The View from Bologna

The Green Menace - Ireland & Islam

Basking in a soft green glow Ireland, for the Italian media, exists t o provide occasional weekend-supplement travel articles. The island is remote (yet easily reachable by low-cost airlines, they stress), and populated by young creative types guzzling guinness. It is also, reassuringly, a Catholic country.

Given that Ireland is rarely in the news here, particularly since peace 'broke out', a recent analysis piece in Diario, a current affairs magazine caught my eye.

The piece focussed on the growing Islamic community in Ireland, and had some useful information and insights to offer. Pity, then, that its opening two paragraphs could well have been written by the late Fallaci.

The opening paragraph sets the tone, where we're introduced to the first Mosque in Dublin, on the South Circular Rd, which is in a deconsacrated protestant church. "In place of the cross, at the top of the bell tower adapted as a minaret, there is the Islamic cresent". A valid, if somewhat dramatic description. The intent is clear - in this case Islam has supplanted Christianity physically. No mention is made of another deconsacrated church on the very same rd. which has been turned into luxury appartments.

Well and good. Up to this point the article is technically correct, though, in this monkey's humble opinion, misleading. The second paragraph, where census statistics are brought in, however, is not just misleading, but factually incorrect, and bordering on the barmy.

After the paragraph heading, "Catholics under 90%", we're told that Islam is Ireland's second religion. It is not. The 2002 census figures, on which Diario bases its article, show clearly that Ireland's second largest religious denomination is that branch of Protestantism gathered together under the label Church of Ireland.

We're told of the astonishing growth of the Islamic community in Ireland, growing from 3,873 people in 1991 through to 26,000 people in 2002, with an estimate that by the time of the next census (taken this year, with preliminary results now available - though not in relation to religious demographics) the population will have grown to 40,000 (no source is cited for this estimate). To put things in perspective, even were the estimate to be correct, Islam would still not be the second largest religious denomination of the state, given that adults describing themselves as 'Church of Ireland' or 'Protestant' in 2002 totalled over 115,000.

But, and this is why the article is misleading and barmy, the ascending numbers of Islam are placed alongside the descending numbers for Catholicism (down to a dismal 3.5 million), against the backdrop of a Church converted into a Mosque. Hey presto, you arrive at a conclusion which would have made even La Fallaci blush: "So, on these numbers, the future of Ireland is Muslim."

With a Ratzinger style flourish the article has set up the clash of civilisations paradigm. Catholic numbers are going down, Islamic numbers are going up - Q.E.D Ireland will be Islamic.

On these numbers, to put it politely, me arse. Even were the information published correct, which it is not, the conclusion is outlandish. If we take Diario's highest estimate of an Islamic community in Ireland at 40,000 people, that still adds up to in and around 1% in a population of over 4 million people. Then again, the article makes ample use of statistics without ever mentioning the total population of Ireland.

The conclusion also presumes that population trends of a given religious denomination will remain constant. It was this ridiculous notion that allowed Orianna Fallaci to proclaim that the future of Europe is to become 'Eurabia' (and Fallaci gave incorrect and incomplete data to support her looney tunes as well).

The genuinely thought-provoking themes in the article, for example the changing nature of Islamic imigration to Ireland, or the question of incitement to hatred legislation, get lost behind the bluster:

"In Ireland one can always discuss any argument: anyone can say what they please, downing a pint of black Guinness. Following on from the tradition of free speech, then, also the fundamentalists that in other countries are silenced, here can say what they like*. In a liberal country it can happen like this. It begins with re-adapting a deconsecrated church into a mosque, it fisnishes with saying that a holy Islamic war against the west is a good and justified thing".

It's a pity that, amongst the interviews conducted for the piece, nobody pointed out to Diario, that the Irish in England suffered the same facile type of equation when, during the IRA bombings of the '70s and '80s, to be Irish was to be considered a terrorist.

There is an wonderful article to be written on the Islamic community in Ireland. Sadly, that published by Diario isn't it.

*Ireland, like many other countries, has an incitement to hatred act, under which people can be prosecuted. How easy it is to bring a succesful prosecution is another matter.

Pinochet and the Finger Wagging Pope

The TV news, inexplicably, chose not to run with footage of General Augusto Pinochet proudly standing on his balcony (God, how fascists lover their balconies) beside 'Santo Subito' Pope John Paul II back in 1987.

"Why bring up the late-great Pope when discussing the death of Pinochet? cries the devil's advocate from stage left. "After all, wasn't that visit in '87 a great stride forward for human rights in Chile?"

JPII, addressing his Bishops, told them :

"Never hesitate to defend always, before all, the legitimate rights of the person, created in the image and likeness of God. Proclaim your preferential love for the poor...." He defended the Church's right "to pass moral judgment even in political matters" ¹

Quite. Funny how that moral judgement never seemed to get passed on an evil bastard who overthrew a democratically elected government, and proceeded to round up, torture, kill, and hide the bodies of thousands.

Not only did JPII not manage to wag his finger at Pinochet - something which he managed succesfully to do at liberation theologians in El Salvador - instead he gave a moral boost to the general, appearing with him.

Would it be worth pointing out that JPII appointed Opus Dei member Angelo Sodano as his secretary of state. Sodano was the Vatican's ambassador to Chile during the 1973 coup, and became a friend and advisor to Pinochet.

Would it be worth pointing out the letter sent by the Vatican to the British authorities when Pinochet was awaiting extradition proceedings in London? The letter's contents have remained secret, but one guesses that 'moral judgement' was conspicuously absent.

Should we mention the stance of Cardinal Javier Errázuriz Ossa, nominated just today as one of the Presidents of the fifth Latin-American Episcopal conference, who suggested that lawsuits against Pinochet should be dropped because "excessive justice could be detrimental to reconciliation and social peace[emphasis added]". Excessive justice - brilliant...

The list, sadly, goes on. It's worth quoting Brazilian Bishop Helder Camara here on the Church's position in Latin America:

"When I called for the role of the Church to be with the poor, I am called a saint; when I'm asked to do something about the causes of poverty, I am called a communist."

Human rights in Latin-America, at least for the boys in the Vatican, is written with the emphasis on right. Hence their continued and unfailing support for the bulwark against communism.

After all this, though, Pinochet's death has left me questioning my credentials as an atheist. There must be a God, and she's got a sense of humour - Pinochet's heart gave out, unexpectedly, on international human rights day.

(As a side note, it's vaguely heartening to see that no-one here in Italy, at least yet, ranging from the Vatican through to the neo-fascist apologists for Mussolini, has seen fit to make the case for the deceased dictator)

Suggested Reading:
A Profoundly Rightwing Pope by Vicente Navarro
Beautiful Horizons
Farewell to the perpetrator of one of the most shocking crimes of the 20th century. - by Christopher Hitchens
Tinker Bell, Pinochet and The Fairy Tale Miracle of Chile by Greg Palast

Kick a man when he's down?

Perhaps, if only he'd stop moving. Rumours of Berlusconi's demise, in what has become a tedious pattern, have been exaggerated. On Saturday, leading an anti-government march, Berlusconi was, without doubt, the star of the show. And it was a show that drew thousands into Rome's Piazza San Giovanni (a location not chosen by chance - it's the traditional site of the decidedly left-wing May day concert every year).

Only a week before, there were serious concerns about Berlusconi's health, politically and physically speaking. While speaking from the podium at a youth rally Berlusconi fainted. A week later and he's staunchly attacking the Red menace of Prodi's government, and more specifically it's first finance bill. What a trooper!

In the intervening week, a number of comics had the audacity to joke about Berluska's fainting spell. Satirical show Blob, which runs on RAI Tre (the notoriously communist channel, at least according to its critics), poked fun at the 70 year old's collapse, provoking a furore amongst the political class - both left and right.

On the 28th, in fact, an official apology came from the board of directors of RAI, the state broadcaster, for the caricature presented, in bad taste, of Berlusconi's fainting fit. The board of directors is, of course, appointed by the Government.

What reason could you possibly have, to laugh at human frailty? When someone of pensionable age (the concept of pensionable age for Italian politicians, like Bishops, Cardinals & Popes doesn't seem to exist) collapses, surely there's little to laugh about?

It brings to mind, first of all, satirist Daniele Luttazzi's famous response to those who questioned his choice of subject matter: "Satire does what the *$%! it pleases". When dealing with the powerful (and lets not forget, our ailing pensioner is one of the richest men in the world), good taste is often just a byword for censorship.

More to the point, if Berlusconi and his supporters really wished his fainting episode to be treated with respect, rather than cynicism, perhaps they should have avoided the unsightly scramble to make political capital from the event.

First in line, on the TV news, was Marcello Dell'Utri, Berlusconi's right hand man, who informed us that the collapse was because Silvio becomes emotional when talking about Liberty. Before any tests had been run, viewers were told that Silvo, come what may, would be at the protest march in Rome the following week. Indeed, throughout the week the message came through loud and clear - despite his health worries, Silvio, for his people, would be at the march. Better advertising for the protest couldn't have been bought for love or money (particularly since Berluska owns the biggest media advertising placement company and three national broadcast channels...).

The collapse itself, couldn't have occured with more dramatic timing had it been scripted. Speaking to a youth rally, Berlusconi seconds after talking of his political 'legacy', told the crowd that the emotion had overcome him - and then he swooned into the arms of his personal physician. At the start of his speech, recieving a rapturous applause, he warned the audience that such enthusiasm could overwhelm an elderly man such as himself. Prophetic...

There's a moment in Nanni Moretti's last film, il Caimano, when a young aspiring director who wishes to make a film on Berlusconi, wonders dumbfounded as to how this man has managed to make his own personal problems the dominant political discourse of his day.

With Berlusconi the personal has always been the political, in sickness and in health...