The French Minister of the Interior, Gerald Darmanin, issued a statement against “Islamism” and “secularism”. The piece is part of the “Projet de Loi Confortant le respect des Principles de la République et de lutte contre le séparatisme”. This is the new French legislation (a 51 articles laundry list) aimed at combating the growing influence of radical forms of Islam in France. Among these extremists are the Muslim, Salafi and Wahhabi brothers.
That Wahhabism, which arose out of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, is, according to the Minister of the Interior, “Heterodox” (p. 41). The Salafis, according to the privilege, are “Ilham Millenery” (p. 56). Of course, “séparatism” does not mean Basque, Corsican, or other forms of nationalism. This stores separation The risk of radical Islam beginning to form a state within a stateIn that republic, the individual is central (‘le citoyen’), not religious societies, as is often the case in Arab and Islamic countries (‘Commutarism’).
Indoctrination
French Interior Minister Gerald Moussa Darmanin was previously Minister of Budget (2017-2020) and mayor of Turquin, a city located in northern France 16 kilometers from Kortrijk. His grandfather was a Jew from Malta. The other was helpful with the Algerian activists. The former Gaullist, now belongs to La République en Marche (LREM), the political movement of French President Emmanuel Macron. Gerald Darmanen studied in Belgium.
The starting point for the statement is ‘l’Etat, trop longtemps focusré contre la réricular qui mène au Terrore, a tardé à voir l’islamisme, menant au séparatisme, comme un risk.’ (P. 14). In fact, indoctrination of some Muslims is more dangerous than Islamic terrorism. The minister says that a parallel society arose out of people who reject republican and democratic values and threaten to drag more and more “ordinary” Muslims. Darmanin finds this parallel society especially in “The Movable Masses, au sein de sociétés Privées de sécurité ainsi que dans le monde socioculturel et sportif” (p. 71). This will relate, among other things, to “A Small Lecture on Islamic Sacred Texts” (p. 63). However, ‘Political Islam is not Islam(blz. 51), vind Darmanin, in van dat islamism weet men went “that it is far from the religion of the Prophet” (blz. 65).
Islam versus Islamism
But where is the division between true Islam – this Okay It would be – and the radical Islam that the French government is fighting against? This is not very clear.
According to the author, Sunni Islam (90% of all Muslims worldwide are Sunnis) is an “appendix to the Book of Holy Texts” (p. 43). In other words, all Sunni Muslims are in fact extremists, because precisely this “literalism” is, according to the author, problematic, isn’t it?
The very good suggestion that imams loaned from Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia not be used in French mosques is also difficult to put into place. Doesn’t that mean that Islam in those three countries is also an extremist, while the French media and politicians have been arguing for many decades that Islam in Morocco and Tunisia is a moderate Islam?
The third node in the minister’s speech is the financing of mosques. French secularism It is based on the famous Act of 1905, the law that (should it be said?) At that time was directed unilaterally against the Catholic Church. According to this law, worship services, be they Christian, Jewish, Islamic, or anything else, cannot be funded from public money. At the same time, the French government is also fighting foreign funding for mosques, because that’s how you get the Trojan horse, as it is called. How should it be done? Currently, 92% of French mosques are financed under the 1901 Law on Associations, meaning associations, in other words, the costs of French mosques are paid from public money, but not through the 1905 law. Internal Affairs now wants to move mosques from 1901 to 1905. The idea of ’Kirchensteuer’ is, in other words, to obtain financing for churches and mosques from the faithful themselves, using a portion of personal income tax to build and maintain churches, mosques, synagogues and their practitioners. Worship services were not preserved.
European distinction
Incidentally, “Islamism” is an intriguing term, and this term does not appear anywhere in many traditional Islamic texts over the centuries. At least until the 1970s, Islam meant civilization, culture and Islamic history. With Islam as a religion, religion, and theology. That with Islamic Islam the current Religion, and Islamism would be a more radical detachment from Islam, which, moreover, has nothing to do with true Islam, is a relatively modern European invention that conquered the whole world with astonishing speed. The distinction between Islam and political Islam is equally artificial, and completely useless from a theological point of view.
Failed form
It is clear that the public discourse on Islam in France has changed. Until about 15-20 years ago, you could often read that the French system would be based on “secularism” in which the individual is central, whereas in the UK the individual will have a “societal” viewpoint, where the group is central rather than the individual. This was bad, the logic continued, because the “typical Anglo-Saxon style” would make integrating Muslims more difficult.
Today in France you don’t hear much about the contradiction between the French and British model. Not only The French model partially failedSocial problems between Muslims and non-Muslims in France can be more problematic than those in the United Kingdom
Wet
The French Cabinet passed the famous French law on ‘séparatism’ on December 9, 2020, and the French Parliament debated and approved it this month. We still have to wait for its implementation. The law contains a set of measures against extremism for some Muslims, and it contains a number of ideas that could also be useful in the Belgian context. It is difficult to say whether this law is really the appropriate way to combat extremism. There is a certain left that talks about Islamophobia (the law will start a hunt campaign against Muslims), because the far right does not go the law far enough. Case to follow.
