Campus Watch, but better – Freedom Party and politics of obstruction

You may also like...

3 Responses

  1. The contribution of my colleague Maurits Berger does not come as a surprise. Geert Wilders and the PVV party are not interested in facts, in discussion, in communication of Islam.

    Their policy is to express their disdain for Islam at all possible issues and events(not Muslims, how?) and as such they took the opportunity to react in Parliament on the conference prof. Berger organized.

    On internet I am working on a series of articles on “The ideology of the PVV” based on an analysis of the book “De schijn-elite van de valse munters” of Party Ideologist Martin Bosma, MP of the PVV as well.

    My analysis shows clearly that for the PVV everything that is Islam or Leftist (parties) is, as prof. Berger labels it correctly, bad.

    And as they are bad, why would you pay attention to them in a constructive way.

    The power of the PVV is rising and I think it is very good to raise ones voice even if it does not provoke any PVV reaction. I think prof. Berger did well to express his views on what happened.

    Whatever comes from all of this, not reacting is not an option and the people in our country can make up their minds. Do they prefer a society based on exclusion (of Muslims) or a society (multicultural or not, I do not care) where -real- equality prevails.

    Take a look at the “Ideology of the PVV” series at:

    http://www.nieuwwij.nl/index.php?pageID=13&messageID=6173 (scroll down for parts 2-6).

    It is in Dutch. I am sorry for the non Dutch readers.

    Jan Jaap de Ruiter

    PS: My website was hacked today.

  2. Mohammed Hashas says:

    Brief comment: Berger’s last sentence is the point I want to reiterate here: ‘We need to change logic and methods – the thing is that I do not yet quite know how and what.’ The way you have reacted here via writing, along with the conferences you organize, is part of the deal. Scholarship has to turn into waht I can call ‘Applied Scholarship’ in the sense that academics have to gain back their place in the public and political space, not for the sake of space as such, but for the sake of that ‘unreached truth’ and ‘right attitudes.’ I can imagine that it is not easy at all…Scholarship as I see it is now following and commenting on what is circulated by some shallow politics, instead of being the engine that nurtures these debates. Scholarship is generally tamed and instead of leading, it is led…The way to get back to that role of ‘correction’ and ‘enlightening’ is to be engaged; that means sacrifices that can be costly to the persons involved…Well, truth is always bitter to accept by many, but it is worth the challenge…Good luck…

  3. vanhetgoor says:

    How lovely that your weapon is knowledge. But I prefer the truth. If you have stepped over the line of researching a subject and accepting that subject in all of its appearances than truth will be far away, and never be reached. In the deepest basic of its existence islam is a form of fraud. Nothing more and nothing less. It was made to scare people and make the into slaves. It’s all about money!

    If someone accepts for instance the sharia as some sort of a law then the results will be that you have a crooked law based upon lies. Only to be followed by misery.

    If the sharia is based upon the islam, and the islam of made out of lies, then the sharia can never be trusted nor can it be used in a civilised society. Because the sharia is based upon the differences between people, the sex and the status of a person. Then there is no justification in that law. Does not matter how long this subject is to be discussed. When justice is not the base of a law it can not be a law. Therefor you are left with only a book of rules. Strange rules that differ from person to person. Unreliable rules made up only to favour one person and to condemn another person. If someone has all the knowledge in the world, and still no sense of dignity, no feelings for what is right and what is wrong, then there is no use in studying sharia or islam.

    Accepting islam and sharia is just as unethical as condoning its existence.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *