After Zemmour, Houellebecq jumps on the bandwagon

[NormanH]

After Éric Zemmour's ranting diatribe Le suicide Français Michel Houellebecq has now jumped on the racist bandwagon with an equally alarmist novel again with a dramatic title Soumission

Although I have quoted the original titles all the links are to pages in English for anyone interested in reading about this.

I can't think that either of these books would have been published in the UK.

[Patf]

Interesting, it could happen in other places too. eg Israel, where the Muslim birthrate is higher than that of Jews and Christians.

[nomoss]

The description of "Soumission" seemed a quite possible scenario to me. But then, I've lived in Saudi Arabia and similar countries.

[woolybanana]

Well, changes of the ruling culture in any society are not impossible; I understand that certain areas of East London (Tower Hamlets) now follow Sharia Law and that shops are 'banned' from selling certain items which are forbidden by the holy book.

The reason that Singapore broke away from Malaysia was, in part, that the Chinese majority thought they would be outnumbered.

Many years ago a novel came out which imagined UK as if it had been conquored and run by the Nazis; the book caused a nice little stir but it was only a work of foction, as is Soumission.

Though these issues are sensationalized by such as Zemmour, it is quite reasonable for a society to have a debate about immmigration and its results.

[Pickles]

[quote user="NormanH"]After Éric Zemmour's ranting diatribe Le suicide Français Michel Houellebecq has now jumped on the racist bandwagon with an equally alarmist novel again with a dramatic title Soumission

Although I have quoted the original titles all the links are to pages in English for anyone interested in reading about this.

I can't think that either of these books would have been published in the UK.[/quote]

I haven't read either, though I have followed the polemic.

Do you think that Soumission goes beyond books like Harris's "Fatherland" or Deightons "SS-GB"?

Should it be treated as science fiction/fantasy (Brave New World/1984/A Clockwork Orange)?

Or is it the intent that seems to underlie his writing the book that is unacceptable?

From the somewhat conflicting and at times delerious statements that he has made about the book he seems to career wildly between "I'm just a writer: I'm not an intellectual" to (my precis) "I think this could happen and want to warn the public" to "this is totally improbable and implausible and it's just a dystopian novel" (again my precis). If, in particular, you took the latter interpretation, what would prevent it being published in the UK?

Supplementary question: Are the French more or less racist than the British? Or are they more overtly racist?

I felt that some things that I heard in France would not be considered acceptable in the UK.

[woolybanana]

British law seems to be more proactive or to be used more proactively in repressing even minor hints of racism, verbal or otherwise.

Any form of any objection to any group, including women, gays and others, their culture or their behavious seems to be interpreted as racist, whereas, in France, there is a great deal more leeway, I suspect.

(But I have not lived in the UK for nearly 18 years so this may just be an impression gained from newspapers and recent visits.)

[nomoss]

WB's comment on Singapore reminded me of the seven years we lived in Sarawak, not too long after independence from British rule.

Many there wished they could have emulated Singapore and left the Federation into which the UK lumped them for geographical rather than cultural reasons.

While we were there, there was a noticeable migration of Malay Moslems from the Peninsula, and the indigenous people were being marginalised in many ways, not only socially, but by jungle clearance for palm oil plantations, and legal and illegal logging, the latter being quite blatant, and controlled by a powerful and sometimes dangerous elite.

By the time we left it was becoming increasingly difficult for non-Moslems to advance in government posts.

Our Chinese Police Chief, hoping for promotion, converted to Islam and changed his name to Omar.

He succeeded in annoying his wife, who, apart from more personal matters, was upset she had to keep kitchen utensils separated if she had used them for pork, and he didn't get the promotion anyway.

Around the time we left, a process of refusing re-entry visas for foreign Christian ministers seemed to be beginning, following the example by Sabah.

In Sabah (ex British North Borneo) there were mass conversions to Islam of indigenous people, who were quite keen on this, as the acceptance of their new faith brought with it a cash bonus and a bit of land.

It was rumoured that the Sabah First Chief Minister at the time, Tun Mustafa, who instigated the mass conversions, had the ambition of creating a Muslim majority in the State, seceeding from the Federation, and declaring a Caliphate with himself as the Caliph.

I too cannot comment on the UK, as apart from infrequent visits, I have not lived there for over 50 years, except to say that it is a very different place from the one I left.

[NormanH]

I feel that the real problem is the resurgence of religious fundamentalism that  wishes to gain political control whatever the religion.

Admittedly nowadays certain forms of the Muslim religion seem much more fanatical than other belief systems, but looking back at  religious persecution and wars in Europe, some extreme evangelical groups in the States, and even the bigotry in the NI troubles I am not convinced that  Christianity has been guilt-free.

However these guys speak a language most of us can't begin to understand, wear distinctive clothes and have a swarthy skin.

It is easy to mingle racism with opposition to religion.  I don't care about a person's origins, but I do care if that person wishes to impose beliefs and behaviour on me.

Perhaps the decline in organised religion since WW2 has left us unaware of the dangers.

[nomoss]

I am very far from believing that Christianity, in any form, has been guilt free. In fact the Moslem world, with its long history of religious toleration, would have to go a very long way to even begin to approach the extremes of the one true church around the 15th. century.

I don't care too much about people's languages I don't understand, although I have made efforts to learn a bit of them - I can at least count to ten, say hello and a few basic niceties and not-so-niceties in a few. Clothes don't bother me, and my own skin is more than a little swarthy at times.

Like Norman, I would care if someone wished to impose their beliefs and behaviour on me, but in many years of living in Moslem countries, that never happened. I felt more pressurised by a Christian Missionary (to the so-called Aboriginals) in Australia, who told me that simply "leading a good life" was inadequate.

Having actively participated in organised religion before leaving the UK, without being totally convinced, my experiences in E. Malaysia and Saudi made me very aware of possible dangers that apparently don't seem relevant to many in the "West".

[YCCMB]

I have, for some time, been curious about the whole religion thing, more from the point of view of Christianity. Over recent years, headline-grabbing scare stories about schools not being allowed to celebrate Christian festivals (you know the sort of thing, and the usual source) have given rise to an awful lot of "we are a Christian country" rants, in the UK at least. but, really, are we? I know very, very few regular, or even irregular churchgoers. People who, if asked for their religion on a form would put C of E or Catholic without batting an eyelid, but who probably haven't set foot inside a church since they were last invited to a wedding, christening or funeral. In France, or at least my part of it, congregations are so tiny that our village church only has services once every few months and shares a priest with several other communes.

Muslims, far more generally, even those removed by miles from any sort of fundamentalist persuasion, do tend to be more observant of their chosen faith.

I'm a bit perplexed. If you can't persuade several million people to follow what they claim as their own religion, how on earth is anyone going to persuade them to start following someone else's religion? I'm prepared to feel a bit threatened by fundamentalists, and that only because I live close to London, which will always be a target for extremists, but I'm not at all threatened by people of other religions in general. Why should I be?

[powerdesal]

Pickles wrote:-

''Supplementary question: Are the French more or less racist than the British? Or are they more overtly racist?

I felt that some things that I heard in France would not be considered acceptable in the UK.''

I think the answer to that question is certainly yes. The French, in general, appear to be far less tolerant of non-European people which is not good but are far more 'nationalistic' which may, not necessarily, be a bad thing.

The level of stricture in UK under the heading of ''racism'' is, IMHO, somewhat over the top these days. The word 'race' is taken completely out of context and is used to cover many things that just are not race at all.

Religion ( for example ) is not race, Nationality is not race either but they both seem to be in UK terms.

[NormanH]

I agree that the word 'racism' has become so general in UK usage as to mean practically nothing more than discrimination of any sort..