Two wrongs never make a right. How do we go around in agreeing and abiding by the tenets of French secularism and constitutionalism? Why have spaces for articulating and expressing one’s faith been deliberately done away with? Arguments in favour can be put as the state would want to sound as a neutral umpire instead of being blamed as biased. Perfectly okay. But how can a state justify its interference in the practice and propagation of a particular religious action?
Well, if it were for organising a homogeneous character and conduct of the state and society, then the Europeans are grossly mistaken. That won’t work and will continue hindering the prospects of rescuing Islam from radicalism.
Past few days incidents in France calls for an immediate and urgent task at hand. As for the integration, acceptance and accommodation of Muslims in popular customs, codes and culture of France. This could have surely avoided the ugly scenes which we saw outside a church in the French city of Nice or for that matter the beheading of a French teacher by one of his students for allegedly defaming the Prophet.
After 9/11, most Europeans believe that Muslims are enemies and anarchists who are for the structural and systematic violation of supremacy and sovereignty of the state. Never have the French taken any initiative to acknowledge and appreciate the versions of their fellow brethren. Otherwise, in the first place, such a situation and circumstance would have never arisen.
Promoting equality, fraternity and brotherhood as for seeking solutions through consultations, consensus and dialogue. Overreacting to the Nice incident was uncalled for as for matching the aspirations and expectations of the vested interests. Emmanuel Macron is an intelligent and inspiring leader who knows how to place pride and faith in the community, which is already in a deep state of crisis.
Islamic organisations should come forward in abhorring the Chinese method of putting the Uyghur Muslims in tight control and order. Round the clock, they are put under surveillance if they dare speak up against any of the customary laws of Red China. But they won’t prefer speaking up as for their convenience rather than for their choice. But someone will have to take the lead in ensuring a challenge against the values and ways of social conservatism, orthodoxy and extremism if not beyond.
How many are ready to take this line, as then you can be a better watchdog.