Reviews

• 「寛容」の揺らぎをどう受け止めるか？

  ポピュリスティックな政治家ピム・フォルタインや映画作家テオ・ヴァン・ゴッホの殺害事件を通して、オランダ多文化主義の揺らぎを見つめたノンフィクション。ヴァン・ゴッホは挑発的・偶像破壊的な言動で人を驚かすのが大好きな天邪鬼であって、もともと人種偏見的な考えは持ち合わせていなかった。かつて、寛容な社会を求める普遍的価値は従来の体制を批判する根拠となっていたが、やがてこの理念は社会の基本原則として受け容れられて体制化し、理想主義そのものが陳腐化してしまった。リベラルな理念は当たり前すぎて、もう飽きた。多文化主義がステータスを獲得してエリートがお説教するのに使う道具になっていることをテオは意図的に挑発、刺激を求めてイスラムを揶揄した。問題なのは、テオ自身はただの悪ふざけのつもりでも、そうは受け止めない人々の存在を無視していたことである。彼を殺害した移民出身の青年は「寛容」を偽善と捉え、憎悪を募らせていた。 異なる価値観の衝突と考えてしまってはあまりにも短絡的だろう。「寛容」という言説そのものが色褪せて説得力を失って、それでもなおかつ異なる価値観の共存を図ろうとするとき、一体どうすればいいのか。そうした問題がオランダの多文化主義社会で先鋭的に表面化した。著者も言うように、これは他の国でもあり得る事態であって、考えるべき貴重な問題提起をはらんでいる。

• Studiato per aiutare una nipote scrivere un assignment in Olanda. Ben informato e ben scritto...

• A very well-written book that takes the murder of Theo Van Gogh as its starting point for considering wider issues of tolerance and cultural diverity. It's written about the Netherlands but most of what the author says applies is highly relevent to other Western societies with significant Muslim minorities. The old cliche of a "warts and all" portraint certainly applies to this book. The negative side of affluent Holland is certainly well detailed; the horrors of the largely Moroccan "dish cities" in Holland are vividly portrayed. Theo Van Gogh certainly doen't emerge as a great hero from this book, in fact he seems pretty obnoxious. The Islamic radicals the author interviews are pretty scary, probably rather unbalanced. The author paints a colouful picture of Pim Fortuyn, and provides a persuaive analysis of his appeal. The author gives no easy answers but certainly makes the reader think. highly recommended.

• Well researched, analytical, insightful. A good read for sure. Evaluates religion and tolerance from many angels and provides readers with a lot to think about

• This book depicts the social landcape of Holland thru the portraits drawn of several infamous celebrities who are representative of modern society: Theo Van Gogh (murdered), Pim Fortuyn (idem), or Ayaan Hirsi (wanted dead by many). Very well written, it is hard to put this book down. Looks like a painting of El Bosco. The author has a knack for revealing the personalities of his characters thru brief details of their lives and intelligent interviews. And he never seems to impose whatever position he may stand for; he's very objective, or that's the impression. Curiously enough both Theo and Fortuyn, who are not to win my simpathies at all, were murdered by an Islamist gone nuts, and a zoophile, personages quite apart, but it's a very telling illustration of the human landscape we have here. Because the 2 victims aren't simple Joes either. Theo was a spoiled brat, a punk; Fortyun a narcissistic sodomite turned politician (it reminds me of when the infamous Cicciolina, the italian meretrix, went into Parliament). Well, these people seem to be some kind of heroes/devils in Holland, and they are the talk of the town. Theo seemed to have been quite obnoxious and despicable as a youngster, fond of insulting anybody religious just to get a kick out of it. He got away with Christians, not with Muslims though. he seemed only to be able to love himself, as good narcissists do. These book was quite informative to me, as I didn't have this side of the picture I surely was given a partial impression by the media when the facts happened. The issues dealt with here are foreign to us Christians, because we are called to live in this world but not like the world, sinful. Both sides of the conflict, immigrants and their hosts, Islam and liberal Europe are spiteful, at least negligent and deaf to Christ and his gospel. We must have nothing to do with them. But it is easy to take sides while reading this good analysis. It seems like we ought to pick the better things of each side; that seems to be the solution at the end for a life together and a stop to the intolereance and hatred. Wrong choice. We would only get ourselves in the dirt too. Remember: "And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled, for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet." (Matthew 24:6) We have in these pages interesting points of view of people who are lost. See page 57; Fortuyn puts on the same level Christianism and Islam. The reason? "Their moral principles are so high, it's not possible to live up to them." That is his excuse for being a sex maniac and a sodomite. Sin is sin. Each one chooses whom to serve, the Devil or the Lord. Modern, decrepit society only wants an alibi for keep living in sin. Modern society is so hooked up there's not enough will power to turn back. It's high time for a crisis. Islam bothers this comfortable generation only as long as it reminds them of certain moral standards that they would rather ignore (and can't). It doesn't bother them as much for its theology, or even violence against women, but for its Calvinistic puritanism. Isn't this quite revealing? This is a deep book; it recquires that you know yourself first, or else it will tell YOU who you should be. See the pillar in your eye, friend, before you point to someone else's moth. Thank you Jesus that we don't belong here. We are just passing by.

• Buruma is a good writer and paces the book very well. There are several points of value (exile returns to native land, cross-cultural comment etc.) but for me the most insightful were the snippets from newspaper commentaries that Buruma uses as a preface to each chapter. A mixture of shock and surprise, mixed with dollops of self-criticism. Dutch society, which is arguably one of the smugest societies on earth, appears to have been living in a fantasy fully committed to the principle that radical permissiveness would bring no evil. From Buruma's account, it seems that many in Holland could not bring themsleves to condemn the killer of Theo Van Gogh without also 'wondering' how Van Gogh had contributed to his own murder. In a 21st century western democracy, you may well ask yourself? Sitting on the fence became preferable to a realistic appraisal of the failure of multiculturalism. The refreshingly sharpest critics of Dutch moral and political ambivalence quoted in the book are those muslims that advocate poitical secularism. Yet, as Buruma points out, among the literatti their voices are rejected as discordant, upsetting the harmony of the Dutch self-melody. For example, it is a complete scandal that muslim women can be shipped halfway around the world for arranged marriages and excluded from education and acculturation opportunities, but no European government including the Dutch wish to interere with these practices on the spurious grounds that any interference would undermine pluralism. After the murder, much Dutch government analysis focused on the challenge that 'urbanisation' posed for young muslims living in the shadow of parents drawn from rural backgrounds. This may be valuable, but Buruma never forms a definite opinion about the strategy and its likely impact. The challenge confronting freedom of exrpession was downplayed. Most sane people would argue that irrespective of the alleged backwardness of a community, murder is just plain wrong - in all the Abrahamic religions. Contrariwise, there is a tradition of female murder in some Islamic cultures, so-cllaed 'honour killings' that has yet to be rooted out. Understanding the motives behind the shooting and hacking to death of Van Gogh (if such is possible) seems in Holland to have been caught up and confused with an unwillingness to challenge cultural relativism. Consequently, vaciliation became the acceptable outcome. Not doing something has become preferable to doing something. Buruma has identified a number of friction points that can only worsen in paralytic effect without sensible defences of Western values being put in place. Yet, ironically echoing the malaise of his own nation, the book ultimately fails to rise above ambivalence in its conclusions. In a double irony this itself reveals the immense moral jeopardy facing Europe as it drifts rudderless towards its own cultural destruction.

Purchase links