I enjoyed this weeks combination of articles discussing the way Europe is conceptualized in the sense of who belongs where and the traditional idea of who belongs. In the Göle reading for instance, it reminded me of a paper that i had written this last semester about the impact that Bosniak Muslims have had in the culture of the Balkan region as well as the formation and breakup of Yugoslavia. In the former Ottoman Balkans in the 17th century where Bosniak culture was respected and revered saw a very different look after Turkey withdrew from the region and those people became repressed under a system that sought to favour the more desirable and ‘traditional’ eastern orthodox Serbian-Croatian denominations. Not only this, but Muslim influence has extended into the mediterranean region and the Iberian peninsula.
The theme of this imagined rightful demographic to situate itself in Europe extends into the New York Times article by Norimitsu Onishi about how immigrants are colonizing the white homelands of the French and of other white Europeans as stated by Renaud Camus. This idea that Immigrants are replacing Whites has had a direct influence on French politicians and has resonated widely beyond France with right wing white supremacist groups. Interestingly Mr. Camus was known a novelist and a pioneering writer of gay literature before turning to writing about the “great replacement”
These ideas expand to many types of people and are not reserved for a single stereotype. The majority of these ideas lay in misinformation of the lack of proper education on the matter, for example Mr. Camus had his ideas based solely on his experience on Facebook and Twitter….how can one fully grasp the situation of immigration and integration so far removed. The Göle article is the opposite and tries to show us that “Europe and Islam as connected histories, yet with competing narratives, cultural values, and time-space constructs of modernity”