On Tuesday, a French parliamentary panel recommended the government of France ban the use of veils and headscarves in public facilities. These garments are primarily worn by Islamic women as a matter of tradition and religious practice.
The French government’s reasoning behind this proposal is that the veil is an “insult to gender equality,” and that it is seen by many as a radical religious symbol that runs contrary to the secular ideals on which the country is situated. The authorities that seek to impose this ban also claim the support of precedent, citing a 2004 law that bans headscarves from institutions of primary and secondary education.
Meanwhile, in Switzerland, a recent law was passed via referendum that bans the further construction of minarets — tall, spire-like structures that often flank mosques and are a distinctive part of Islamic architecture. The publicity campaign surrounding this referendum (not dissimilar to the propositions that are part and parcel of Election Day here in the United States) has been particularly controversial, with one poster arguably seeking to depict minarets as missiles looming over a Swiss flag, accompanied with an image of a fully covered woman glowering out from behind a veil.
Alexander Segert, the designer of the poster and other controversial campaigns, sought to explain the reasoning behind the strong imagery.
“The message must go straight to the stomach, not to the brain, and connect with specific emotions involving fear, health, money, safety,” Segart said, according to The New York Times.
Segert also admitted that the campaigns were successful because “we know how to reduce information to the lowest level, so people respond without thinking.”
These incidents are part of a growing trend across Europe, where populist parties are seeking to cash in on anti-immigrant sentiment among the voting public. Whether it is the Calabrian town of Rosarno in Italy, which witnessed rioting and attacks on immigrant workers this month, or British inner cities, where groups associated with the far-right British National Party have been accused of inciting discrimination and violence against settlers and immigrants on racial grounds, the message seems to be the same: Political parties will go to any lengths to use propaganda and the fear of a change in the status quo to push their aspirations for power.
We are lucky to enjoy a more civil discourse on burning issues like immigration in the United States, but there are certainly lessons to take away from these developments, especially here in Arizona.
Foremost among these is that we must never use propaganda and hyperbole as crutches to vilify and discriminate against a group accused of no wrongdoing, whether it is on the basis of dress, culture, tradition, or indeed, just language.
Kartik still thinks it’s fine to discriminate against schools that have never sent a team to the Rose Bowl. E-mail your posters to kartikt@asu.edu
