, yet we pander to thier demands constantly. We have a democratic government (with many flaws), equal opportunity to succeed, a strong legal and system, good government services and prosperity. If that is not enough ncentive for an immigrant to embrace this culture, and give up parts of thier culture we find unacceptable than don’t move here. How much more do you want from a country?

      Then we have the left attacking the country that provides all these wonderful opportunities and services because they speak out against some obviously barbaric, and socially unnacceptable practices that some immigrants bring with them. Why should we be tolerant to activities that we would not accept from christians for example.

      Reply

    • annie says:

      09:03am | 28/06/10

      Yep okay PaulB and the moon is made of green cheese and of course the moon landing didnt happen its filmed in the nevada desert and kennedy was shot by the cia and to your point yes its obvious bush was behind 9/11. mate keep taking those pills and dont forget your appointment with the trick cyclist. you have my sympathy

      Reply

    • Mark says:

      09:26am | 28/06/10

      And of course Paul a conspiracy that big can easily be kept under wraps… except from critical thinkers like you Paul, because nothing gets past you!

    • T.Chong says:

      09:31am | 28/06/10

      Annie- because the murderers of 9/11 claimed they did what they did for Islam, does not mean that muslims asked or condoned these attacks.
      The ‘born again “who murdered the Dr at the US abortion clinic did so in the name of his Jesus.  Does that mean all christians were in on the plan ? That all christians supported his murderous activities?  That we condem all christians because of his actions?
      Why are all Muslims held to account for the actions of extremists, yet we dont apply this standard to other religions.
      Extreme Zionist settlers regularly beat up Palestinians and destroy crops / orchards etc. Are ALL jews responsible ? Of course not, but yet when it comes to Muslims, no such diffentiation is made between its extremists and the many 100s of millions who dont support such actions.

    • annie says:

      11:16am | 28/06/10

      T Chong Why are all Muslims held to account for the actions of extremists.

      I’ll tell you old son muslims are behind 99 percent of all acts of terrorism or events of mass murder either to christians hindus or different sects of the same religion. And the silence is always deafening of the criticism of these acts from muslim leader here in australia and around the world. in fact it’s mostly condoned by the silent majority if you care to read muslim blogs.

    • Greg says:

      04:19pm | 28/06/10

      Wow, this quickly got onto the anti Muslim wagon didn’t it and though making a separate post, it is hard to ignore some things.
      And so Annie, whatever % of whomever is involved in terrorist attacks, that still does not mean every or even close to the majority of all muslims are bad people or even condone terrorism.
      I agree that there could be more Islamic Clerics speaking against terrorism and violence if what the media portrays for us is near a truth that they do not but we also need to remember that the media may well just target those clerics that are not prpepared to go public with a view we would like to see.
      How many muslims do you actually know and how many people might you know and not even know what their religion is?
      I doubt that many of us not being terribly religious would have acquaintances who are Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, Geek Orthodox or whatever or even have much contact with people of such religions.
      And with
      ” in fact it’s mostly condoned by the silent majority if you care to read muslim blogs. ” you know for a fact that the silent majority is well represented in blogging on the internet do you?
      Could it not be such perceptions give rise to antagonism and then persecution that may well give rise to attitudes that may themselves be esily converted to hatred and violence?
      Like, I doubt you would go too far out of your way to help a muslim person in difficulty.
      Sure, nobody in their right mind condones terrorist attacks like 911 others and most of us would like for a peaceful life with fairness in all respects.
      But cast your mind if you can to what could have perceivably caused people to develop such hatred to believe those proposing terrorist attacks and then participating.
      And sure there’ll be people painting the infidels as despicable and needing to be attacked just as we have western leaders talking of smoking guns, axis of evil etc. and perpetrating hostilities for many years against a region of the planet where Islam is the majority religion.
      Could you concieve that perhaps with people of Islamic religion there have been far more civillian casualties than what Muslim terrorists have ever caused amongst civillians in western countries.
      Hundreds of thousands if not tens of millions killed or maimed throughout the middle east with survivors not having too much of a life either.
      Could it be poverty that causes people to be attracted to religion and all that may mean in some regions.
      Certainly, it is not unknown for other churches to offer support.

    • Freeman says:

      07:04pm | 28/06/10

      Greg, are you suggesting that those of us using this post to criticize Islam have gone off on a tangent? if you are you should read some of the news coming out of France and Holland ect. You will quickly realize that the ‘tension’ the author speaks of is not racism but anti Islamic ‘sentiment’ (is that better, Sally?)
      I have never heard anyone say that all muslims condone terrorism and that they are all bad people and no-one here has said that, and almost everyone I know has at least one muslim friend. you make excuses for the hate that some muslims possess but there is no excuse for bringing that hatred to a new country that is offering them a new life and making life difficult for the existing population. no other ethnic group seem to have a problem with that.

    • Greg says:

      12:21am | 29/06/10

      Well Freeman, I’m very aware of what’s going down in various countries in Europe and some of it not too good at all, even the Swiss stopping the building of a Mosque and then there was a town in Italy where Mediteranean boat people types were tun out of town by vigilante mobs, those people not necessarily muslim and some doing the cheap labor work that Italians would not.
      Gypsies have always been persecuted in Europe and the slippery slope James refers to is more about potential for returning to good old Nazi days policies, [ Skinheads being alive and well throughout various countries ], and sure, the muslims could well be the new Jews when it comes to persecution as far as majorities go but the theme of the article was nationalism. 
      My response re every or close to a majority of muslims not being bad people was to
      ” I’ll tell you old son muslims are behind 99 percent of all acts of terrorism or events of mass murder either to christians hindus or different sects of the same religion. ”
      and agreed, miss-read that.
      My reference to the the causal factors is merely an explanation of why the hatred is there and you may have read that I stated terrorist attacks are not to be condoned.
      Again, the article is very much about the attitude to foreigners including muslims.
      If you want examples of hatred towards ethnicity or religion including genocide on massive scale, there’s of course been a few examples about the globe if you bother to research that.

    • Sally says:

      09:05am | 28/06/10

      My mum’s favourite mantra when I was growing up was ” you can’t control others, you can only control yourself.”
      This can be applied to so many of today’s conflicts.  Politically, the best counter to any sitting government is BETTER alternate policy.  Why waste time and energy attempting to control/dictate/critique the other side, when if all energies were directed at improving your own side the choice becomes obvious in its’ superiority.
      This could also be applied to religion.  Isn’t it better to live, grow and promote your own faith/ideology than to waste time attempting to control others’ beliefs.  Much is always made of the the things to be done to control the emergence of Islamic fundamentalism.  I don’t know the answers.  It seems a misdirection of energies, however, to attempt to control “them” in the context of western society.  It makes more sense to control “us”. 
      If “they” are eroding our culture, values and standards, what are “we” doing in terms of valuing, upholding and promoting our own?  Not much, it seems….....

      Reply

    • Eric says:

      07:37pm | 28/06/10

      No.

      It is not a problem with “us”. It is a problem with a primitive, medieval culture attempting to impose itself on a free society by means of intimidation.

    • AdamC says:

      09:26am | 28/06/10

      The rise of nationalist and ‘right-wing’ parties in Europe are partially due to the esoteric forces of globalisation (Geert Wilders, for example, is a big government economic nationalist) but it is also due to the failure of European immigration policies. There is nothing esoteric or inevitable about this - just government policy failures and a desperate attempt by the political establishment to avoid addressing it.

      Because mainstream political parties neglect the problem, flamboyant outsiders rise to prominence by actually proposing solutions. Similar things happened with environmental issues in the seventies and eighties. Environmental awareness is now squarely in the mainstream.

      The best-case outcome of the European situation is that the Euopean elites will realise they need to adopt policies to prevent poorly-designed immigration policies from turning their nations into series of bi-cultural bantustans.  That such a thing is occuring now is really not in serious dispute. The question is whether anyone is prepared to talk about it in the salons as well as the beer-halls of Euroope.

      Reply

    • marley says:

      01:22pm | 28/06/10

      Actually, Europe doesn’t really have any immigration policies (the UK is an exception).  People come, and they’re either allowed to stay, or not.  But the EU has never had the stomach to deport people, nor indeed to deny them entry in the first place.  So their immigration programs consist of “regularizing” the status of whoever shows up on their doorstep.  Which is why there is such a large Muslim population in Milan, for example, that simply didn’t exist 50 years ago. 

      The lack of forward planning, and the complete absence of any sort of selection system or programs to integrate newcomers, leaves Europe with the problems it has today.  Australia and other countries with pro-active immigration programs may have their problems, but they’re well ahead of the reactive system in place in Europe.

    • papachango says:

      01:46pm | 28/06/10

      Wilders is not a ‘big government economic nationalist’, he considers himself libertarian, admires Margaret Thatcher and generally advocates for smaller government, with the exception of regulating Muslim immigration.

      While his anti-Muslim rhetoric sounds similar, Wilders is actually quite different from the so-called ‘far right’ like Jean Marie Le Pen or the BNP, both of whom are ‘big government economic nationalists’. In fact rather than ‘far right’, I’d call people like Le Pen, Pauline Hanson and the BNP the ‘ultra nationalist far Left’.

    • AdamC says:

      04:09pm | 28/06/10

      My apologies, Papachango, I stand corrected, Wilders is not a big government nationalist or whatever I said earlier. His party does seem to have some liberal policies, like tax cuts, in its platform. However, some civil libertries policies seem fairly aggressive in scope. Nonetheless, I will admit my wrongness without reservation.

      And, Marley, you are right that European immigration policy has been something of a misnomer. I don’t agree that the UK is any exception to this, though, as its historically permissive asylum policies have left it with among the most radical islamist preachers in Europe.  Australians are right to be vigilant about immigration generally, but especially the use of asylum laws by people to claim permanent residency, a practice that should simply be scrapped.

    • Sarah says:

      09:38am | 28/06/10

      Unfortunately, much as we want the opinions of Eric & Annie to be wrong, they are not. Adam Diver is right. We’re being brainwashed into thinking that expressing concerns over the changing dynamics of this world is wrong. Or Racist. Or Xenophobic.

      Adam is right - the reality is that there are certain ways of life that are incompatible to our own and the more that we bow down to certain requests, the more risk we have at waking up 30 years from now bowing down to the likes of fanatical Islam or dying because we refuse to. And it’s already happening in parts of the world like Egypt & Sudan.

      I will never forget witnessing a woman accosted by over 10 muslim men for having a car accident (accident!) with a muslim lady. Or my cousin’s neighbours being told that their house was going to be graffitied and vandaled because they had Christmas decorations (lights, nativity scenes etc) up in December. Right here in Australia. Apparently that was insensitive to them. And, need I forget, the big drama at certain shopping centres about the Christmas decorations. In fact, it was here on the punch that I read about a woman who works in centrelink saying she gets mulsim men who have up to four wives collecting the single parent pension for their subsequent wives and saying that most Australians dont know theyre funding other people’s lifestlye choices.

      We shouldnt change our way of life to the needs of others. People come here for a reason, because it offers a better way of life and they need to remember that. Like it (or accept it) or leave it. Contrary to what some people believe, we are sensitive enough.

      Reply

    • Anna C says:

      11:03am | 28/06/10

      Totally agree with you Sarah.  We in the West should stop pandering to these Muslims who want to destroy our way of life.  I want to live in a society that: protects women’s rights; freedom of speech; gay rights; separation between church and state; is anti female genital mutiliation etc etc.

    • Huddo says:

      02:01pm | 28/06/10

      So true Sarah.  One of my friends is a school teacher and quite a lefty.  She always talked about how peaceful and progressive Islam is, especially compared to Christianity.  Basically, she just repeated all the lines the muslim mothers who’s kids attended the school filled her head with.  Then one day one of the “little kings” was playing up so she told him to be quiet.  She was physically attacked the next day by some of the mothers and quite plainly told that as a female she had no right to rebuke a male and that she was now the enemy.  She had to move to another school.  The only good part is that finally, I think she understands the truth about that religion, but it did take a nasty incident to open her eyes.

    • papachango says:

      02:44pm | 28/06/10

      @Huddo - it always bemuses me how lefties side with Islam (to the extent that radical lefties side with radical Islam), and describe it as progressive.

      Countries run under Islamic law have more in common with the religious right than the left - e.g. they are anti-gay, anti-feminist, and generally extremely conservative. They’re not even particularly socialist - generally they have the sort of feudalism and entrenched class systems that the left originally fought against.

      The Left’s support for islam seems to go against all their other principles like human rights, equality of the sexes, gay rights, opposition to conservative religious dogma etc.

      Though one thing they do have in common is a desire for extensive state control over the individual.

    • mk says:

      03:18pm | 28/06/10

      Couldn’t agree with you more Papachango.
      Whilst at an extremely left-wing university (I guess there wouldn’t be many right leaning ones! :-p) I was left shell-shocked during tutorials where we discussed the gang rapes on the early noughties, in which muslim youths gang raped a young anglo saxon woman, referring to her as an ‘aussie pig’.
      The attitude of our classes was that these young men were vilified by a racist, ignorant media. Anyone who dared to bring up the welfare of the young women involved, or the fact that the young men themselves had made racist comments to the victims (something their families in court also did) were shot down. In fact, you were just about viewed as a racist.
      I was always bewildered that the defence of islam and all it’s follower’s, trumped women’s rights, and even excused scorn for violent and despicable acts.

    • papachango says:

      03:57pm | 28/06/10

      @mk - I can’t think of any right leaning universities, though some individual departments like commerce, engineering, medicine etc could be considered ‘right wing’ in that they operate in the real world, and their students are generally there in order to gain a degree that will enable them to earn a decent income.

      Compare this to most humanities departments, where people study fluffy topics like ‘gender studies’, that don’t lead to any high paying jobs (which would be terribly capitalist anyway). It’s no wonder they’re such hotbeds of Marxism.

      I’m disappointed but not altogether surprised by your gang rape example. When supposed icons of feminism like Germaine Greer refuse to condemn female genital mutilation, and even actively support it because ‘it’s part of their culture and we have no right to assume our culture is superior’, you know that things are a little screwed up with the modern Left.

      I saw a mob called the ‘Queers for Palestine’ the other day, carrying signs with the most vile anti-semitic slogans. They were condemning as evil the only country in that part of the world that has any tolerance at all for homosexuality, and supporting a regime that would execute them for being gay.

    • Huddo says:

      01:41pm | 29/06/10

      I have recently come to the belief that George W Bush’s win in 2000 was a disaster for the West.  It left Al Gore free to preach his global warming b.s. and when the terrorists hit the twin towers and the republicans and the “right” responded with war, most lefties felt they had to support the other side.  I think it is more about the hatred for their local political opponents and of course the fact that they are absolutely terrified of Islamic violence (e.g. Salman Rushdie, Theo Van-Gogh).  It is much easier to protest against people who won’t violently kill you.  It means later your friends can fawn over you and tell you how brave you are.  So much harder to enjoy when your head is missing.

      Perhaps if a democrat had been in the white house the left would have stood up to the terrorists?  Hmm, perhaps I’m just being naïve…..

    • Andrew says:

      10:44am | 28/06/10

      I uh, don’t think there are car’s with engines smaller than 50cc.  Thats like, the smallest scooter or moped territory.

      Sorry for nit picking.  I do agree with the above posters, there needs to be dialogue on cultural assimilation.

      Reply

    • Henry says:

      11:02am | 28/06/10

      Little Holland is fighting for its culture and right to resist being swamped by other cultures, crime and multiculturalism.  Good on them.  Way way too many immigrants from wherever have wrecked Holland in recent years.  To see the crime, filth and neglect of many migrant areas in its cities is shocking and saddens the hearts of many Dutch people who pride themselves on hard work, honesty and cleanliness.  All nations should have a right to preserve their culture.
      How about migrants stop telling others what to do and how bad their countries are?  If you don’t like it - migrate to a muslim country that you like, or maybe stay in your own country and help fix it up??  You are just country shoppers looking for the best welfare - face it.

      Reply

    • Stephen Fitzpatrick says:

      11:14am | 28/06/10

      Karma at work for the state they left Indonesia in after they fianlly gave up fighting for it. Let Wilders form govrenment if you ask me, see how long it is before Holland needs bailing out like Greece, because that’s where his economic ideas will take them.

      Reply

    • DaisyMae says:

      11:25am | 28/06/10

      I am not racist, I am agnostic but don’t what religeous views you have, as long as you don’t try to convert me, I am a lost cause. I believe gays should have the same rights as hetrosexuals. I believe in equal rights for both men and women, but for the life of me I can’t understand in the climate of hate in the world why muslims are still being allowed in here. They can’t seem to adapt into our culture, but its not that really that bothers me. Its the fact that they have the potential to do acts of terrorism here. In my opinion all muslim traffic into Australia should be stopped whilst we are fighting wars in Muslim countries.

      Reply

    • T.Chong says:

      12:34pm | 28/06/10

      Yeah, good old easy going DaisyMae- “Im no racist, BUT….,”
      So once again ALL muslims are full of hate, All Muslims are terrorists. LOL.
      BTW Daisy did you realise that not even the most rabid haters in the GW Bush cabinet claimed to be fighting the whole of Islam, but I guess they didnt have your insight into just how serios the threat is.

    • papachango says:

      02:37pm | 28/06/10

      Islam is not a race, it is both a religion and a political system. Therefore criticising it, even blanket criticism, is not racist.

      Criticising Muslims is not ‘racist’ either, though possibly bigotted if blanket generalisations are used.

    • Freeman says:

      11:31am | 28/06/10

      @ the Author,
      so basically you’re blaming globalisation for increasing sediment against Islam in europe but attribute no blame to multiculturalism or the faith itself?

      be fair, James, the countries you speak of are having trouble with one particular group. in a world where the acceptance of other religions and cultures is rightfully becoming the norm, one particular religion is arousing much concern in many countries. you may say fed by fear mongering but i’m willing to stick my neck out and suggest it would largely be influenced by personal experiences and observations. Islam has an aggressive and intolerant nature openly spelt out in the koran. residents in european countries as well as ours are witnessing a push for Sharia Law, pressure to change their own culture to accomodate islam. Violent and threatening public demonstrations. disdain for western women, open preaching of hatred for their culture from within their own country and most damaging of all, unsavoury or scary personal dealings with intolerant followers of the faith.  But none of that is relevant is it james? it’s all the fault of Globalisation I guess. We don’t hate Islam, Islam hates us.

      Reply

    • Sally says:

      11:46am | 28/06/10

      @Freeman,
      Don’t normally comment on others use of language, but “increasing sediment” made me laugh out loud.  Thanks.

    • Seano says:

      07:13pm | 28/06/10

      Sally, you should read the rest of it if you want the laughs to keep coming.

    • Eric says:

      07:35pm | 28/06/10

      Typical ... Lefties have no reasoned response to Freeman’s well-marked points, so they resort to shallow sneering.

      No wonder most thinking people are rejecting the Left.

    • Freeman says:

      09:37pm | 28/06/10

      Sally,
      Poor grammar and spelling features often in my posts so stay tuned if you think thats funny (can’t help it, I’m a product of a below average public school in a safe labor seat. in home economics we learnt how to fill out a dole application ect, in social studies we learnt that goff was a god and to always vote labor)
      Seano, always glad to provide you with some ‘nasty right wing’ content for you to scoff at.

    • papachango says:

      02:30pm | 28/06/10

      I note that the Author works for a ‘left wing think tank’ and is a ‘human rights activist’ - i.e. a regulation, dyed in the wool, left winger.

      Of course he is going to blame everything on globalisation, anti-globalisation being a core philosophy of so-called ‘progressive’ lefties everywhere.

      As such the article is a fairly typical expression of how the Left see the issues with Islam and world politics in general. It’s all ‘our’ fault as evil white Western imperialists. If someone straps dynamite to themselves and blows us up, it’s only because we ‘oppress’ them.

      I’m amused to notice a couple of glaring errors however:

      1- He lumps Wilders in with the so-called ‘far Right’, such as the BNP, Jean-Marie Le Pen, Pauline Hanson etc, when if fact they are radically different. Honestly, what is it with lefties and calling anyone who disagrees with their world view ‘a far right fascist’? I’m opposed to the economic policies of the Left, but I can understand and appreciate the difference between, say, Marxist-Leninists, social democrats, eco-socialists, Trotskyites etc.

      2 - Speaking of anti-globalisation, I wonder if James realises that this is precisely one of the things he has in common with the so-called ‘far Right’ like Nick Griffin etc. While they would disagree intensely on whether or not Muslims and Westerners are ‘good’ or ‘bad’, if you removed the actual names of the tribes, then James would actually find he had a lot in common with the so-called ‘far right’. Their economic and even social philosophies are similar, they just back different teams.

      Re your last paragraph, try this as an exercise. Substitute the word ‘Westerner’ for ‘Muslim’ and ‘The West’ for ‘Islam’, ‘Western democracy’ for Sharia Law’, ‘Bible’ for ‘Koran’ and re-read it. You could be a lefty describing how the West is bad and why Muslims rightly hate us.

      Reply

    • papachango says:

      02:50pm | 28/06/10

      I was referring to the ‘last parargaph’ in @Freeman’s post directly above mine.

    • Pete says:

      04:23pm | 28/06/10

      My political views are more ‘left wing’ than ‘right wing’, yet this sort of article really makes my blood boil. Nowhere does the author acknowledge that many Dutch and other European people may have very good reasons for their fear and anxiety over mass immigration from Islamic societies. I believe if the clock were turned back, many progressive Australians would also wish to severely restrict immigration from hardcore Islamic societies. The core views and attitudes of fundamentalist Muslims are incompatible with a liberal democratic society. Of course the majority of Muslims are no threat, but there are too many bad eggs among them. Sheik Hilaly - of ‘uncovered meat’ fame - is not ‘extremist’, he is a major mainstream Islamic leader in our country - as the father of two daughters I wish there was a way to deport him and all who think like him.

      Reply

    • Greg says:

      06:58pm | 28/06/10

      Wow James, bring on a general topic about what’s happening on the other side of the planet, two Islamic mentions, one of young women wearing a Hijab and another re not only Muslims and look at the responses.
      Now they have even turned on you!
      You do really have to wonder where people have their minds focused sometimes and how it gives little chance for a peaceful world.

      Re the article, perhaps some of you might just be able to consider that there is a much wider platform than just religion re changes that the planet faces.
      James wrote of his three reasons
      ” The second is that this vulnerability is aggravated because the many promises made have failed to materialise. The interlinking of economies was supposed to bring peace, stability and opportunities. In an age defined by terrorism, financial instability and environmental devastation, the optimism has quickly vanished. “

      One post mentioned some claim the world is flat and I suppose that is close enough to the interlinking of economies via the WTO and level playing fields we have decided upon by the stronger global economic powers.
      As to bringing peace, stability and opportunities, that’s another matter re the resources of theplanet and what we may do to it and hopefully the Gof M is no example of what’ll be happening too often.
      Meanwhile the level playing field means that employment opportunities are going away from developed countries with people in those countries having opportunity and wealth reduced whilst opportunities and wealth are being transferred to the less fortunate.
      Companies may be maintaining or even improving profitability and then there’s the smart arses moves re spreading toxic assets and no wonder people are feeling aggrieved.
      And aside from broken promises, what are governments doing about it?
      Not much because they’re powerless and what government will come out with the truth ahead of when more people continue to lose employment.
      One PM once said at least ” Life is not meant to be easy ” and now we have one whose policy is that 40% of Australians getting a degree education will set us up better for the future - somehow I do not think so.

      ” Thirdly, globalisation means change – and rapid change at that. If we throw this in as the third ingredient, we can see how the flow of migrants that accompanies closer economic links is changing the nature of communities and has been identified, for political expedience, as a destabilising force.  “

      And yes, with the most populous countries of China and India becoming wealthier, that may lead to many seeking opportunities abroad and then there will also be from countries still afflicted with massive unemployment and poverty not to mention droughts, starvation and violence many that will also seek another life and you cannot really blame them.
      Reason why there is about 30-40 million refugees registered with the UN

      ” In Australia, this has been aimed at refugees and genuine asylum seekers. “
      I’m not too sure how James comes to that conclusion given Australia has had a refuge program for many years, a program that works in concert with the UN and Asylum seekers arriving outside of that program are a problem for any country.
      In attempts to get to Australia, many have perished in the open sea at the hands of people smugglers and the current government policy made Australia a softer destination and so encourages people to risk their lives in making ocean trips.
      It also means that people who are in the UN system are bypassed and many waiting for many years will continue to wait for many years longer.

      The people smuggling had been greatly diminished by strong government policy and in recent years with relaxation it has recommenced and so it would seem that the required action is obvious to see.

      Reply

    • Eric says:

      05:52am | 29/06/10

      I read the article.

      It was a poor attempt to explain away the rise of anti-Islamic political parties by pretending it has something to do with “racism” or “globalisation”.

      Sorry, no sale. The real issue that James is trying to avoid is Islam itself, and most readers have seen through the camouflage.

    • Chase says:

      11:17pm | 28/06/10

      Noam Chomsky.

      Nuff said I think.

      Reply

    • James Arvanitakis says:

      08:27am | 29/06/10

      Hey everyone

      Firstly, thanks for engaging with the article.

      I appreciate all your comments and disagree with a number of them - but this is the point of such a forum.

      I think there are two issues that need to be emphasized in regards to my article that have been misunderstood.

      1. I am not taking a pro or anti religion position on any of this. I am no fan of religion per se - but to accuse one religion of being aggressive (in this case Islam by most respondents) is much too simplistic. Most, if not all, religions can be accused of taking aggressive stances. For every Christian who has accused Islam of aggression, we can find an equal example of the opposite. As I tell mys students:  There are plenty of morons in this world - they are this way inclined because hey are morons and religion is simply an excuse for such behaviour.

      2. The second point is that globalisation is a complex phenomenon: it creates incredible disparities - both in wealth and opportunities. Spend time in Brazil, Jakarta (or Sydney and Melbourne) and see the results. This disparity creates tensions.

      The issue here is, that it is another step in removing control of people’s lives: not all of us are lucky enough to be mobile labour (say like an engineer or yes, an academic).

      What we have seen is people lose their jobs without understanding why, and when someone comes and points the finger and says, ‘it is the blacks’ or ‘the jews’ or ‘the migrants’ or ‘the greeks’ or ‘the italians’ who have taken your jobs, people react. The economics here are brutal - and we look for someone to blame. This has nothing to do with religion - but economics. We have seen the two conflated.

      Re my economics, they are not ideologically defined: i believe that the market is an efficient measure to distribute certain commodities, but all markets should be regulated - how much depends on the commodity… 

      I hope that clarifies my position…

      Enough from me except to say that Brazil and Germany are awesome, and I doubt the Dutch can keep up…

      Cheers, james

      Reply

    • Freeman says:

      10:25am | 29/06/10

      Some interesting reading but I think it does nothing to link globalisation to anti islamic sentiment in europe.

      “What we have seen is people lose their jobs without understanding why, and when someone comes and points the finger and says, ‘it is the blacks’ or ‘the jews’ or ‘the migrants’ or ‘the greeks’ or ‘the italians’ who have taken your jobs, people react.”
      do you really give people so little credit? maybe that happened in the 60’s but now? even if people were so simple as to blame migrants for taking their jobs why would they single out islamic migrants, who in most countries, are over represented in the un-employed statistics?

      no one said you are pro-islam. but for some reason lefties like yourself ignore or excuse the behaviour of followers of the faith while happily attacking Christianity (not that I care as an athiest) and you belittle the genuine concerns of the rest of the community

      Reply

    • Pete says:

      01:23pm | 29/06/10

      “I am not taking a pro or anti religion position on any of this. I am no fan of religion per se - but to accuse one religion of being aggressive (in this case Islam by most respondents) is much too simplistic. Most, if not all, religions can be accused of taking aggressive stances. For every Christian who has accused Islam of aggression, we can find an equal example of the opposite.”

      Your post was not about some abstract comparison of religions - it was about the increasing popularity of right wing anti-immigration parties in Europe. Clearly a major factor in this phenomenon is the reaction by residents of European countries to their actual experiences - yet you patronise these people by arguing that they do not understand what’s happening in their own societies. If an Australian filmmaker was executed by an Islamic extremist, for instance, this would quite rightly fuel a massive debate. Your position is a classic example of the disconnect between academic left-wing arguments and the deeply-held fears that many people - across class and ethnic lines - hold about this. I hate the far right, but I also believe that one of the reasons that more people are voting that way is that progressive people like you are completely blind to their concerns.

      Reply

    • Freda20Beach says:

      08:34am | 22/08/11

      That’s known that cash can make people disembarrass. But what to do when somebody has no money? The only one way is to try to get the loans and small business loan.

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 24 May 12 09:56PM

RT @popculturechris: Meanwhile, Gotye holds no.1 for a sixth massive week in the US - "that" song has now sold over 4 million copies there.

ToryShepherd

ToryShepherd 24 May 12 09:17PM

@loupascale if the survey made you sad, probably skip the comments...

Paul Colgan

Colgo 24 May 12 07:27PM

@paulwiggins @richardkendall that fountain pens yarn is a great social trend story

Paul Colgan

Colgo 24 May 12 07:27PM

I like how a tip erodes so only you can use it MT “@paulwiggins: BBC News - Why are fountain pen sales rising? http://t.co/0hk2MRtf”

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Punch on: Open thread 25/05/2012

by The Punch Team

0

Punch on: Open thread 25/05/2012

Last week, the Friday open thread featured an image of a baby hippo. They’re more attractive than…

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

by Tony Burke

38

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

When you take on a job like being Environment Minister there’s some hits you can see coming. …

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

by Tory Shepherd

92

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

Welcome to this week’s I Call Bullshit column. It’s a regular column that looks at skulduggery…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed