France’s “burqa” law is terrible policy, drawing a deep, dark line between the French ideals of secular governance and the conscience of some of its citizens, creating a self-isolating community that could pose significant internal threat to stability in the long term. It also feeds the legitimacy of anti-immigration sentiment throughout Europe. But perhaps the worst failure here is the failure of France’s much-admired intellectual class that was unable to understand or accept the primacy of conscience over secular ideologies.
Before France’s veil laws, Muslim women may have veiled for a variety of personal reasons, such as the dictates of conscience, the habits of culture, or the strictures of parents. None of these reasons posed a threat to the public order. After the veil laws went into enforcement, the act of wearing a niqab ceased to be one personal preference among many and became an act of public defiance against an antagonist state. Though some women may chose to modify their veiling, many won’t. As a result, they are forcefully isolated, and the communities where these women live become increasingly isolated from their government.
It would be easy to blame Europe’s “Far Right” movements for France’s burqa ban and similar ones in development in other EU states. Yet when France’s National Assembly voted (336 to 1) to proscribe the public wearing of niqab in July 2010, and the Senate followed suit (246 to 1) in September, it was clear that the legislation was more than an attempt to placate Europe’s xenophobic fringe. Some of the law’s most vocal proponents came from France’s center-left intelligentsia. That public dialogue, played out in France’s mainstream press, exposed the deep alienation between the country’s elite and some members of its Muslim population.
There’s no better comment that crystalizes the alienation between France’s intellectual and political classes and the women targeted by the “burqa” ban than a simple (sarcastic) sentence written at Muslimah Media Watch. Summarizing French feminist Elisabeth Badinter’s patronizing response to their clothing choices, one writer noted: “The enlightened philosopher speaks to the savages with veils.” The women on the receiving end of Badinter’s civilizational condescension are just as self-aware as the philosopher kings in Paris, but their language is the language of religious conviction. Badinter’s patronizing sentiment is a common response among France’s elite and other Western countries -- including the United States.
Extreme religious practices always present an antithesis to the secular social order. However, they rarely constitute a threat to that order. There is no doubt that many women who wear the niqab in Western countries do so as a rejection of contemporary norms of women’s fashion. But they also wear it out of the personal conviction formed by the dictates of their conscience. It’s not just a symbol to be (mis)interpreted, it’s a personal risk taken to live a life against the grain of contemporary norms. To impose a law against an extreme, but otherwise harmless, religious practice in the name of a secular order simply reinforces the validity of that practice against the secular order.
There is something else to consider. France’s “burqa” ban is often defended by asserting the primacy of France’s secular political order and its secularized “public square.” But it’s just this type of secular absolutism that inspired the political and extremist Islamic movements of the 20th century in the first place. The questions of appropriate governance obsessed Muslim Brotherhood leader Hassan al-Banna (and contemporaries in Turkey, India and the Levant). He wrote extensively on the topic in the 1930s and 40s. Works such as Toward the Light proposed an Islamic alternative to a secular political order. The unknown promise of an “Islamic alternative” continues to animate political and radical Islamic movements in their many forms. It’s just this type of secular challenge - veil laws -- that helped form these movements in the first place. It is too soon to tell if EU-wide “burqa” bans will posed similar challenges to secularism, but the laws themselves create an environment where some form of challenge is probable.
Perhaps the fundamental failure here is not France “burqa” law itself, but the lackluster arguments of its proponents. It was as if France’s intellectuals just gave up. Christian, Jewish and Muslim community leaders understand that programs of inter-religious dialogue are generational efforts. It sometimes takes years just to build the frameworks for productive discussion. But the secularist in France’s case, didn’t seem to care much for building a common framework or engaging in the kind of debate that would accept the legitimacy of the other side’s concerns. Few understood the role of conscience, and even fewer spoke directly to the women themselves. None understood the relationship between secularism and radical Islam. There wasn’t even a perfunctory “show-commission” producing pro-forma rubber stamp opinions like the 2003 Stasi Commission Report. They just wrote their opinion pieces, gave their interviews, mouthing the same platitudes on laïcité, and turned to the state to finish the job.
It was as if they were all bored with arguments, couldn’t be bothered with those “savages in veils,” and just wanted to get it all over with. Mission accomplished. But the very weakness of the defense of laïcité among France best and brightest intellectuals bodes ill for secularism. If even the secularists seem tired of defending secularism, then perhaps those “savages in veils” are closer to victory than they think.


