Riots in Malmo, Sweden as people burn the Koran

[mr friendly guy]

This has been reported on a few outlets, including Australia's ABC, although the reporting by them is frankly very sparse compared to some others.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/08/ ... 55481.html

Riots in Sweden after far-right activists burn copy of Quran
Unrest in Malmo city after copy of Muslim holy book is burned during a far-right rally in a mainly immigrant district.

30 Aug 2020

At least 10 people were arrested in southern Sweden and several police officers injured in violence triggered by an illegal protest where a copy of the Quran was burned.

Protesters in Malmo city threw stones at police and burned tyres on the streets late on Friday, with violence escalating as the night wore on, according to police and local media.

The demonstration of about 300 people was connected to a rally earlier on Friday in which far-right activists burned a copy of the Muslim holy book in Rosengard, a largely migrant neighbourhood, police spokesman Rickard Lundqvist told Swedish tabloid, Expressen.

Anti-Muslim Danish politician Rasmus Paludan was expected to attend that rally, but was stopped by the police at the Swedish-Danish border, police said.

Between 10 and 20 protesters were arrested late on Friday for the violence and "have all been released," police spokesman Patric Fors told AFP news agency.

The violence had subsided by Saturday morning. "It's not right," Malmo resident Shahed told the SVT public broadcaster. "But it wouldn't have happened if they hadn't burned the Quran."

Earlier on Friday, Paludan, who leads the far-right Danish anti-immigration Hard Line party, was stopped at the border with Denmark and subsequently banned from entering Sweden for two years.

Paludan was due to travel to Malmo to speak at Friday's event. But authorities pre-empted his arrival by announcing the ban and briefly detaining him near Malmo.

"We suspect that he was going to break the law in Sweden," Calle Persson, spokesman for the police in Malmo told AFP. "There was also a risk that his behaviour ... would pose a threat to society."

But his supporters went ahead with the rally, during which six people were arrested for inciting racial hatred.

Paludan later put up a scathing message on Facebook. "Sent back and banned from Sweden for two years. However, rapists and murderers are always welcome!" he wrote.

Paludan last year attracted media attention for burning a Quran wrapped in bacon - a meat banned in Islam.

In June, Paludan was sentenced to a three-month prison sentence in Denmark over various violations of that country's hate-speech laws.

I now slightly OT, but I am surprised Denmark is allowing its citizens to travel to Sweden during the pandemic. I thought Sweden was put on the list of unsafe countries. So Paludan was allowed to from the Danish side, but it was the Swedish side that blocked him.

In any event, the right wing has used Sweden as an example of failed integration for some time. Not sure how many Swedes we still have posting on this board, but it would be interesting to hear their perspective.

[Ralin]

The violence had subsided by Saturday morning. "It's not right," Malmo resident Shahed told the SVT public broadcaster. "But it wouldn't have happened if they hadn't burned the Quran."

Man. Way to make me feel a spark of sympathy for the anti-immigrant right. Fuck the Quran.

[ray245]

The violence had subsided by Saturday morning. "It's not right," Malmo resident Shahed told the SVT public broadcaster. "But it wouldn't have happened if they hadn't burned the Quran."

Man. Way to make me feel a spark of sympathy for the anti-immigrant right. Fuck the Quran.

The anti-immigrant right knows burning the Quran will provoke a response. It is a form of intimidation of a marginalised minority.

[mr friendly guy]

Its really quite an almost symbiotic relationship. Take pre existing problems with integration, justify anti immigrant measures, and when that's not enough stir shit up with migrants like this, then get a reaction and then use that to justify further anti immigrant measures. These measures in turn drive the migrants to feel alienation, further impeding attempts at integration.

I can understand when some governments just say fuck this shit, and keep the two groups apart.

[ray245]

Its really quite an almost symbiotic relationship. Take pre existing problems with integration, justify anti immigrant measures, and when that's not enough stir shit up with migrants like this, then get a reaction and then use that to justify further anti immigrant measures. These measures in turn drive the migrants to feel alienation, further impeding attempts at integration.

I can understand when some governments just say fuck this shit, and keep the two groups apart.

Exactly. Freedom of speech is fine and dandy, but it can be used to deliberately provoke and intimidate a minority. The power balance is not equal in regards to religion in the West. On paper it should be fine to criticise both Christianity and Islam, but that completely ignores the fact that Christianity is the established religion in the West.

It's like burning the Torah in the 1930s. The marginalised community is already feeling unwelcome and subject to threats and discrimination in their daily lives. The Quran is not so much a holy book as much as a symbol of their community. Burning that symbol of that community when they are already being told to leave the country... is not going to help matters.

[Ralin]

The anti-immigrant right knows burning the Quran will provoke a response.

So we're going with 'He shouldn't have hit his wife, but she had it coming talking like that' logic?

It is a form of intimidation of a marginalised minority.

It's no more a form of intimidation than me saying that God isn't real and that Muhammad was a lying fraud who made up all that shit about the archangel Gabriel. I'm not generally one to bust out the whole "They hate us because of our freedoms!!!" card, but, uh...

The Quran is not so much a holy book as much as a symbol of their community. Burning that symbol of that community when they are already being told to leave the country... is not going to help matters.

Why should I feel concern over the welfare of people who think Swedes aren't entitled to say that their ~community's~ (because people from the same background who decide to dump Islam don't count I guess) stupid book is trash and that they'll disrespect it whenever they feel like it?

[wautd]

The violence had subsided by Saturday morning. "It's not right," Malmo resident Shahed told the SVT public broadcaster. "But it wouldn't have happened if they hadn't burned the Quran."

The past couple of weeks there have been several riots here in Belgium and Holland as well by migrant youths from Islamic backgrounds . Without any quran getting burned.
I think it's rather the result of a toxic criminal sub-culture created by a mix of lack of upbringing and islamic fundamentalism. A patriarchal macho culture where boys are superior to girls (case in point, sexual harassment of girls in public, teenage pimps/loverboys), where it's all about perceived honor and manliness, where the laws of the host country are subservient to their religious rules, and where the (non islamic) state shouldn't be respected or even fought (case in point, scum attacking ambulances and firefighters during interventions,...).
Integration is hard when islamic fundamentalism considers it's a sin to integrate in a non islamic country

[ray245]

So we're going with 'He shouldn't have hit his wife, but she had it coming talking like that' logic?

No. It's more the wife lashing out after years of abuse.

It's no more a form of intimidation than me saying that God isn't real and that Muhammad was a lying fraud who made up all that shit about the archangel Gabriel. I'm not generally one to bust out the whole "They hate us because of our freedoms!!!" card, but, uh...

It is when the far-right is actively trying to kick all of them out of the country.

Why should I feel concern over the welfare of people who think Swedes aren't entitled to say that their ~community's~ (because people from the same background who decide to dump Islam don't count I guess) stupid book is trash and that they'll disrespect it whenever they feel like it?

So people's idiocy legitimise the intimations towards their community?

The past couple of weeks there have been several riots here in Belgium and Holland as well by migrant youths from Islamic backgrounds . Without any quran getting burned.
I think it's rather the result of a toxic criminal sub-culture created by a mix of lack of upbringing and islamic fundamentalism. A patriarchal macho culture where boys are superior to girls (case in point, sexual harassment of girls in public, teenage pimps/loverboys), where it's all about perceived honor and manliness, where the laws of the host country are subservient to their religious rules, and where the (non islamic) state shouldn't be respected or even fought (case in point, scum attacking ambulances and firefighters during interventions,...).
Integration is hard when islamic fundamentalism considers it's a sin to integrate in a non islamic country

Or people turn towards Islamic fundamentalism in part because of they are already feeling marginalised.

[mr friendly guy]

Exactly. Freedom of speech is fine and dandy, but it can be used to deliberately provoke and intimidate a minority. The power balance is not equal in regards to religion in the West. On paper it should be fine to criticise both Christianity and Islam, but that completely ignores the fact that Christianity is the established religion in the West.

It's like burning the Torah in the 1930s. The marginalised community is already feeling unwelcome and subject to threats and discrimination in their daily lives. The Quran is not so much a holy book as much as a symbol of their community. Burning that symbol of that community when they are already being told to leave the country... is not going to help matters.

The other thing we got to be aware of, is that there are accusations that hate speech laws aren't applied equally. I am not sure how accurate it is, but the allegation goes that if a Muslim was to say anti semitic thing the law will come on them, but it doesn't seem to be as harsh as when right winger says stuff about Islam. Personally I think ideas generally shouldn't be subject to the same protections as people, so the two situations aren't quite comparable. However if the law says they are (ie both strictly comes under hate speech) and its not applied equally to Muslims, then yeah I can see that worsening the problem.

[ray245]

The other thing we got to be aware of, is that there are accusations that hate speech laws aren't applied equally. I am not sure how accurate it is, but the allegation goes that if a Muslim was to say anti semitic thing the law will come on them, but it doesn't seem to be as harsh as when right winger says stuff about Islam. Personally I think ideas generally shouldn't be subject to the same protections as people, so the two situations aren't quite comparable. However if the law says they are (ie both strictly comes under hate speech) and its not applied equally to Muslims, then yeah I can see that worsening the problem.

It could be the case of such hate speech simply not being very well reported to the police? Given that in Sweden many people from those communities do not speak Swedish, they may not be too familiar with the legal system as well.

[wautd]

The other thing we got to be aware of, is that there are accusations that hate speech laws aren't applied equally. I am not sure how accurate it is, but the allegation goes that if a Muslim was to say anti semitic thing the law will come on them, but it doesn't seem to be as harsh as when right winger says stuff about Islam. Personally I think ideas generally shouldn't be subject to the same protections as people, so the two situations aren't quite comparable. However if the law says they are (ie both strictly comes under hate speech) and its not applied equally to Muslims, then yeah I can see that worsening the problem.

It could be the case of such hate speech simply not being very well reported to the police? Given that in Sweden many people from those communities do not speak Swedish, they may not be too familiar with the legal system as well.

Another example of failed integration

[Ralin]

No. It's more the wife lashing out after years of abuse.

Nah, because that would imply that the Muslims in question were somehow wronged by a Quran being burned or that the people whose property they burned or who they threw rocks at somehow deserved it.

Yes or no Ray, do you think it should be a crime to insult certain religions? Do members of certain religions have the right to punish people who insult their religion? If so, which religions and in which countries?

So people's idiocy legitimise the intimations towards their community?

Members of a religion rioting in response to their religion being insulted certainly lends credence to claims that many members of said religion are violent, entitled and a threat to people who refuse to kowtow to their religion’s rules.

Or people turn towards Islamic fundamentalism in part because of they are already feeling marginalised.

Any Muslim in Sweden who refuses to accept concepts like gender equality, religious freedom and that no one is obligated to ‘respect’ their religion should be forced to do so regardless of their personal history.

[Vendetta]

They’re not insulting a religion, they’re using it as a stick to hit people whose skin is the wrong colour.

It the only thing they’ve bothered to find out so they’re using it as their attack.

[Ralin]

They’re not insulting a religion, they’re using it as a stick to hit people whose skin is the wrong colour.

Please, tell me which ethnicity the Quran belongs to.

[wautd]

They’re not insulting a religion, they’re using it as a stick to hit people whose skin is the wrong colour.

Bullshit. This is about ideology/religion, not race.
Here in Belgium we have recently had issues with Chechen migrant groups making organized homophobic attacks. Makes me feel like burning a quran too, despite Chechens being white.

[loomer]

Here's a simple question. How does burning the quran resolve that issue or demonstrate respect for the multicultural values of a modern secular democracy?

[His Divine Shadow]

Pretty sure this is about race given it was organized by fucking Rasmus Paludan. Just because the two things can be separate, doesn't mean they are separated now, just because white people can be muslims, doesn't mean most people with anti-muslim sentiment ever think about that, or care.

[wautd]

Here's a simple question. How does burning the quran resolve that issue or demonstrate respect for the multicultural values of a modern secular democracy?

Simple answer: It doesn't. It's stupid and counter productive but that doesn't mean it should be forbidden as it would violate freedom of speech. If someone wants to burn his copy of the quran to make a statement then so be it. It's his property and he can do what he wants with it. Answering with riots and damaging other people's property =/= free speech.
No religion or ideology should be above criticism.

[loomer]

Here's a simple question. How does burning the quran resolve that issue or demonstrate respect for the multicultural values of a modern secular democracy?

Simple answer: It doesn't. It's stupid and counter productive but that doesn't mean it should be forbidden as it would violate freedom of speech. If someone wants to burn his copy of the quran to make a statement then so be it. It's his property and he can do what he wants with it. Answering with riots and damaging other people's property =/= free speech.
No religion or ideology should be above criticism.

Okay. But where do you draw the line between legitimate criticism and the deliberate intimidation of a people?

[mr friendly guy]

For those who aren't familiar with Rasmus Paludan, Australian news did interview him last year when they did a piece on Denmark and the difficulties of integration there. Paludan filmed the whole thing and you can find it if anyone wants to sit through 1 hour and 14 minutes. Just search Paludan name, interview, and the name of the journalist Hamish.

I admit he is charismatic, and its easy to follow the I am against Islam not against race argument. However as he talks further, you find that he subscribes to the Bell Curve bullshit on IQ and race, which leads to some interesting conclusions. For example they will admit using the Bell Curve bullshit Asians are slightly better, so he doesn't feel racist against Vietnamese (the example he used), but he looks down on Africans.

He usually chucks in the usual "arguments" of "cultural marxism" etc.

While he has a right to burn his own property which includes the Koran, it smacks of a publicity stunt trying to get a reaction rather than a serious attempt to solve the problem. Unless he was hoping that Danes will get outrage and deport some migrants.

[Ralin]

Okay. But where do you draw the line between legitimate criticism and the deliberate intimidation of a people?

I feel that focusing on 'legitimate criticism' is the wrong tack to be taking. An anti-immigrant racist burning the Quran isn't going to make Swedish Muslims any less uncomfortable or angry than me burning the Quran because I'm an atheist who thinks that Muhammad was a lying fraud who made the whole thing up and I want to spite some jackass who threatened to beat my ass if I ever disrespected a Quran. So I think the intentions of the person doing it are irrelevant compared to the fact that Sweden is a secular country with religious freedom, and where religious freedom means you can mock and insult religions you object to without fear of reprisal. You don't have to be right about how evil the Catholic Church is be able to draw pictures mocking the Virgin Mary and expect to not have your house burnt down or something. Muslims who feel intimidated by Quran burnings have a duty to get over that because that's part of what's expected of people living in a secular country like Sweden. If they collectively can't, well...I'm not going to start agreeing with anti-immigrant right-wingers, but that's legit evidence that there is a problem with Muslim immigrants there.

Or to put it more succinctly

While he has a right to burn his own property which includes the Koran, it smacks of a publicity stunt trying to get a reaction rather than a serious attempt to solve the problem.

If the publicity stunt works well enough to spark riots then clearly there’s a real problem with some of the Muslim population that he was able to exploit.

And really, I'm not seeing a lot of evidence that the rioters were acting out of fear rather than anger and a desire to punish people for insulting their religion.

[mr friendly guy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9A1LtmxkAYk

Here is the Australian report on Denmark, including a conversation with Paludan.

Maybe the Europeans can enlighten me, but is the view in Europe that ethnicity triumphs nationality for identity? Because that seems like a bit point of confusion between the Australian journalist Hamish, and Paludan. Basically Paludan is saying when (some migrants) say they are as Danish as he is, he gets offended (but its their right to say so). To which Hamish ask, if they were born there, doesn't that make them Danes? Paludan then goes onto how Danes are an ethnic group.

From an Australian perspective, national identity ie Australian generally but not always plays a larger role than ethnic identity. Like when you say you're Australian, its clearly interpreted to mean your national identity rather than ethnic identity.

[ray245]

Nah, because that would imply that the Muslims in question were somehow wronged by a Quran being burned or that the people whose property they burned or who they threw rocks at somehow deserved it.

Yes or no Ray, do you think it should be a crime to insult certain religions? Do members of certain religions have the right to punish people who insult their religion? If so, which religions and in which countries?

It depends who is the one burning the book. Would you say it is acceptable for Nazis to burn the Torah?

As for whether it is a crime, the legal framework does not recognise the power-dynamics and power disparity between the communities. Far-right burning the Quran after years of threatening Muslims is an entirely different dynamic from marginalised groups protesting against say a well-off church.

Members of a religion rioting in response to their religion being insulted certainly lends credence to claims that many members of said religion are violent, entitled and a threat to people who refuse to kowtow to their religion’s rules.

That sounds eerily similar to what Trump and many Republicans would say about Blacks in America.

Any Muslim in Sweden who refuses to accept concepts like gender equality, religious freedom and that no one is obligated to ‘respect’ their religion should be forced to do so regardless of their personal history.

And that blanket mentality and public perception towards Muslims in Sweden will hinder their life opportunities, make it seem like the world is set against them, and discourage integration.

Integration is a two-way street, but if the society of Sweden as a whole perceive Muslims predominately as a threat, that will not be possible.

[loomer]

Okay. But where do you draw the line between legitimate criticism and the deliberate intimidation of a people?

I feel that focusing on 'legitimate criticism' is the wrong tack to be taking. An anti-immigrant racist burning the Quran isn't going to make Swedish Muslims any less uncomfortable or angry than me burning the Quran because I'm an atheist who thinks that Muhammad was a lying fraud who made the whole thing up and I want to spite some jackass who threatened to beat my ass if I ever disrespected a Quran.

Ah, a truly democratic value on display. But also, since I was asking wautd, who expressed the idea that legitimate criticism can include burning the quran at an anti-immigrant rally in a predominantly immigrant area, your bizarre little fixation isn't terribly relevant.

So I think the intentions of the person doing it are irrelevant compared to the fact that Sweden is a secular country with religious freedom, and where religious freedom means you can mock and insult religions you object to without fear of reprisal. You don't have to be right about how evil the Catholic Church is be able to draw pictures mocking the Virgin Mary and expect to not have your house burnt down or something.

You are making two fundamental mistakes. You are assuming first that there is no difference in terms of intent between forms of conduct, which is manifestly incorrect. Second, you are mistaking 'religious freedom' to mean that you may do anything you wish without consequence. This is also incorrect - it simply means you are free to practice any religion you please, or no religion at all, without the fear of state consequences, in the same way that freedom of speech allows you to say dumb shit but does not insulate you from criticism or reprisals from private citizens.

Muslims who feel intimidated by Quran burnings have a duty to get over that because that's part of what's expected of people living in a secular country like Sweden.

Is it? You can, of course, demonstrate that the values of a secular country require people not to feel anger and fear at active insults to their identity, religion, and culture, right? And you can, of course, demonstrate that the values of a secular country permit people to induce that anger and fear on the basis of a person's identity, religion, and culture, yes?

If they collectively can't, well...I'm not going to start agreeing with anti-immigrant right-wingers, but that's legit evidence that there is a problem with Muslim immigrants there.

That's peculiar, because your explicit tack here is pretty much the antithesis of what secular democracy is actually about, so you'd get on swimmingly with them!

Or to put it more succinctly

While he has a right to burn his own property which includes the Koran, it smacks of a publicity stunt trying to get a reaction rather than a serious attempt to solve the problem.

If the publicity stunt works well enough to spark riots then clearly there’s a real problem with some of the Muslim population that he was able to exploit.

And really, I'm not seeing a lot of evidence that the rioters were acting out of fear rather than anger and a desire to punish people for insulting their religion.

And you have yet to produce any evidence that there was no fear, nor that the purpose of the burning was not to produce it or even to incite rage at a deliberate and flagrant insult to people's culture, religion, and identity taking place in the context of long-standing anti-immigrant and anti-Islam sentiment.

[wautd]

Here's a simple question. How does burning the quran resolve that issue or demonstrate respect for the multicultural values of a modern secular democracy?

Simple answer: It doesn't. It's stupid and counter productive but that doesn't mean it should be forbidden as it would violate freedom of speech. If someone wants to burn his copy of the quran to make a statement then so be it. It's his property and he can do what he wants with it. Answering with riots and damaging other people's property =/= free speech.
No religion or ideology should be above criticism.

Okay. But where do you draw the line between legitimate criticism and the deliberate intimidation of a people?

Openly calling for murder or violence, making false accusations or slander against a person,...
I fail to see how burning a quran equals intimidating people. A religious symbol isn't a person and burning a quran fall more under blasphemy, and blasphemy most certainly falls under freedom of speech.
I don't see why Islam should deserve special treatment simply because its fanatics are more likely to respond with violence whenever they feel offended. I don't think that we should drop the bar on what's allowed by the standards of religious fascists who feel offended by pretty much everything anyway.

Freedom of speech/expression also means having the freedom to offend.