Study: Widespread Islamic Fundamentalism in Europe

sharia-law-uk-new“Religious fundamentalism is not a marginal phenomenon in Western Europe,” concluded a December 9, 2013, press release of the Berlin Social Science Center (Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung or WZB) with respect to European Muslims in particular.  The social survey results from six West European countries supporting WZB’s conclusion present troubling questions concerning Muslim immigrant integration into free societies in Europe and beyond.

As a WZB Discussion Paper explained, the WZB-funded Six Country Immigrant Integration Comparative Survey (SCIICS) involved a 2008 “large-scale telephone survey.”  Respondents were “Turkish origin” and “Moroccan origin” people “who came during the guest-worker era” pre-1975 or their descendants.  SCIICS surveyed both groups in Belgium, France, Germany, and the Netherlands, while insignificant Moroccan populations limited the survey to Turkish-descent individuals in Austria and Sweden.  SCIICS sought 500 respondents from each group in each country as well as from a control group of non-immigrant descended country citizens, with the exception of Belgium with its “high degree of federalism.”  Here SCIICS surveyed 300 individuals from each group in both Flanders and Wallonia provinces.  Almost 9,000 completed surveys or 3,373 native, 3,344 Turkish, and 2,204 Moroccan origin, resulted.

For WZB study author Ruud Koopmans the results revealed unsettling aspects of Islamic belief in Western Europe as discussed in his article “Fundamentalism and Out-Group Hostility:  Muslim Immigrants and Christian Natives in Western Europe.”  Among other issues, SCIICS sought to remedy the deficiency that “very little is known about the extent of religious fundamentalism among Muslim immigrants” in Europe.  A “large number of studies” on American Protestant fundamentalism, meanwhile, “have shown that it is strongly and consistently associated with prejudices and hostility against racial and religious out-groups, as well as ‘deviant’ groups such as homosexuals.”

For a comparative religious fundamentalism survey, SCIICS employed Bob Altermeyer and Bruce Hunsberger’s “widely accepted definition of fundamentalism” with “three key elements.” These are (1) “that believers should return to the eternal and unchangeable rules laid down in the past;” (2) “that these rules allow only one interpretation and are binding for all believers;” and (3) “that religious rules have priority over secular laws.”  Accordingly, “native respondents who indicated” being Christian (70%) and “Turkish and Moroccan origin” respondents who professed being Muslim (96%) received three questions.  These were (1) “Christians [Muslims] should return to the roots of Christianity [Islam];” (2) “There is only one interpretation of the Bible [the Koran] and every Christian [Muslim] must stick to that;” and (3) “The rules of the Bible [the Koran] are more important to me than the laws of [survey country].”

These questions revealed that “religious fundamentalism is not a marginal phenomenon within West European Muslim communities.”  Almost 60% of surveyed Muslims advocated a “return to the roots of Islam,” 75% accepted following “only one interpretation of the Koran,” and 65% considered “religious rules…more important” than domestic laws.  “Consistent fundamentalist beliefs, with agreement to all three statements,” existed among 44% of the Muslim survey respondents.

“Fundamentalist attitudes are slightly less prevalent among Sunni Muslims with a Turkish (45% agreement to all three statements) compared to a Moroccan (50%) background,” Koopmans noted.  In contrast, only 15% of Alevi, a “Turkish minority current within Islam,” were similarly fundamentalist. The “lowest levels of fundamentalism” among the individually surveyed Muslim communities appeared in Germany, where a nonetheless “widespread” 30% affirmed all three statements.  This result opposed the “idea that fundamentalism is a reaction to exclusion by the host society” given that German Muslims had the least legal recognition as a religious community among all the surveyed countries.  Koopmans discerned “remarkably similar patterns” in other studies of West European Muslims such that 47% of German Muslims prioritized religious rules over democracy in both his and the 2007 Federal Ministry of the Interior Muslime in Deutschland study.

By contrast, only 13-21% of Christian survey respondents agreed to the individual statements, with fewer than 4% accepting all three as “consistent fundamentalists.”  Corresponding “with what is known about Christian fundamentalism,” fundamentalism rates were low among Catholics (3%) and “mainstream Protestants” (4%).  A “most pronounced” high of 12% occurred “among the adherents of smaller Protestant groups such as Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Pentecostal believers.”  Thus Christian “support for fundamentalist attitudes remains much below the levels found among Sunni Muslims.”

Such “differences are due to class rather than religion,” a critical observer might object.  The “demographic and socio-economic profiles of Muslim immigrants and native Christians differ strongly,” Koopmans recognized.  Moreover, “marginalized, lowerclass individuals are more strongly attracted to fundamentalist movements.”  Yet “regression analyses controlling for education, labor market status, age, gender, and marital status” refuted this theory.  Such “variables explain variation…within both religious groups,” but “do not at all explain or even diminish the difference between Muslims and Christians.”  Particularly troubling, while Christian “religious fundamentalism is much less widespread among younger people, fundamentalist attitudes are as widespread among young as among older Muslims.”

Given that American Christian fundamentalism research “has demonstrated a strong association with hostility towards out-groups…seen as threatening the religious in-group,” SCIICS investigated “this linkage…in the European context.”   Here SCIICS utilized “three statements that measure rejection of homosexuals and Jews” along with the perception of being “threatened by outside enemies.”  Religious respondents received the statements “I don’t want to have homosexuals as friends” and “Jews cannot be trusted.”  “Muslims aim to destroy Western culture” and “Western countries are out to destroy Islam” were, respectively, the third question for Christian natives and Turkish/Moroccan-descent Muslims.

Such “out-group hostility is far from negligible among native Christians.”  The offered statements revealed that 9% of these respondents were “overtly anti-Semitic” (11% in Germany) and 13% (10% in Germany) rejected homosexual friends.  “Not surprisingly,” the Muslim out-group attracted the “highest level of hostility” from 23% (17% in Germany) who feared Muslims as the West’s destroyers.  Hostility towards all three groups united only 1.6% native Christians. Inclusion of all natives, secular or religious, slightly lowered the “out-group hostility” to respective rates of 8%, 10%, 21%, and 1.4%.

Although “worrisome enough,” these native figures “are dwarfed by the levels of out-group hostility among European Muslims.”  Their hostility towards homosexuals and Jews reach levels of almost 60% and 45%, respectively.  Compared with “Islamophobic” natives, Muslim “phobia against the West” is “much higher still;” 54% of Muslim respondents fearing a Western destruction of Islam.  Koopmans suggested the term “Occidentophobia” for this fear “for which oddly enough there is no word.”

A little more than a quarter of surveyed Muslims were hostile towards all three groups, with Turkish (30% agreeing with all three statements) outscoring in this metric Moroccan Muslims (17%).  Alevi (13% agreeing to all three statements) were significantly less hostile than Turkish Sunni Muslims (31%). Once again “worrying,” Muslim respondents do not replicate the native trend that “out-group hostility is significantly lower among younger generations.”  Likewise once again, “controlling for socio-economic variables hardly reduces group differences.”  In all, “religious fundamentalism…turns out to be by far the most important predictor of out-group hostility” as differences between surveyed Christians and Muslims indicated.

SCIICS’ “findings clearly contradict…often-heard” assertions that “Islamic religious fundamentalism is a marginal phenomenon in Western Europe” similar to the “extent of fundamentalism among the Christian majority.”  “Both claims are blatantly false,” Koopmans concluded.   Not only the “extent of Islamic religious fundamentalism,” but also its hostile “correlates” are “serious causes of concern for policy makers as well as Muslim community leaders.”  While “religious fundamentalism should not be equated with the willingness to support, or even to engage, in religiously motivated violence,” fundamentalism’s “strong relationship to out-group hostility” could “very likely…provide a nourishing environment for radicalization.”

Contrary to politically correct nostrums about Islam’s practical equivalence to all other faiths, WZB has soberly assessed disturbing facts.  WZB’s analysis is even more disturbing given traditional Islamic understandings of aggressive and authoritarian jihad/sharia norms belonging to Islam’s fundamentals, a canonical core apparently ignored by Koopmans but not by devout German Muslims-turned-violent.  Europe and the rest of the world ignore these facts at their peril.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • Elizabeth Cape Cod

    So the women folk in the photo are homesick for oppression and brutality??
    I’ll never understand these ‘people’.

    • A Z

      Muslimas are hoping they offspring do well by dispossessing the children of others. So they are onboard.

      But what makes non-Muslimas put their kids through 3 years of ostracism & racism?

      “Life for Norwegian kids in Norway’
      http://www.mrctv.org/videos/life-norwegian-kids-norway

      • defcon 4

        That’s really the story of islam, a parasitic, totalitarian ideology that enslaves others to get ahead.

    • billobillo54

      They’re usually referred to as ‘liberals,” “feminists,” or “secularists.”

  • Drakken

    Sooner or later the German people will go the nationalistic route that will make a Serb blush. Islam in Europe is about to meet that European gene of how to make war.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    No I didn’t have the time to read this article, but nevertheless there is only one kind of Islam and that is mainstream orthodox Islam. So-called moderate Islam, i.e., the religion of peace, is a non-existent political correct multicultural fiction. In other words, it doesn’t exist in reality.

    By the way, Islam is not a religion. So how can it be fundamentalist? Indeed, what happens to people of Islamic persuasion who criticize Islam or try to leave the religion? They get an automatic death sentence. Can Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, etc. criticize their respective religions and also leave them without receiving an automatic death sentence? Of course, because those religions are actual religions. While Islam is a cult in stark contrast.

    Moreover, Islam requires all Muslims to wage jihad, i.e., holy war, in the cause of Allah against all religions and all infidels in one form or another to ultimately make Islam supreme. What religions likewise require their adherents to wage war on their behalf in order to make them supreme? The answer is none of them. Islam is alone in the world in that respect.

    Finally, what religions have a form of strict totalitarian law, i.e., Sharia, which is the “will of Allah, that governs all of society down to the smallest minute details. The answer again is Islam is alone in that respect.

    Islam should be banned in America because it is clearly not a religion, but a very rabid totalitarian cult that uses the pretense of being a religion in a very hideous way to impose itself.

  • logdon

    When Pakistani Muslims first arrived in Britain they wouldn’t say boo to a goose.

    Subdued, deferential with a hint of the oleaginous about them, they gradually opened street corner shops, cheap curry houses and were as nice as pie.

    Considered an asset they consolidated their positions and as more and more arrived and as the numbers grew so too did the boldness.

    They bought properties in cash until whole streets of terrace houses were Pakistani and they injected themselves into local politics.

    This was the trojan horse, unintegrated apart from the extraction of cash from the state and via business, protected by race laws they became almost a state within a state.

    The left courted them and as political correctness grew so did Islamic unassailability. They were ring fenced by special privilege and favour by police, local government and social services.

    Islamic societies were established and the moment of truth emerged during the Rushdie crisis when busloads of Pakistanis and Bangladeshis descended on Bradford to call for his death, cause chaos and denounce our state.

    Nothing was done.

    From then on via threat, violence, special privilege wheedling and a constant high pitched whine they are now where they are with Christmas all but banned in certain areas, piggy banks removed from sale , halal meat as default in supermarkets and even our national flag deemed racist by idiot councils.

    They are not entirely to blame, the credit for this debacle of our national suicide must also lay with the dhimmis for whom Britain is a racist coloniser.

    That for the unenlightened, includes our very own BBC.

    So there you have it.

    I’ve seen it grow first hand and truly, along with my friends, despair.

    We remember how it was and we witness how it is.

    But this isn’t over. They don’t understand how we work. Toleration is not everlasting in the face of provocation and killing a British soldier on our streets has tipped opinion.

    There is trouble ahead yet without that trouble we may as well give up.

    I say clear the air, if Muslims want confrontation let them have it. Then allow the truth to decide.

    • Huck Folder

      Agreed, and that bastard Tariq Ali from forty odd years ago, organizing parades, and that double bastard dipshit alcoholic fornicator Andy Choudhary, and ‘moslem patrols’, and the pedophile gang-rape industry, and the National Association of Moslem Police – all 2,000 of them, and on and on…

    • defcon 4

      You’ll have to deal w/the collaborators/traitors in your own government and law enforcement as well.

      • logdon

        Policy on law enforcement is decided by the Home Office and that department is part of the elected Government.

        Cameron is hated, obviously by the left who in classic lefty manner despise his upper middle class Eton educated privilege.

        Add in those huge masses of socialist Brown employees whose numbers in local government have been severely culled and consequently turfed out of their cosy sinecures for life.

        He has also lost his core party Conservative voters who are greatly disappointed by his flaccid carelessness which lacks any nationalistic spirit or real patriotism.

        He is EU European through and through and the referendum is his very belated response to the surge in the polls by UKIP.

        Next year EU ruling will open the gates of our sceptred isle to a whole swathe of Rumanians and Bulgarians. That is the crunch.

        If our populations are so fed up with the three party’s idiocy, lies and hypocrisy when these people begin flooding our streets they’ll swing to UKIP and then the ‘collaborators/traitors’ will meet their nemesis.

        Just like America the left has insinuated its tentacles into the institutions. Teachers, Police, local government, social services and the NHS are firmly infiltrated and a huge clean out is required.

        Such is the malaise, it won’t be easy but it’s either that or a totally unrecognisable Britain within a decade or two.

      • logdon

        Walid Shoebat has some information on this very thing.

        In 1887 Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior:

        “A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship… The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

        http://shoebat.com/2013/12/16/fall-usa-obituary/

  • Chippy

    Why dont they all head on back to where they came from?

    • billobillo54

      Because they demand and will FIGHT to impose Sharia on us.

  • tokanbaduku

    I pity Europe in 5-10 year’s time. Because of colour and so-called Arab money, they allowed the influx of the Asians, while branding the relatively peaceful Africans leprous. The question is, why don’t we have churches in places like Saudi Arabia? That is to tell you how intolerance is at it peak in Islam (the religion of peace).