logo
Why Left-‘Liberals' Are Downplaying Violence In Spain

Why Left-‘Liberals' Are Downplaying Violence In Spain

News182 days ago
At the heart of the problem is unwanted and often illegal immigration of Muslims into not just Spain but the entire Europe
The main purpose of language is communication, but Left-'liberals' often deploy it to conceal the reality, spread disinformation, and further their agenda. Top items on their agenda are downplaying the unpleasant features of radical Islam and veiling the violence by Muslims, the recent case being violence in Spain, which apparently Muslims perpetrated.
A news agency reported, 'Violent clashes erupted between far-right groups, local residents and North African migrants in a town in southeastern Spain late on Saturday following an attack on an elderly man by unknown assailants earlier in the week."
Notice the mention of 'far-Right groups, local residents and North African migrants." It may look like some neo-Nazi outfits—with whom far-Right is considered synonymous—along with a few parochial churls began the ruckus. Nowhere in the 318-word report are the words 'Muslims" and 'Islam" mentioned.
The recent violence was triggered in Torre-Pacheco when the Muslim migrants thrashed an elderly man in the street.
At the heart of the problem is unwanted and often illegal immigration of Muslims into not just Spain but the entire Europe. Along with them come Islamist and jihadist ideas, resulting in violence, the worst being the 2004 Madrid train bombings, the deadliest Muslim attack on European soil. In August 2017, a Muslim drove a van into crowds on Barcelona's busy Las Ramblas, mowing down 13 people; the attack was claimed by the Islamic State (IS) group. Hours later, there was a second attack in the southern coastal town of Cambrils, killing a woman.
Over the past several decades, Europe has transformed into a truly multicultural continent. People from across the globe—belonging to diverse ethnicities, religions, and nationalities—have made Europe their home. Among them are Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Christians from non-European countries, and others who, for the most part, integrate peacefully into European societies. They contribute to the economy, respect local laws, and generally coexist without major friction with native populations. Incidents involving these groups clashing with local populations over religious or cultural issues are exceedingly rare.
However, in stark contrast, the experience with overwhelming majorities of Muslim immigrant populations in Europe has been different, and increasingly fraught with tension. From France to Germany, Britain to Sweden, and Italy to Spain, conflicts involving some Muslim communities have frequently made headlines. These tensions range from social friction and cultural disputes to, in some extreme cases, violent acts carried out in the name of religion.
This raises an uncomfortable but important question: why is it that similar issues are not commonly observed with other non-European religious communities?
A key part of the answer lies in the refusal of Islam, as a faith and civilizational system, has faced in reconciling to come to terms with the foundational principles of modernity. Unlike the trajectory followed by other major religions, Islam has seen far less theological or philosophical engagement with Enlightenment-era values such as individual liberty, freedom of expression, secular governance, and tolerance for dissent. These values underpin much of European political and social life, and failure to embrace them can create deep cultural dissonance.
For many Muslims, identity is closely intertwined with religion, often in ways that do not allow for personal interpretation or deviation from traditional norms. This has led to difficulties when adjusting to secular societies where religion is expected to be a private affair and where critical engagement with religious ideas—including satire or irreverence—is legally protected and culturally embedded.
In extreme instances, this clash has culminated in acts of violence or intimidation—such as attacks over depictions of the Prophet Muhammad or over perceived blasphemy—which are utterly unacceptable in liberal democracies. In contrast, other communities may find certain cultural elements uncomfortable or offensive but seldom respond with threats or violence.
However, the reluctance to address this issue honestly is not limited to segments within the Muslim community alone. Many intellectuals and commentators—particularly on the Left—prefer to avoid uncomfortable truths in the name of cultural sensitivity or fear of being labeled Islamophobic. While compassion and anti-discrimination efforts are noble, a blanket refusal to discuss the ideological roots of recurring social tensions does more harm than good. It enables denial, avoids reform, and alienates moderate Muslims who wish to harmonize their faith with modern values.
It is crucial to understand that this is not an indictment of all Muslims, most of whom live peacefully; it is a call for honest dialogue about the ideological challenges facing Islam in the modern world, and the need for reform within religious thought to embrace pluralism, freedom, and reason.
Only when these issues are acknowledged by both Muslim leaders and their liberal allies can meaningful integration and social harmony be achieved across Europe.
To begin with, Muslim elites and Left-'liberals' must stop the abuse of language by taking recourse to phony concepts like 'Islamophobia.' Phony, because the fear of Islam is real, as the victims of the Madrid and London bombings know.
First Published:
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Israel-Iran war: Will the ceasefire hold?
Israel-Iran war: Will the ceasefire hold?

The Hindu

time35 minutes ago

  • The Hindu

Israel-Iran war: Will the ceasefire hold?

The 12-day Israel-Iran war, backed by U.S. airstrikes on key Iranian nuclear sites, ended with a ceasefire—but without decisive victory. President Trump declared Iran's facilities 'obliterated,' yet U.S. and European intelligence suggested only a temporary setback. Iran had likely dispersed its enriched uranium, and experts say it could resume enrichment within months. For Israel, the war exposed its overdependence on the U.S. and its inability to dismantle Iran's nuclear programme or provoke regime change. While Washington wants to stop a nuclear Iran, it avoids deep military entanglement in West Asia, especially under domestic pressure. For Iran, the attack echoed historical betrayals like the 1953 coup, strengthening its resolve. Many now argue that only nuclear deterrence—like North Korea's—can shield Iran from foreign aggression. As Iran rebuilds its arsenal and Israel stays on high alert, the ceasefire is only a pause. The deeper conflict and its dangers remain unresolved. Presentation - Stanly Johny Camera & Editing - Shivaraj S

18 Muslim women made it to Lok Sabha since independence; 13 of them dynasts: Book
18 Muslim women made it to Lok Sabha since independence; 13 of them dynasts: Book

The Print

timean hour ago

  • The Print

18 Muslim women made it to Lok Sabha since independence; 13 of them dynasts: Book

From royalty to a tea vendor-turned-politician's wife and from a first lady to a Bengali actress, the 18 Muslim women who treaded the hallowed corridors of power in the Lok Sabha are an eclectic mix, with each of them having an interesting backstory, but one common thread — their path to power was always strewn with struggle and hurdles. And while dynastic politics may not be conducive for democracy to deepen its roots, it has played a positive part in giving chances to Muslim women, with 13 out of the 18 being from political families. New Delhi, Jul 20 (PTI) That women were always under-represented in the Lok Sabha is a known fact, but Muslim women members have been a greater rarity with only 18 making it to the Lower House since independence, according to a new book. The story of these 18 Muslim women has been chronicled in an upcoming book– 'Missing from the House — Muslim women in the Lok Sabha' by Rasheed Kidwai and Ambar Kumar Ghosh. Kidwai says he wanted to document the profile of 20 Muslim women who made it to the Lower House, but two of them — Subhasini Ali and Afrin Ali — had openly proclaimed that they did not follow Islam. 'Only eighteen Muslim women have made it to the Lok Sabha since the first parliamentary polls in 1951-52. It is a shockingly abysmal figure, considering Muslim women are about 7.1 per cent of India's 146 crore population. Out of the 18 Lok Sabhas constituted till 2025, five times the Lok Sabha did not have a single Muslim woman member,' Kidwai and Ghosh write in their book, published by Juggernaut and will be released next month. Equally shocking is the fact that the number of Muslim women elected to Parliament in one tenure never crossed the mark of four in the 543-seat lower house of Parliament, the book points out. The book also notes that none of the five southern states — Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana — otherwise known for better political representation than the North and with better literary levels and other socio-economic indicators, have not yet sent a single Muslim woman MP to the Lok Sabha. The 18 Muslim women who made it to the Lok Sabha include Mofida Ahmed (1957, Congress); Zohraben Akbarbhai Chavda (Congress, 1962-67); Maimoona Sultan (Congress, 1957-67); Begum Akbar Jehan Abdullah (National Conference, 1977-79, 1984-89); Rashida Haque (Congress 1977-79); Mohsina Kidwai (Congress, 1977-89); Abida Ahmed (Congress, 1981-89); Noor Bano (Congress, 1996, 1999-2004); Rubab Sayda (Samajwadi Party, 2004-09); and Mehbooba Mufti (People's Democratic Party, 2004-09, 2014-19). The other Muslim women who entered the Lower House are Tabassum Hasan (Samajwadi Party, Lok Dal, Bahujan Samaj Party 2009-14); Mausam Noor (Trinamool Congress 2009-19); Kaisar Jahan (Bahujan Samaj Party, 2009-14); Mamtaz Sanghamita (Trinamool Congress 2014-19); Sajda Ahmed (Trinamool Congress 2014-24); Ranee Narah (Congress, 1998-2004, 2009-14); Nusrat Jahan Ruhi (Trinamool Congress, 2019-24); and Iqra Hasan (Samajwadi Party, 2024-present). A dominant political figure who made an indelible mark on Indian politics was Mohsina Kidwai. She not only entered the Lok Sabha but also went on to join the council of ministers and hold several portfolios, including labour, health and family welfare, rural development, transport and urban development. Another fascinating personality that the book talks about is the wife of Mohammad Jasmir Ansari, a tea vendor-turned-politician. In 2009, Kaisar Jahan, wife of Ansari, won a fiercely fought four-corner contest even though she had barely thirty-five days to prepare and campaign. As 2009 Lok Sabha polls neared, Mayawati summoned MLA Jasmir and Kaisar Jahan to Lucknow. 'Jasmir and Kaisar stopped at 'Sharmaji ki Chai' in Hazratganj before heading to the chief minister's residence. Jasmir was anticipating a ministerial position, but instead, Mayawati came straight to the point by asking him to contest the polls. The lingering taste of chai vanished quickly as Jasmir struggled, looking tentatively at his wife for an answer. Mayawati, a politician among politicians, sensed his unease. She directly asked Kaisar: 'Tu ladegi? The answer came immediately and spontaneously from both Jasmir and Kaisar-yes,' the book narrates. There is also a first lady among the 18 Muslim women – Begum Abida Ahmed, wife of the country's fifth president, Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed. Over four years after Ahmed passed away in 1977, Abida Ahmed agreed to fight a Lok Sabha by-election from Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, in 1981 and won, becoming the first and only First Lady of India to have entered the competitive arena of politics. She won again in 1984, making it two in a row from Bareilly. Begum Noor Bano, originally Mahatab Zamani and the widow of the former ruler of Rampur, was royalty who was a key figure in the political landscape of that area and fought many battles with Azam Khan of the Samajwadi Party and Jaya Prada, who also contested on an SP ticket. Her husband, Nawab Syed Zulfikar Ali Khan Bahadur, belonged to the Rohilla dynasty and was popularly addressed as 'Mickey Mian'. He was killed in a freak road accident in 1992 while returning from New Delhi to Rampur. Noor Bano won the 1996 and 1999 Lok Sabha polls, but her electoral battles with Jaya Prada in 2004 and 2009 ended in defeats. Among the 18 Muslim women, Bengali actress Nusrat Jahan Ruhi also broke a number of glass ceilings as she went on to win the Lok Sabha polls on a TMC ticket in 2019. In the current Lok Sabha, there is just one Muslim woman MP, and that is SP's Iqra Hasan Choudhury. From earning the distinction of being one of the youngest MPs after defeating a veteran leader from the BJP to becoming the centre of social media discussion as a young, London-educated Muslim woman leader, Iqra Hasan has appeared to have carved out a space for herself in the public imagination. In his foreword to the book, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor writes, 'Nearly seventy-eight years have passed since that portentous stroke of midnight on 15 August 1947, when Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru proclaimed a 'tryst with destiny' and India awakened to 'life and freedom.' …Yet even after almost eight decades, a shameful reality, which should deflate our self-congratulatory fervour over our democratic track record, still haunts us.' 'Not everyone has found 'utterance' in the world's largest democracy, many of whose towering leaders eulogize it as the 'Mother of Democracy.' This self-serving description is enabled, in part, by a too-pliant news media, an ineffectual civil society and a menaced academic class, so that no one dares point out the irony inherent in the claim,' Tharoor says. 'Although we depict India as a doting mother nurturing and nourishing a clamorous, combative and chaotic republic, corrupt and inefficient, perhaps, but nonetheless flourishing, the truth is that throughout our democratic history, we have consistently failed our women citizens: failed to afford them, in the thoroughfares of our country, a life of dignity and decency,' he says. PTI ASK RHL RHL This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.

From the Opinions Editor: NCERT textbook revisions — a point-to-point counter isn't enough
From the Opinions Editor: NCERT textbook revisions — a point-to-point counter isn't enough

Indian Express

timean hour ago

  • Indian Express

From the Opinions Editor: NCERT textbook revisions — a point-to-point counter isn't enough

Dear Readers, Revision of social science textbooks, especially history readers, has become par for the course. Most times, this exercise is not guided by the scholarly imperative to mirror developments in knowledge. Instead, it seems to bear the ideological hallmarks of those in power. Textbooks have borne this burden for long. However, there's still a difference in today's restructuring of reading material compared to schoolbook rewriting exercises of the past. In the last five years, parts of history textbooks have been either excised or modified and the changes have been ascribed to a variety of factors – from rationalising content to reducing the burden on students. These exercises claim to be motivated by a desire to ensure student 'well-being', but carry imprints of the ruling regime's anxiety to flatten social complexities. Introduced last week, the latest changes, dotted with references to the 'brutality' of medieval Muslim kings, carry a disclaimer, 'Notes on Some Darker Periods of History' : 'No one no one should be held responsible today for events of the past. The emphasis is on an honest approach to history with a view to drawing important lessons for a better future.' Historians have rightly underlined that the account is not as 'honest' as it claims to be. The selective references to destruction of places of worship by Muslim kings has not gone unnoticed. Scholars have rightly pointed out that such violence was not uncommon across a variety of ruling dispensations in ancient and medieval times. These are significant interventions. Yet, there is a broader challenge for historians: To underline the fundamental differences between the social and moral universe of pre-modern times with today's norms. Kings and sultans were not accountable for their actions, statecraft had very different objectives and wars were often critical to empire-building. All this is historical common sense. However, it's yet to become a general common sense. Narratives of the pre-modern era continue to be framed around heroes and villains. The search for a protonationalist in Ashoka, Akbar or Shivaji – depending on ideological inclination –and describing a Mahmud of Ghazni or Allaudin Khalji or Aurangzeb as evil might seem somewhat different endeavours. But both approaches obscure an understanding of epochs, much removed in time – Mahmud of Ghazini lived in the 10th-11th centuries, the Khaljis in the 13th and 14th century and the last great Mughal ruled from 1658-1707. That the latest revisions in textbooks bracket a more than 500-year period under the shibboleth of 'Dark Age' shows that even a section of historians – affiliated to the ruling regime – carry such blinkers. The challenge, in large measure, has to do with a historiographical deficit, plugging which remains a work in progress. Indian historians have produced groundbreaking studies on the extractive nature of medieval kingdoms, the ebbs and flows of commerce, the caste system and rise of kingdoms far away from sultanates in Delhi. Yet, an understanding of violence in pre-modern times is a relatively recent historiographical pursuit. Charges of destruction of places of worship continue to be countered by narratives which stress the political impulses behind such violence – as opposed to religious motives. The standard response also is that instances of destruction of places of worship by sultans and badshahs were far fewer, compared to the grants they gave to temples and monasteries. A historian should, of course, be judged by her fealty to facts. Viewed from that perspective, there is nothing wrong in how most professional historians have responded to allegations of 'brutality' levied on Islamic kings. However, today the challenge in classrooms – and beyond – is not just to provide a point-to-point counter. The internet, political propaganda, social media, films and TV make lives information heavy. Whatsapp chats have precipitated the collapse of some of the traditional filters on information. How can narratives that place violence in medieval times in their historical context help? Why do people need to understand the complexities of times when rulers could destroy some temples and give grants to many others? What purpose would it serve to depict Mughal, and several other, rulers as complex personalities who had the blood of their kin on their hand and yet presided over great cultural refinement? Why tell the stories of Shivaji's successors who struck terror in people in Bengal? Studies placing personalities in their times are, of course, needed for purely epistemological purposes. History is at its most vigorous, when it not only celebrates the resilience of societies but also tries to understand fault lines. The search for syncretism in medieval times was driven by a young nation's desire to place a salve on the wounds of Partition as well as the imperative to counter the colonial historian's charge that Indian history, before the arrival of Britishers, was nothing but an account of communal feuding. Histories of pre-modern violence, not prejudiced by colonial blinkers and innocent of sectarian agendas, have been few and they have not gone beyond academia. But why disturb the student's 'well-being' by introducing such complexities in textbooks? The latest changes have been introduced in Class VIII textbooks – a time when youngsters step into their teens. They are introduced to complicated concepts in mathematics and science – cell division, for instance. Why not in the social sciences? A textbook is perhaps the only text of history that a large majority of people, who do not engage with the discipline for professional purposes, will encounter in their lives – while they would be inundated with myriad accounts of the past. Critics of the revisions are, therefore, right in underlining the importance of rigour in reading materials. The task also is to find ways to communicate the complexity that informs their scholarship outside select circles – a difficult yet necessary imperative for the historian, inside and outside academia. Till next time, Kaushik

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store