Political and media reactions to the assassination of Abu Bakr Sisse gave a clear example of the denial of France, and therefore – at the intersection of the colonial legacy and the failure of new liberalism – must be intersecting the phenomenon of Islamophobia as one of the forms of equality.
With this introduction, the Media Bart website opened a lengthy article – with the pen Karen Photo – in which it said that Islamophobia did not appear in France with the appeal of Abu Bakr Cisse on Friday morning, April 25, in the Laghran Composte in Garde, but that France is experiencing a horrific experience of its influence, not only in the political and media space, but at the highest levels of the state.
The comments of the striker, the explicit offensive of the Muslims, showed before the camera the rigidity of the executive authority and the emptiness of the slogans of the republic and the global that it advocates, as the government did not even the minimum in front of a tragedy targeting a people that made it a political goal, although a judicial investigation was opened for “intentional killing on the basis of race or religion.”
The site warned that the late reaction from the Minister of Interior responsible for religious affairs Bruno Ritayo, and his choice of going to Alice County instead of the mosque, and his inability to mention the name of the young man, and his unwillingness to meet the family, can only be considered a sign of disrespect and contempt for Muslims who live in France.
The writer reminded that Muslims represent 10% of the population of urban areas, and that they are victims of prejudice after the Roma, but before the Chinese, Jews and blacks, according to the National Consulting Committee for Human Rights, although their religion occupies the first rank in the country, before Catholicism, Judaism and Protestantism.
A term remains in dispute
In addition to Ritayo’s failures in the aftermath of the assassination of Abu Bakr Cisse, there was a series of political and institutional imbalances – according to the site – such as the delay in the governor of Garde 4 days from the scene of the accident, the absence of representatives of the public authorities from the silent march, and the disputes over standing a minute of silence in the National Assembly and the Senate.
However, the roots of Islamophobia found their most disturbing expression outside these institutions, as the controversy within the political and media space was about the use of the term “Islamophobia”, knowing that it is a term acceptable for two decades for the consensus of international scholars and organizations.
Hence, the refusal to name a social reality – according to the writer – is a way to hide it socially and politically, or even deny its existence, and it means – at the very least – not to recognize its size or effect, so that the general debate prevents reaching a diagnosis commensurate with the problem and providing appropriate political responses.
The thinker, Reza Diaa Ibrahimi, says – in an article entitled “French origins to deny Islamophobia” – that it is not a coincidence that this denial is French, because it stems from our colonial history, as the authorities are working by refusing to accept the past to prevent any compensation, and thus violates the present and divides the community and destroys it.
The term Islamophobia, which literally means “fear of Islam”, refers to the way in which hostility to this religion is used to cover up the refusal of Muslims. Sociologist Abdul -Malik Al -Sayyad says that Islam has a similar role to the role of the skin color, as it is like a condemnation that we attach to every bias, every stigma and all racism. “
Since criticism of religions falls within freedom of expression, Islamophobia has been viewed as a “respectable” method of the stigma of the minority, although – such as anti -Semitism and all other forms of racism – a crime and not an opinion.
The emergence of the problem of Muslims
The writer reminded that the assassination of Abu Bakr Cisse was the culmination of a long process of building an “Islamic problem” with an influence in the formation of the French society’s view of its Muslim citizens, Norbert Elias says that “discontent arises when it is a socially lower social group and is about to demand legal and social equality.”
Accordingly, there is tolerance with the distressive marginal groups as long as they do not seek to escape from the social inferiority in which they were placed, and since the eighties of the 20th century, when its first symptoms appeared, Muslims’ refusal was closely related to the effects of new liberalism and the issue of post -colonialism, that is, the social issue and the racist issue.
When the migrant workers at Citroen and at Talbot Company in 1982, with the support of the unions, they soon found that their actions became illegal, on the basis that their traditional social demands are added to a place of place of prayer, as happened in 1976 in Renault.
In 1989, the second phase of the anti -Islam missile was launched with the first “Hijab issue” in the magazine of Krill, in the context of the fatwa of the Iranian highest Iranian guide at the time, Ayatollah Khomeini against Salman Rushdie after the publication of his book “Satanic Ayat”.
At the time of the case of the veil, Muslims had to be forced to pay the price of this intervention in the public sphere, and the sociologist Pierre Purdio translates what to understand about what was happening in Krill, saying that “the question if we should accept wearing what is called the Islamic veil in school or not withholding the underlying question, which is we must accept migrants of North African origin in France or not?”
As it becomes clear from the founding episodes of workers’ strikes and then the Krill strikes, building an “Islamic problem” is not the responsibility of the French extremist right alone, despite its theoretical since the 1960s of the existence of Arab and Islamic difference on the basis of the idea that Islam is not compatible with our “French traditions”.
The extreme right fuel
The writer saw that the negative representations of Islam are now widespread in French society were transferred primarily through political discourse, state laws, and media framing, and through party divisions, where shocking statements and the main headlines that bear the stigma more effectively on the marginalization of Muslims worked.
And from a discussion about the national identity launched by former President Nicolas Sarkozy to the law of the current President Emmanuel Macron on secession, the public authorities imposed Muslims as the minority personality par excellence, and without naming them specifically, they ended up with a picture of a group that was formed as an “internal enemy”, and “potential extremism”, and they are therefore a group of unwanted people, and it is justified to seek to get rid Among them in order to preserve the cohesion of the nation.
This violence in describing Muslims as non -French cannot – according to the writer – can only remind us of the brutality that the colonial administration forced Algerian women to take off their veil in order to portray them or force them to show their association with France.
In addition to the authorities’ inability to digest independence, the clear failure of new liberalism prompted the ruling parties to seize the favorite topics of the extreme right, because they are convinced that they would not be able to remain in power except by tempting the National Front voters.
Karen Photo concluded that the extreme right’s concerns sneaks to society deeply because of the media and political elites, and the opposite of this path requires agreement to naming Islamophobia, then confronting the colonial history, and re -establishing a “non -divided, secular, democratic and social republic” worth this name because it guarantees “equality before the law for all citizens without discrimination based on origin, race or religion.”
(Tagstotranslate) Politics (T) Politics (T) Europe (T) France