Bangladeshi residents and others in Monfalcone say decisions to prohibit worship at cultural centres and banning burkinis at the beach is part of anti-Islam agenda
The envelope containing two partially burned pages of the Qur’an came as a shock. Until then, Muslim residents in the Adriatic port town of Monfalcone had lived relatively peacefully for more than 20 years.
Addressed to the Darus Salaam Muslim cultural association on Via Duca d’Aosta, the envelope was received soon after Monfalcone’s far-right mayor, Anna Maria Cisint, banned prayers on the premises.
“It was hurtful, a serious insult we never expected,” said Bou Konate, the association’s president. “But it was not a coincidence. The letter was a threat, generated by a campaign of hate that has stoked toxicity.”
Monfalcone’s population recently passed 30,000. Such a positive demographic trend would ordinarily spell good news in a country grappling with a rapidly declining birthrate, but in Monfalcone, where Cisint has been nurturing an anti-Islam agenda since winning her first mandate in 2016, the rise has not been welcomed.
I think it just might have to do with the history of Islamic terror attacks…
Such as the London bombings and bridge attack, Charlie Hebdo attack and the more recent stabbings in France, the Madrid train bombings which killed 193 people, the November 2015 Paris attack in which 130 were murdered, the 2016 Atatürk Airport attack in Turkey which left 45 dead, the 2016 Brussels bombings, just to name a few…
I’m not suggesting that all or even most Islamic individuals are dangerous/terrorists. But there is a long, bloody history of Islamic extremism throughout Europe.
I’m also not suggesting this justifies these bans in Italy whatsoever. I share this because it’s essential context to answer your question.
Muslim immigrants will have de facto faced as much (if not far more) hostility and prejudice before any of those events.
What changed is that by the late 20th century, it had become politically unacceptable for right-wing parties to be perceived to be preying on overt racism towards their countries’ brown-skinned citizens. But the War on Terror at the start of the 21st century created a new organising framework for nativists, whereby they could incite hatred against exactly the same brown-skinned people as before, but claim they were targeting them for their religion and not their skin colour. At the heart of it is still the same prejudice towards those who are different, it’s just that the aspect of difference they choose to focus on today is more politically acceptable than the one they used to focus on.
From the perspective of a brown-skinned Muslim immigrant, the ideological hoops the far-right jump through are likely irrelevant. These people were targeted by nativists before, and they get targeted by nativists now.
I don’t disagree with you that it’s the product of racism and discrimination. But the terror attacks also fuel that hate.
I can say the same thing about the consequences of my (US) country’s actions in the ‘war on terror.’ We’re the greatest contributing factor to the formation of ISIS. The casualties of our drone strikes alone (from Bush, Obama, and trump) were vastly civilian targets.
Whether it’s politically/religiously motivated drone strikes on civilians, bombs in subways, or knife attacks, those actions spawn further fear, hate, intolerance, and extremism.
Even though Italy is enacting racist policies/systems, they are able to gather support for/‘justify’ their actions due largely to the terror attacks throughout Europe.