Sunday, January 17, 2016

The European Immigration Crisis: A Conversation with Dr. Erik Tillman

Michael L.

{Also published at the Elder of Ziyon and Vocal Europe.}

Erik Tillman is an Associate Professor of Political Science at DePaul University and one of my colleagues on the Academic Board of Trustees at Vocal Europe.

We seem to have differences concerning the significance of the migration crisis currently playing itself out in Germany and Sweden, among other western European countries.

In a piece entitled, Is the Refugee Crisis Fueling a Radical-Right Surge in Europe?, Tillman claims:
the refugee crisis is helping to push those voters attracted to the radical right—individuals who value security and social cohesion over individual autonomy and universal rights—to vote for those parties. (Emphasis mine.)
My question is whether or not the current refugee crisis will incline European voters who are already attracted to the "radical right" to vote for right-leaning political parties, as Tillman implies, or are we seeing a reasonable and growing concern among native Europeans about the political sensibilities and behavior of many of the Arab-Muslim immigrants pouring into their countries?

Tillman, for his part, took exception with my statement, within Arab Migrants, Jews, and the “Radical-Right” in Europe:
One thing that we know with certainty is that the great majority of Middle Eastern immigrants into Europe do not hold liberal values, i.e., the values of minority rights, gender equality, free speech, freedom of religion, and Gay rights.
Tillman points out:
But what do we “know with certainty” about the values of Muslim immigrants in the West? Because it is difficult and expensive to conduct survey research on a minority population, there is not a great deal of evidence.
He notes:
it is not a monolithic religious community, and significant differences exist between Muslims of different branches.
Islam numbers around 1.5 billion people from virtually every corner of the world... with the possible exception of Japan... so, yes, it is exceedingly diverse.

Tillman concludes:
many European Muslims display lower levels of prejudice closer to those of European Christians. This fact should remind us that individual personality traits that predispose one to prejudice exist across all religions and societies.
I absolutely agree.

Nonetheless, the data clearly shows levels of anti-Semitism throughout North Africa and the Middle East topping out over the 90th percentile according to Anti-Defamation League world statistics. The current genocide of Christians within that part of the world is staggering, and entirely under-reported, as Raymond Ibrahim, a scholar of Coptic descent, can easily attest. The rights of women and Gay people are regularly trampled throughout the Arab-Muslim Middle East and few in the West seems to care.

It is a matter of fundamental common sense, therefore, that traditionally oppressed groups within Europe, such as the GBLT community or the Jewish minority, not to mention women, should have a heads-up concerning the political nature of this Islamic influx.

Tillman takes a helpful step in that direction by breaking down some of the differences between Islamic groups. For example, he notes that there are significant differences in outlook between Sunni Muslims and the more liberal-minded Alevi Muslims. However, Alevi Muslims only represent between fifteen and twenty million people throughout the world, which means that they represent only a tiny percentage of the world Muslim population.

In any case, my question above stands.

Are the Europeans who will be voting for right-wing political parties likely to do so, as Tillman suggests, because they were already attracted to the "radical right" or will they do so out of a moderate and reasonable concern over how this mass migration will alter the nature of Europe?

The question is important because if the answer is the former they can easily be dismissed as radical right-wing bigots. However if the answer to the question is the latter then their politics will have significantly greater weight among opinion makers, policy makers, and the general public going forward.

5 comments:

  1. Why is ANY resistance portrayed as 'radical right' at all? That by itself is framing the point with prejudice. If Europe is supposed to be more afraid of protest because it's called 'radical right' than it is supposed to be afraid of this Islamic wave, then I submit we should simply ignore it all and let them implode. Fair enough, Europe, become Sudan. What's the worse that happens? You blame the Jews? Ok.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's a matter of defining terms.

      How does "right" in the western European context differ from "far-right"?

      One of the problems that western Europe has is that political correctness has run amock to such a degree that the Swedes and the Germans are willing to rob their own daughters of the freedom to walk their own neighborhoods without fear of attack.

      When I think of "far right" in the western European context hard-line racist nationalism, of the neo-Nazi type, comes to mind.

      The problem is that Germany and Sweden have become so excutiatingly PC that to even wonder aloud about the consequences of this nearly unlimited North African and Middle Eastern immigration into Europe is make of oneself just such a neo-Nazi in the eyes of the media, the government, and who knows what percentage of the population.

      They are stangulating themselves on their own high ideals and rather high opinions of themselves.

      Moral powerhouse, indeed.

      Delete
  2. "But what do we “know with certainty” about the values of Muslim immigrants in the West?"
    Asleep?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mehdi Hasan, high profile British journalist, in a rare moment of honesty:

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/03/sorry-truth-virus-anti-semitism-has-infected-british-muslim-community

    ReplyDelete
  4. Not entirely on topic, but dealing with some of the realities of racial tensions in multicultural Britain. It's much more complex and nuanced than many arguments would suggest. And, interestingly, this documentary for Channel Four was made by a prominent, black anti-racism activist and broadcaster.
    If anyone's got half an hour or so, it's interesting viewing.
    And, as the blog says
    ( it's a blog I often don't agree with ) it's a film that almost certainly could not be made today. It's about ten years old.

    http://biasedbbc.org/blog/2015/12/13/battle-scars/

    ReplyDelete