The Effects of Government and Media Reaction

These days the Danish government is yet again making tightenings regarding radicalised young people. The reason why it is yet again a part of the media as well as the Governments awareness is due to a resent police response the Danish Security and Intelligence Service made where some young people were arrested and charged within the so-called Danish terror-paragraph.

It is rather common that radicalisation in a context such as this makes the media overflow with articles that hints fear and begins a sense of hostility among the Danish people. I must admit that the anger regarding the rather one-sided cover of the so-called "muslim radical" that makes it seem that all muslims are radical may overflow my judgement and make my arguments in this respect rather generalised. However, The governments ideas to tighten the law regarding these so-called Syrian-warriors. The medias eternal cover of radicalisation in more or less direct connection with Islam and muslims. It makes me so furious that it is the action of a few people that may have an affect of how the Danish people regard the rest of those Danes who confess to Islam and are actually well integrated and participate in the Danish society and pay their taxes.

On one hand, I understand that it is of the governments interest to show the Danish people that it takes action against possible terror-threats. In a time like these where Europe seem more of a terror-target than ever, it would on one hand seem too laid back if the government did not react. On the other hand, I find that the reaction has really gone overboard. The fact that the Danish Security and Intelligence Service actually manage to do the job they exists to do, makes me wonder why we need another government "over"-reaction. The part of our society that exists to deal with the terror-threats works. They have done a rather good job in the prevention of terror in Denmark - a thing that is rather difficult to prevent. The only reaction another government intervention will create is that the media attention will yet again make muslims the villains and it will create even more hostility among the Danish people that will make sure that the Danish people will to a lesser degree help the war-inflicted people who really do need our help by for instance demanding a complete closure of our borders towards people who have experienced trauma, war and terror in ways we will never be able to understand.

If the government instead let things work, the way they are ment to, I would respect the government if they react in a rather respectful way towards the system that have been created in Denmark. It would possibly create more peace and instead of letting the fear cloud the Danish peoples judgement, it might make room for more compassion.

Even though, many Danish people have worked against the Danish governments views of the refugees who have more than ever escaped to Europe, the fact that a refugee-hostile party as the Danish People Party who have gained more support than ever shows me that there is a great deal of fear and hostility that needs to be dealt with in Denmark.

We keep saying to each other that fear and a limitation of our everyday life is what terror wants to create. Even though we keep telling ourselves and each other that it is important to live life as we would usually do and not be affected by the terror. Maybe, terror is slowly creeping into our conscience and have slowly affected the way we think about the world and the way we react towards people who truly needs our help. Or the way we react towards the diversity that obviously exists in our society.

Showing compassion and helping other are indeed a more difficult road towards destroying terror and what it creates among the people affected by it. But I believe that the long and difficult road is the better road to take than fighting with the same means and tools as the "enemy" does. Have we, the rich part of the world forgotten that our previous actions hostile and mean actions may have had a role in creating the anger, hostility and the "us" and "them"-mentality that terror springs from? Maybe it is time to react differently than we usually have done since a war on terror obviously haven't worked?

A 'Schizophrenic' Life

These days the problems concerning the refugees is a sour subject in Denmark. As a Dane I am at one hand more or less embarrassed by the way Denmark is perceived by the outside world. On the other hand I haven't lost faith in the Danes, as I can see how much of a difference the Danish people actually want to do.
       A friend of mine told me about a local initiative where the children of the neighbourhood can come and get help with their homework. She told me that most of the children knew Danish better than their native tongue and thereby, complicating simple communication between the youngsters and their families. Integration seems to be going very well, you may think. But hold on for a moment and try to follow my train of thought.

Carolin Goerzig and Khaled Al-Hashimi touches a very interesting subject in relation to this in their book "Radicalisation in Western Europe: Integration, public discourse, and loss of identity among Muslim communities". In the description of a workshop in the book one subject the book analysis is radicalisation and religion. The respondents of the workshop is seen creating an in- and out-group according to their religious background vs the religious background of the country they live in. A out-group, with all the people with opinions consistent with theirs and an in-group with people they can rely on having the same opinion as themselves. Thereby, an in-group and out-group situation is created concerning the fact that the exterior reality is not consistent with their interior reality - a reality consistent with the cultural and religious worldview in the family of the immigrants versus the outside world with its many different world-views. The framework of Goerzig and Al-Hashimi is the society the immigrants live in versus the family-life the immigrants have. However, what if both the exterior as well as the interior reality is causing young immigrants to distance themselves? A feeling of being marginalised from both the society one lives within and also from ones family? If someone had a feeling of being different within the outer reality as well as what was supposed to be ones inner reality, a reasonable conclusion could be that one would search for a reality or peers within which or with whom one can feel average and like-minded.
        For instance, if a young girl or guy with another ethnical origin than the country he or she lives in. If he or she because of his or hers ethnical origin is labelled by the society as different however is still labelled as different at home because he or she is not capable of communicating fully with his or hers parents because he or she does not fully speak their original language, would that not cause a situation where a young girl or guy would search for like-minded, a substitute family, and therefore, could be exposed to different types of harmless as well as less harmless groups, where they might be exposed to an extremist worldview that might have a great affect on them.
       In Denmark it is almost considered a success if the young women and guys is capable of getting around and communicate in flawless Danish. In fact, in a new special allowance called "integration allowance" an extra amount of money (called "dansktillæg"), 1500 kr, is given to those who pass a danish test in a wish to strengthen the danish skills among the immigrants. However, are we forgetting that this may have a marginalised effect on youngsters who cannot have the same support at home, because they simply cannot communicate with their parents? If my inference is somewhat true, such a small thing as language skills could be one more thing in the range of things that could be of great importance regarding whether or not young women and guys is exposed to extremist ideas and actions. Are we in Denmark so focused on immigrants getting so integrated that it is an assimilation and therefore, makes immigrants alienated from their own families? Families who are supposed to offer guidance and support in a time in the young women and guys lifes that has a lot of mixed feelings that can be confusing and weird. Are we stealing away their safety-net and security with the attempt of integrating these people to our standards instead of considering to implement their ideas and worldviews as well?

Some thesis-influenced thoughts on to be or not to be... 'radical'

"The first four steps, in fact, revolve around getting to know people and building trust: Be helpful, be good neighbors, listen to the concerns of others. The activist's religious identity is not revealed until step five and only then in a rudimentary fashion that avoids church questions and instead centers on generic religious discussions and values ... In a similar fashion some Islamic activists, particularly jihadis, hide their movement identity, until after a personal relationship is developed. " Quintan Wiktorowicz, Radical Islam Rising, 2005 p. 23. 

As I am writing my thesis at the moment I came across this rather detailed description of how religious activists, through a development of personal relation, seeks to proselyte among strangers, in an attempt to gain more followers to their cause. 

At first I found it kind of weird; So now I have to worry about the guy who pics up my wallet from the street and runs to me to hand it to me? Or the neighbour that knocks on my door with a piece of pie she made yesterday? Because they might be radicalised and before I know it I might be involved in some extreme activities? First, I came to realise that this method is not exclusively something "Islamic activists" do, everyone does it. Everyone should do it. Not necessarily with a hidden agenda. But, wouldn't the world be a less lonely place if we were some who came out of our individualistic tendencies to exclude everyone else, just because we don't know them? Everyone needs someone to listen to one's concerns. Relate. Everyone at some point in their lives needs a helping hand. 

Second, I became a little curious on how many 'radicalised' have actually been detected in the Danish society. In an article at a local newsstation, recently revealed that the Danish Immigration Services received 5 notifications of coincidences of possible radicalised people. In 2015 an estimated number of over 21000 people sought asylum in Denmark (exact numbers: https://www.nyidanmark.dk/NR/rdonlyres/E3C50EA0-BD36-4DDD-9C8D 

7AAF44DE1F12/0/seneste_tal_udlaendingeeomraadet.pdf). Now, 5 coincidences are not a lot. Though, we may take into account that various de-radicalisation programs may have received some notifications as well, the next question is what here is meant by 'radicalisation'? The usual definition contains a process where someone to a higher degree accepts violence in order to fulfil one's political / ideological / religious goals. Now, does this person have to exercise violence? Can someone be referred to as radical just in terms of opinions? One's execution of regular lifestile choices? Would someone choosing to live fully by the bible not also be called radical by the rest of the society if they did not live by this norm? And what exactly is wrong with having a radically different worldview as long as such worldview does not violently affect others? 

I understand that something needs to be done when it comes to preventing violence from being the choice of expression when someone wants to express themselves, but I find that radical way of living becomes dangerous in itself, without some perspective and without general knowledge about the different worldviews. Hypothetically, I guess the reason why Christianity in some contexts isn't regarded as 'dangerous' in the Danish society, because Danes are aware and know to some extent of the religion and what it entails, naturally everything unknown becomes that dangerous thing out there in the dark. But maybe, instead of accusing someone for being 'radical' in its negative connotation, it is time to reach out and become acquainted with the different wordlviews. What is the worse that could happen? Maybe you will get a knew friend? Maybe not? Under all circumstances, we are all free to express our opinions. Free to belief in anything we want. As long as that does not cause any harm to others right? So lets all look over the hedge separating our gardens from the neighbours and say hello. Let's all be 'radical'. 

Just thoughts from a thesis-writing, soon to be done with school, radical, that actually believes in the good in everyone despite difference in opinion, religion or just worldview.