Secularism is not secularisation. An excellent distillation of this point has been made on CiF by Humeira Iqtidar and it is a must-read for people who (often wilfully) confuse a secular state with a secularised society.
Secularisation is not just the increase or decrease in visible markers of religiosity or in church attendance, but also a fundamental shift in religious belief towards rationalisation and objectification. The Protestant reformers were not arguing for less religion, they were asking for more – for a continuously religious life against the Catholic cycles of sin and repentance. Yet, as Max Weber’s influential work suggests, they ended up rationalising and secularising. To say all this is not to suggest that Pakistani Islamists will have exactly the same impact as the German Protestants. There can be little doubt that they will produce a very different subject and citizen because of the disparity in context.
This point has been wholly lost on lawmakers in the Netherlands who have outlawed “ritual slaughter” practised by Jews and Muslims, because it implements a “no stun” policy. Outwardly this has all the marks of a repressive measure applied exclusively to Jews and Muslims but dressed up as “rationalism” and opposition to “medieval obscurantism”.
This would be an example of what Humerira Iqtidar would refer to as “secularisation of society”. But I can’t help thinking that the Dutch, by applying this self-inflicted folly, are less concerned about cruelty to animals than about a stupid and ineffectual majoritorian grandstand to its minorities. It’s a point that’s picked up by the Humanist:
If the humanist reason for wanting a ban on religious slaughter is animal welfare, then the implication is that animal welfare is a humanist issue. Perhaps so (one for you to debate in the comments). But if that is the case, then why should ritual slaughter be the only animal welfare issue pursued by humanists? The animal rights group VIVA state that, of the 900 million animals slaughtered for food each year in Britain, around 12 million are killed by Muslim or Jewish ritual methods. I think in order for me to want to throw my support behind a ban on ritual slaughter I’d have to be convinced that the suffering endured by that 1.3 per cent of animals at the moment of death is somehow greater than the suffering inflicted upon far greater percentages during the course of their lives through transport and living conditions. Otherwise, campaigning specifically on the issue of religious slaughter feels, for me, uncomfortably like scapegoating. As someone whose meat-eating involves plenty of ethical inconsistencies, I’m not sure I’m in a position to lecture a religious minority about theirs.
It’s a shame that the Dutch, by imposing this ban, have denied themselves the pleasure of lamb-kebab rolls and salt-beef bagels. Holland is made much worse off for it.
8 Comments
My friend’s RC husband worked as a Kosher butcher in NW London.
As part of his job he frequently visited Kosher abattoirs. Having initially been apprenticed to a butcher who didn’t sell animals killed by Jewish and Muslim ritual methods, he was astonished to find that the un-stunned animals were not only treated better, but appeared to suffer less pain, and less fear.
This edict from Holland comes as 8000 San Franciscans have signed a petition to ask the City of San Francisco to ban male circumcision on the under 18s within the city limits.
The French have already banned the Hijab. I’m assuming that the bizarre but traditional garb worn by Charedi men will be next.
i can’t help thinking this is yet another example of a government seeking to appear tough on islamic extremists at the same time as not leaving themselves open to the charge of singling out muslims. of course the best way to do this is to inconvenience jews at the same time, who will not of course march in the streets, kill people or blow anything up in retailation. equally clearly, the dutch government don’t have the balls of the french government, who, whether they’re right or not (and generally they’re not) don’t mind facing down the criticisms of islamophobia, drafting their legislation such that it clearly singles out muslims: “..and this law applies to any religion that starts with an ‘i’”.
i also can’t help thinking that the dutch may just have exported their diamond industry to the UK – expect rents to go up very soon in hatton garden. i am sure we could do with the gdp.
b’shalom
bananabrain
“But if that is the case, then why should ritual slaughter be the only animal welfare issue pursued by humanists?”
Rather an odd thing to say after all the bitter campaigns that have been fought across the western world to ban foxhunting, hare coursing, badger baiting, dog fighting, cock fighting, veal crates, vivisection, animal testing of pharmaceuticals, live exports, and the raising of piglets in crates.
What has humanism to do with “foxhunting, hare coursing, badger baiting, dog fighting, cock fighting, veal crates, vivisection, animal testing of pharmaceuticals, live exports, and the raising of piglets in crates”?
Monty, your copy and paste transcript missed out the essential point. I’ll post it again:
“I think in order for me to want to throw my support behind a ban on ritual slaughter I’d have to be convinced that the suffering endured by that 1.3 per cent of animals at the moment of death is somehow greater than the suffering inflicted upon far greater percentages during the course of their lives through transport and living conditions.”
How different is the Dutch ban from our own ban on fox hunting – fussing about the way that a handful of people kill animals, while millions of animals are kept and killed in revolting factory farms?
It’s not the way a minority of these animals are killed by halal and kosher methods which is the real cruelty but they way they are made to live. I don’t see the Dutch being very concerned about the cruelty of their own factory farming methods.
And in at number four on the Top 10 hit parade of Countries With the Most Animal Cruelty.. is The Netherlands.
http://www.dutchdailynews.com/animal-cruelty/
“Last year the Netherlands was in sixth place. This year our country has risen two places, due to the trading of sick horse, trade in live animals through numerous web sites and providing a hunting license to members of the Royal Family. “
Wilders is a rotten racist opportunist, picking up on the poujardist (if that is not out of place) reaction of rural Dutch sentiment. Van Goch was an appalling anti-Semite (as well as quite untalented in comparison to his forefathers).
Something is amiss in the Low Countries. One hopes the outcome will be better than the virulent hatred that is presently, and conspicuously, on display.
yes, the prominence of wilders’ party in pushing this initiative ought to serve as an excellent example for those in my community who think that “my enemy’s enemy is my friend” and get into bed with extreme anti-muslim activists; these people are not our friends. they will use us when it is convenient but they will never stand up for us. they are not for integration, because they are not really in favour of a pluralistic society. that puts us squarely in the firing line.
i don’t know why anyone’s surprised.
apparently that woman who supposedly heads up the so-called “jewish division” (ugh) of the edl has now also resigned because – shock horror – the organisation has been “infiltrated” by neo-nazis. what an imbecile.
b’shalom
bananabrain