How to be tolerant, in the right way

Roy Voragen, Bandung

Discussions on the Islamic headscarf (hijab) keep on returning in the headlines for the past two decades. These discussions are marked by a high density of trenches -- the different parties accuse each other of not being tolerant, of being against religion (thus of being too secular), of being too religious (thus of being a fundamentalist), of occupying public space. Let us reconsider these terms to try to unravel the Gordian knots -- or at least to identify the Gordian knots.

In Europe live many Muslims, many of them of Moroccan and Turkish ancestry. During the economic booms after World War II many Moroccans and Turks came to work and no one really gave it a thought if they would stay and whether they would stay for how long under what conditions. The majority of those so called temporary workers stayed and settled down. Either they started families or invited their families over to (fortress) Europe. Anyway, they became for the better or worse Europeans, even though many kept a double nationality.

Europeans should accept all those came on the high tide of economy and staid to become Europeans. All those Moroccans, Turks and their offspring should no longer be regarded as mere immigrants. They are Europeans and have the nationality of a European Union member state. These Europeans should not be regarded as intruders, as new Moors or Ottomans. They are European citizens and rights and duties that come with citizenship are not limited to participating in elections.

It is very problematic that throughout the European Union the immigrants and their offspring are stuck in the lower social and economic strata of their society. They are not in this position because they pray towards Mecca or because they left their heart in Morocco or Turkey, even though the language is an important barrier and if they want to have two nationalities they should be bi-lingual. Democracy is supposed to work in a direction to integrate all, so every citizen can participate and that is why public space is of importance.

Do immigrants and their offspring not want to integrate within the existing society? Or do existing European societies not want to integrate these immigrants and their offspring? The latter proposition states that religion is used as a political tool to destabilize existing societies. The former suggest that (old) Europeans are hostile towards their religion and treat them (therefore) unjustly.

European states are nation-states and have difficulties to absorb new people with different cultural identities then what is generally seen as the national identity (this can be seen in the uprising of far right wing parties with populist or even racist leaders throughout Europe). Even though a national identity is not a consistent unity and is gradually changing, it is anyway with significant socio-political consequences.

The secular state is generally seen as one of those pillars of the European nation-states after too many religious wars were fought on European soil.

The secular state does not mean that the secular state promotes secularization -- i.e. the defeat of religious institutions -- or atheism. The secular state means that the state is not to force a certain religion on its citizens, neither is the state allowed to force its citizens to belive in certain ways and not in other ways. The secular state leaves religion to its citizens, without making the separation between politics and religion an absolute one (e.g. Christian Democratic parties use religious arguments in ethical discussions).

The secular state does not mean that public space is without religion. But because religion and other belief systems are up to citizens we are in the need of tolerance. Tolerance has to mean two things to make it workable. First of all we need to tolerate each others' differences; tolerance does not mean that we have to see the value of every value (the standpoint of some proponents of postmodernism). But second, we should not absolute our own good. Without the second we will be trapped in our own good and tolerance will be a synonym for indifference and will overstate differences.

Tolerance should neither be a power tool: The majority tolerates the minority as long as they abide the law, norms and values of the ruling majority. Nor should tolerance permit everything. A dialog can point out what tolerance means, and what is and what is not permissible.

A dialog between citizens requires irony so one does not hide behind the walls of one's particular values and norms. In the debates on Islam in general and on the headscarf in particular we can see a total lack of irony with all parties. This lack of irony reflects and generates standpoints of us and them, Muslim Europeans and other Europeans are more and more segregated from each other.

And it does not help when the debate is put in terms of human rights violations. No one is being killed or tortured. We are not witnessing cruelty. We are talking about freedom of expression by individual citizens. But this freedom -- as with any freedom -- is not an absolute one, it depends where and with who on what one can express. And to make one's identity absolute is to overstate it.

Nor does it help to enforce a culture on people in the name of mere neutrality. Civilization means that citizens interact in a civil -- i.e. peaceful way -- way. But civilization also means the dominant culture of a certain time and place. European countries are no multicultural countries. Europeans have to accept the immigrants and their offspring, and immigrants and their offspring should accept that they are (becoming) Europeans.

Instead of exchanging standpoints a consensus could be tried. A consensus could take many forms. Most likely different consensuses will be found in different political cultures, thus probably the different European Union member states will have to try different consensuses.

The writer is political philosopher, currently working as a guest lecturer at the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences (FISIP), Universitas Padjadjaran in Bandung. He can be reached at royvoragen@hotmail.com