Column: Fear drives discrimination in Switzerland
Published Dec. 4, 2009
In a surprise referendum the people of Switzerland have voted in favor of banning the construction of new minarets within Swiss borders. That's right, the European country most often associated with neutrality and tolerance has voted affirmatively for discrimination targeted specifically at their Muslim population.
Let me break the situation down. Switzerland's version of democracy (a questionable definition in light of this decision) allows for citizens to directly propose and vote on any referendum. The issue of banning minarets, the towers traditionally on mosques, was put forward and promoted by a far right political party. This party proceeded to spread posters that featured a woman in a burqa along with minarets shooting up like missiles covering the Swiss map.
This effort meant to incite fear into people about the possible influence of Switzerland's 400,000 Muslim citizens, a meager 4 percent of the total population. The Muslims facing this discrimination come from nearby former Yugoslavia and Turkey! But that doesn't matter to the voters because many of the Swiss who voted in favor of this referendum have probably never met a Swiss Muslim. The majority of the pro-ban votes came from rural areas. The majority of Muslims reside in urban areas.
The campaign put on by the right-wing party was an amazing success at fear mongering. They convinced a majority of the population to vote against a group with which most had no personal experience. It's not like the Swiss people were looking around and saying to themselves, "Jeez, there sure are a lot of minarets springing up in this country. Pretty soon I'm going to be in the minority." There are only four minarets in the whole country! So from where do these voters derive their opinions? From fear-mongering news and propaganda, of course. From exacerbated anxieties and allegations.
Even France, which bans hijabs in public schools, took issue with the Swiss people's decision. Of course, France put a ban on any religious symbol, such as wearing a cross on a necklace, thus equally affecting practitioners of any faith. But Switzerland has specifically singled out minarets and Muslims in a plain and clear case of discrimination.
The issue is larger than minarets. Minarets are not required for worship. In efforts to quell the disapproval of both Muslim nations and their European neighbors, Swiss spokespeople have scrambled for explanations. Switzerland's justice minister claims the result "reflects fears among the population of Islamic fundamentalist tendencies." So fears of radical “Islamization” of Europe, which would surely endanger prized European values and liberties is grounds for throwing away those same prized values and liberties? Does Switzerland aim to save itself from the erosion of 'democratic values' that opponents claim Islam invariably brings?
So this traditionally tolerant country reacts to extremist threats from small groups far abroad with homegrown extremist fear mongering on its own soil. These tactics might fool some, but the UN Council on Human Rights joins governments worldwide as it authoritatively condemns the proposed banning of minarets as a violation of international law and human rights.
The Swiss government makes claims the vote was "not a rejection of the Muslim community, religion or culture," but it is clear to Swiss Muslims and the observers around the world extremism and radical intolerance come from many sources.
Comments (2)
12:49 a.m., Aug. 29, 2011
Nancy said:
I'm a Swiss citizen and I've never been more ashamed to be Swiss. Discrimination is not what we stand for and it's not in accordance with our 'neutrality' stance. You wouldn't be able to diffrentiate a mosque minaret from a church or synagogue minaret. This is a direct move against the Muslim community that will not be tolerated. This was a terrible political move since 70% of Swiss tourism can be attributed to Gulf Aab tourists. They may not be so keen to visit again. The only thing worse would be if we passed the law against burkas. What an awful idea...we sit and preach freedom and mock Saudi Arabia for it's oppression and yet here Europe is joining it's ranks and dictating what women can and can't wear. It's ridiculous. If someone can go out in a mini skirt and see through shirt without getting fined then a burka covered woman should be able to not be fined either. THAT's freedom. We, the west, mock the middle east for being intolerant but WE are the intolerant ones and it's absolutely disgusting. Luckily, I'm also an Egyptian citizen so I do belong to a truly tolerant country that respects all religious faiths and has never and would never pass a law like this. While the Swiss are banning minarets and paving the way for islamophobia, Muslim Egyptians are protecting churches and their Christian counterparts on Sundays ensuring they have the right to practice their faith. Truly inspiring. Switzerland is better than this. I know we are.
11:43 a.m., Dec. 14, 2009
C. Stewart said:
I'm sorry, but your opinion on this is completely wrong. Your writing is simply reactionary and fails to analyze the situation completely. This is a demonstration of what can happen in a direct democracy, and why efforts toward this form of government should be feared by all Americans (and indeed all of Western society): the rise of demagogues and the oppressive nature of mob rule that will prevail. You cannot question that this is democracy though, since there was a vote and the majority rules. The Swiss people are a sovereign nation and have every right to make their own laws; and in this case, the majority have decided in an exercise of democratic will that banning minarets is necessary and proper. Swiss Muslims must abide by the law or leave. They have not lost the right to practice their faith. I don't see how this is any kind of "human rights" violation, or a violation of international law, since no commonly accepted freedom has been taken. Nor do I respect the U.N. or any other nation condemning Switzerland for exercising its power as a sovereign nation.