Pork is the latest front in Europe's culture wars

by Guest Tue Apr 15, 2014 10:36 am

First topic message reminder :

Pork is the latest front in Europe's culture wars
The far right is fixated on pork and is using it as an excuse to target yet another aspect of Muslim life

Following its significant gains in last month's local elections, the French Front National leader, Marine Le Pen, swiftly announced that school cafeterias would no longer serve non-pork substitution meals to children living in towns won by FN candidates. Targeting Muslims for another ritual round of public humiliation, while also excluding Jewish children, Le Pen declared: "There is no reason for religion to enter the public sphere."

While Le Pen framed this fixation on the dietary requirements of her fellow citizens as a defence of state secularism, the FN mayor of the south-western town of Arveyres, Benoit Gheysens, suggested the move was simply to cut costs and to prevent "staff being distressed" by excessive food waste. This mix of environmental concern and secular commitment illustrates just how eclectic the far right can be in its defence of order, and Le Pen's conversion to republican values is shaped by this strategic elasticity.

As recently as 2011, Le Pen was threatened with prosecution for describing Muslims praying in the streets as comparable to the Nazi occupation of France, rather than opting to oppose it as an assault on the neutrality of public space. Her subsequent cultivation of a rightwing defence of secularism is based on the realisation that the supposedly universal values of the republic can be appropriated as a productive front in the struggle for national identity.

The prime reason for this conversion, of course, is that it provides a fertile opportunity for consistently reproducing public controversies regarding the "Muslim problem" and its threat to national identity.

As Arun Kundnani says in his newbook, The Muslims are Coming, the social and political construction of racism in the post-9/11 period has relied in part on translating "cultural markers associated with Muslimness (forms of dress, rituals, languages) … into racial signifiers".

This constant manufacture of controversy is a ritual whereby yet another dimension of Muslim life can be stereotyped, held up for public scrutiny and marked out as a problem that requires resolute political intervention. Symbols can be endlessly generated, leaving every cultural marker to be labelled as yet more evidence of the excessive demands of eternal foreigners on an overly tolerant "host".

Much of this pig-whistle politics, which is becoming more prevalent across western Europe, is opportunistic. Heinz-Christian Strache of the Austrian Freedom party, for instance, who in 2012 posted an antisemitic caricature on his Facebook page, also circulated a picture of himself with a roast suckling pig and the caption "Isst du Schwein, darfst du rein" (If you eat pork you can come in).

The Danish People's party, fully invested in a culture war over Danish values, was an early adopter of animal welfare in order to campaign against halal meat and has long sought to politicise the provision of halal options in nurseries as the "forced adoption" of Muslim tradition.

When it was reported last summer that some Copenhagen kindergartens, in consultation with parents, had stopped serving pork products, the DPP complained of discrimination against Danish food culture. The intensity of the resulting debate – and of the charge that only the DPP spoke for the silent majority victimised by overly indulged minorities – prompted the Social Democrat prime minister, Helle Thorning-Schmidt, into the absurd public affirmation of the importance of meatballs to Danish culture and identity.

That a centre-left politician competitively declares her fidelity to a meat product is a predictable effect of the European politics of integration of the last decade. Integration, for all its suggestion of a weighty national project, is in practice a series of public demands: they must do this, they shouldn't do that. Integration politics responds to the social anxieties of the neoliberal era by producing symbolic problems that can be politically addressed through cost-free symbolic action.

Yet, they are never cost-free for those racialised as the problem. It is, for instance, in this context that a sinister genre of direct action has developed around symbolically and physically imposing pork products on Muslims. The French "anti-white racism" group Bloc Identitaire has occupied mosques and tried to organise a march to kick back against the "racist refusal" of Muslims to eat pork.

In what it later, predictably, described as a joke, the Flemish Vlaams Belang stormed a food festival at a school in Schoten and reportedly forced pork sausages into the mouths of some children. When some enterprising young people in Helsinki wanted to humiliate an Afghan asylum seeker on hunger strike for 30 days in front of the Finnish parliament, they made a video of themselves inviting him to warm his hands on a fire before cooking sausages on it.

Pork has become a racist meme, endlessly adapted through practices of harassment: mosques in Europe have had pig's heads nailed to their doors, pork-filled envelopes sent in the mail,slices of ham rubbed on door handles, bacon slices slipped in the shoes of worshippers as they prayed.

This is the political context in which Le Pen's pig-whistle politics seeks a register, for all its lofty appeals to the conceits of the republic. And when the pork has been exhausted, a new affront, or burning source of resentment, will be produced.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/15/le-pen-pig-whistle-politics

On top of all that, the treatment of pigs to produce pork in Denmark is a disgrace. I love pork, but I always make sure I never buy Danish pork, would rather go hungry.

by Guest Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:09 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:Even George W. Bush said we're not at war with Islam.

Even George W. Bush.

I think that ought to give everyone pause ...

Are we so certain Islam is not at war with us?

by Guest Wed Apr 16, 2014 8:56 am

Nems wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:Even George W. Bush said we're not at war with Islam.

Even George W. Bush.

I think that ought to give everyone pause ...

Are we so certain Islam is not at war with us?

Well this gets weirder by th minute, how can a religion be at war with us unless you think this deity, Allah exists and then if he does has declared war on everyone?

Which is odd when the faith actually teaches not to transgress and thus it is the actions of Muslims themselves who commit to war just as people of any nation, so how on Satan's bottom can a religion be at war with us, that makes no logical sense, because people are responsible for their own actions?

by veya_victaous Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:02 pm

Nems wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:Even George W. Bush said we're not at war with Islam.

Even George W. Bush.

I think that ought to give everyone pause ...

Are we so certain Islam is not at war with us?

YES 100% certain. Suspect

frankly i a surprised anyone besides sarah palin can say that with a straight face. pirat

by Guest Wed Apr 16, 2014 4:20 pm

veya_victaous wrote:
Nems wrote:

Are we so certain Islam is not at war with us?

YES 100% certain.

frankly i a surprised anyone besides sarah palin can say that with a straight face.

You just reminded me of a conversation I had with an Aussie about the IRA, he was very proud of 'our boys' very easy to have such views when you are thousands of miles away from danger. I take it there are no such integration problems in Australia? good stuff we shall send a few boatloads of undesirables, its been a while.

by Guest Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:15 pm

VOD(original) wrote:
lovedust wrote:

In my case, the former. I view forcing pork into the mouths of Muslim children and nailing pigs' heads to Mosque doors as bullying.
beheading soldiers in the street in broad daylight is far worse than nailing a frigging pig on a mosque door come on for goodness sake

... But we're agreed nailing a pig's head to a Mosque door is a nasty thing to do, right?

VOD wrote:and who is force feeding Muslim children pork, if they don't want to eat it take a packed lunch i am sure that would be the first answer if my children ever moaned about certain foods in school .

From the article quoted in the OP:

"It is, for instance, in this context that a sinister genre of direct action has developed around symbolically and physically imposing pork products on Muslims. The French "anti-white racism" group Bloc Identitaire has occupied mosques and tried to organise a march to kick back against the "racist refusal" of Muslims to eat pork.

In what it later, predictably, described as a joke, the Flemish Vlaams Belang stormed a food festival at a school in Schoten and reportedly forced pork sausages into the mouths of some children."

Reference here

by Guest Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:26 pm

lovedust wrote:
VOD(original) wrote:
beheading soldiers in the street in broad daylight is far worse than nailing a frigging pig on a mosque door come on for goodness sake

... But we're agreed nailing a pig's head to a Mosque door is a nasty thing to do, right?

VOD wrote:and who is force feeding Muslim children pork, if they don't want to eat it take a packed lunch i am sure that would be the first answer if my children ever moaned about certain foods in school .

From the article quoted in the OP:

"It is, for instance, in this context that a sinister genre of direct action has developed around symbolically and physically imposing pork products on Muslims. The French "anti-white racism" group Bloc Identitaire has occupied mosques and tried to organise a march to kick back against the "racist refusal" of Muslims to eat pork.

In what it later, predictably, described as a joke, the Flemish Vlaams Belang stormed a food festival at a school in Schoten and reportedly forced pork sausages into the mouths of some children."

Reference here

it is a perceived attack on Muslims because everything that doesn't go their way is a perceived attack...

it stands to save the french govt.. a small fortune i would have thought, but hey lets close hospitals and make sure the kids have 17 different meat substitutes just in case they have a picky day... Smile

by Guest Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:38 pm

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:
lovedust wrote:

... But we're agreed nailing a pig's head to a Mosque door is a nasty thing to do, right?

From the article quoted in the OP:

"It is, for instance, in this context that a sinister genre of direct action has developed around symbolically and physically imposing pork products on Muslims. The French "anti-white racism" group Bloc Identitaire has occupied mosques and tried to organise a march to kick back against the "racist refusal" of Muslims to eat pork.

In what it later, predictably, described as a joke, the Flemish Vlaams Belang stormed a food festival at a school in Schoten and reportedly forced pork sausages into the mouths of some children."

Reference here

it is a perceived attack on Muslims because everything that doesn't go their way is a perceived attack...

it stands to save the french govt.. a small fortune i would have thought, but hey lets close hospitals and make sure the kids have 17 different meat substitutes just in case they have a picky day...

We're talking about pigs heads being nailed to Mosque doors and sausages being forced into the mouths of Muslim children at the moment, GIGATT.

by Guest Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:42 pm

pardon me for sticking to the thread... Smile

i was actually answering the final part of your own post..

it is a perceived attack...not real...

by Guest Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:48 pm

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:pardon me for sticking to the thread... You weren't.

i was actually answering the final part of your own post.. No you weren't.

it is a perceived attack...not real... Yes it is.

From the article quoted in the OP:

"It is, for instance, in this context that a sinister genre of direct action has developed around symbolically and physically imposing pork products on Muslims. The French "anti-white racism" group Bloc Identitaire has occupied mosques and tried to organise a march to kick back against the "racist refusal" of Muslims to eat pork.

In what it later, predictably, described as a joke, the Flemish Vlaams Belang stormed a food festival at a school in Schoten and reportedly forced pork sausages into the mouths of some children."

by Guest Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:56 pm

lovedust wrote:
Godisgoodallthetime wrote:pardon me for sticking to the thread... You weren't.

i was actually answering the final part of your own post.. No you weren't.

it is a perceived attack...not real... Yes it is.

From the article quoted in the OP:

"It is, for instance, in this context that a sinister genre of direct action has developed around symbolically and physically imposing pork products on Muslims. The French "anti-white racism" group Bloc Identitaire has occupied mosques and tried to organise a march to kick back against the "racist refusal" of Muslims to eat pork.

In what it later, predictably, described as a joke, the Flemish Vlaams Belang stormed a food festival at a school in Schoten and reportedly forced pork sausages into the mouths of some children."

is it an attack on jewish children..

by Guest Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:59 pm

veya_victaous wrote:
VOD(original) wrote:
beheading soldiers in the street in broad daylight is far worse than nailing a frigging pig on a mosque door come on for goodness sake and who is force feeding Muslim children pork, if they don't want to eat it take a packed lunch i am sure that would be the first answer if my children ever moaned about certain foods in school .

no its not.
Soldiers are legit targets... beheaded, shot, blow up, stabbed irrelevant.
targeting of Civilian religions structures is no a legit military strategy.

AND Al-Qaeda is at war with who ever is sending soldiers to the middle east, the west is not supposed to be at war with ALL Muslims and westerners that act like we are, are every bit the terrorist as (and actually validate and perpetuating the problem) Al-Qaeda .

I do hope you are not trying to say Lee Rigby was a legitimate target or a casualty of war

by veya_victaous Wed Apr 16, 2014 11:19 pm

Nems wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
Nems wrote:

Are we so certain Islam is not at war with us?

YES 100% certain.

frankly i a surprised anyone besides sarah palin can say that with a straight face.

You just reminded me of a conversation I had with an Aussie about the IRA, he was very proud of 'our boys' very easy to have such views when you are thousands of miles away from danger. I take it there are no such integration problems in Australia? good stuff we shall send a few boatloads of undesirables, its been a while.

umm we already have twice as many as you Suspect

and we were your undesirables in the first place that YOU already sent here to the detriment of the Aboriginals

Bloody English Mad

" ohh we got understandable lets send them some where else, Ohh no no one can come here they might be undersireable "

Like Ben Said
You guys are JUST beginning we are already decades into the process of multiculturalism (and Aussie are doing a better job than the USA),
WELCOME TO THE MODERN GLOBALISED WORLD

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate

10th Australia 5.93/per 1000
16th United States 3.62/per 1000
18th United Kingdom 2.59/per 1000

by veya_victaous Wed Apr 16, 2014 11:21 pm

Nems wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
VOD(original) wrote:
beheading soldiers in the street in broad daylight is far worse than nailing a frigging pig on a mosque door come on for goodness sake and who is force feeding Muslim children pork, if they don't want to eat it take a packed lunch i am sure that would be the first answer if my children ever moaned about certain foods in school .

no its not.
Soldiers are legit targets... beheaded, shot, blow up, stabbed irrelevant.
targeting of Civilian religions structures is no a legit military strategy.

AND Al-Qaeda is at war with who ever is sending soldiers to the middle east, the west is not supposed to be at war with ALL Muslims and westerners that act like we are, are every bit the terrorist as (and actually validate and perpetuating the problem) Al-Qaeda .

I do hope you are not trying to say Lee Rigby was a legitimate target or a casualty of war

he wasn't killed by an army, he was killed by 2 psychos that have no official status as representative of anyone, so it was murder.

by Guest Wed Apr 16, 2014 11:22 pm

veya_victaous wrote:
Nems wrote:

You just reminded me of a conversation I had with an Aussie about the IRA, he was very proud of 'our boys' very easy to have such views when you are thousands of miles away from danger. I take it there are no such integration problems in Australia? good stuff we shall send a few boatloads of undesirables, its been a while.

umm we already have twice as many as you and we were your undesirables in the first place that YOU already sent here to the detriment of the Aboriginals

Bloody English " ohh we got understandable lets send them some where else, Ohh no no one can come here they might be undersireable "

Like Ben Said
You guys are JUST beginning we are already decades into the process of multiculturalism (and Aussie are doing a better job than the USA),
WELCOME TO THE MODERN GLOBALISED WORLD

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate

10th Australia 5.93/per 1000
16th United States 3.62/per 1000
18th United Kingdom 2.59/per 1000

I don't think some people will ever get there Veya.

by veya_victaous Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:59 am

Sassy wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
Nems wrote:

You just reminded me of a conversation I had with an Aussie about the IRA, he was very proud of 'our boys' very easy to have such views when you are thousands of miles away from danger. I take it there are no such integration problems in Australia? good stuff we shall send a few boatloads of undesirables, its been a while.

umm we already have twice as many as you and we were your undesirables in the first place that YOU already sent here to the detriment of the Aboriginals

Bloody English " ohh we got understandable lets send them some where else, Ohh no no one can come here they might be undersireable "

Like Ben Said
You guys are JUST beginning we are already decades into the process of multiculturalism (and Aussie are doing a better job than the USA),
WELCOME TO THE MODERN GLOBALISED WORLD

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate

10th Australia 5.93/per 1000
16th United States 3.62/per 1000
18th United Kingdom 2.59/per 1000

I don't think some people will ever get there Veya.

And
regarding Muslims, one of our closets neighbors is Indonesia which everyone seems to forget is still the most populous Muslim country.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_world

As of 2010, over 1.6 billion or about 23.4% of the world population are Muslims.[5] Of these, around 62% live in Asia-Pacific,[6] 20% in the Middle East-North Africa,[7] 15% in Sub-Saharan Africa,[8] around 3% in Europe,[9] and 0.3% in the Americas

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 8:26 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Nems wrote:

I do hope you are not trying to say Lee Rigby was a legitimate target or a casualty of war

he wasn't killed by an army, he was killed by 2 psychos that have no official status as representative of anyone, so it was murder.

Well I know that thats why I wondered why you made the soldiers are legit targets comment.

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 8:29 am

Sassy wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:

umm we already have twice as many as you and we were your undesirables in the first place that YOU already sent here to the detriment of the Aboriginals

Bloody English " ohh we got understandable lets send them some where else, Ohh no no one can come here they might be undersireable "

Like Ben Said
You guys are JUST beginning we are already decades into the process of multiculturalism (and Aussie are doing a better job than the USA),
WELCOME TO THE MODERN GLOBALISED WORLD

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate

10th Australia 5.93/per 1000
16th United States 3.62/per 1000
18th United Kingdom 2.59/per 1000

I don't think some people will ever get there Veya.

Some people? Another veiled insult from granny gobshite the queen of snide.

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 9:31 am

lovedust wrote:
Godisgoodallthetime wrote:

it is a perceived attack on Muslims because everything that doesn't go their way is a perceived attack...

it stands to save the french govt.. a small fortune i would have thought, but hey lets close hospitals and make sure the kids have 17 different meat substitutes just in case they have a picky day...

We're talking about pigs heads being nailed to Mosque doors and sausages being forced into the mouths of Muslim children at the moment, GIGATT.

I thought it said reportedly being forced... You know if it had said that Muslims reportedly forced non-Muslim kids to do something this would be repeatedly jumped on and dismissed as propaganda, anti-Muslim rhetoric, blah blah blah....
Rolling Eyes

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:02 am

Nems wrote:
Sassy wrote:

I don't think some people will ever get there Veya.

Some people? Another veiled insult from granny gobshite the queen of snide.

Scrolling through before I logged in and saw this. There is something uniquely funny about you calling anyone else snide, especially me as I say exactly what I think. It's also even more funny that out of all the people (Smelly, BA etc) who more than show their racist sides you should think I was referring to you in particular. Maybe an attack of conscience, then again, maybe not. Funnily enough, it's not 'all about you'. No wonder your aura was black. (and that was in Gerbs post btw). You really have sunk.

by veya_victaous Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:04 am

Nems wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
Nems wrote:

I do hope you are not trying to say Lee Rigby was a legitimate target or a casualty of war

he wasn't killed by an army, he was killed by 2 psychos that have no official status as representative of anyone, so it was murder.

Well I know that thats why I wondered why you made the soldiers are legit targets comment.

She said soldiers So I assumed she was also talking about the unlucky ones in Iraq and Afghanistan too silent

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:58 am

Tesstacious wrote:
lovedust wrote:

We're talking about pigs heads being nailed to Mosque doors and sausages being forced into the mouths of Muslim children at the moment, GIGATT.
I thought it said reportedly being forced... You know if it had said that Muslims reportedly forced non-Muslim kids to do something this would be repeatedly jumped on and dismissed as propaganda, anti-Muslim rhetoric, blah blah blah....

Well. VOD expressed scepticism that any force feeding allegation had taken place, apparently assuming the subject was school meals again. Yes, the far right group reportedly forced sausages into children's mouths; according to the article their response to the allegation was far from a robust denial - they said it was a "joke". It didn't seem like a convincing response to a serious accusation to me.

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:12 pm

Sassy wrote:
Nems wrote:

Some people? Another veiled insult from granny gobshite the queen of snide.

Scrolling through before I logged in and saw this. There is something uniquely funny about you calling anyone else snide, especially me as I say exactly what I think. It's also even more funny that out of all the people (Smelly, BA etc) who more than show their racist sides you should think I was referring to you in particular. Maybe an attack of conscience, then again, maybe not. Funnily enough, it's not 'all about you'. No wonder your aura was black. (and that was in Gerbs post btw). You really have sunk.

Course you were! Next time you scroll through you could always answer some of the questions I have asked you!
You cant ignore me Laughing

You love it its all you have.
If you read what I said I didnt say you were referring to me I just said it was another veiled insult. You may say what you think but you never dare say who you are referring to. Hence the question I asked about who has pmd you.
Has Gerbs said some thing nasty about my aura colour? I shall look, when I can. I would be surprised though Gerbs isnt usually nasty.
Have a word with yourself for gods sake. You are a horrible person and I hope all the misery you cause comes back on you tenfold.

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:57 pm

I'm not going to tell you who pm'd me, that's their business and you can swivel. All I have? Don't make me laugh, OH and I are getting married this year and having a lovely time now I feel rather better, going on holiday at the end of next month with my Dad and brother as Dad thinks it will probably be the last time he can manage it, joined an art club and getting the odd commission for a painting, in the middle of doing a very large one at the moment, 6ft by 4ft, meet up with friends I have made here in town twice a week, I think that enough to keep me going thanks. I've caused no misery, you on the other hand seem intent on causing a lot to yourself.

Now back on ignore, your negativity might be catching.

PS Gerbs didn't say anything nasty about you, she simply quoted your post, but trust you to jump to a conclusion like that.

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 5:22 pm

Sassy wrote:I'm not going to tell you who pm'd me, that's their business and you can swivel. All I have? Don't make me laugh, OH and I are getting married this year and having a lovely time now I feel rather better, going on holiday at the end of next month with my Dad and brother as Dad thinks it will probably be the last time he can manage it, joined an art club and getting the odd commission for a painting, in the middle of doing a very large one at the moment, 6ft by 4ft, meet up with friends I have made here in town twice a week, I think that enough to keep me going thanks. I've caused no misery, you on the other hand seem intent on causing a lot to yourself.

Now back on ignore, your negativity might be catching.

PS Gerbs didn't say anything nasty about you, she simply quoted your post, but trust you to jump to a conclusion like that.

Why mention Gerbs then? To show you are ignoring my posts?
Well Im convinced
But then you wont see this so please feel free to fuck right off.

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 7:00 pm

Sassy wrote:Pork is the latest front in Europe's culture wars
The far right is fixated on pork and is using it as an excuse to target yet another aspect of Muslim life

Following its significant gains in last month's local elections, the French Front National leader, Marine Le Pen, swiftly announced that school cafeterias would no longer serve non-pork substitution meals to children living in towns won by FN candidates. Targeting Muslims for another ritual round of public humiliation, while also excluding Jewish children, Le Pen declared: "There is no reason for religion to enter the public sphere."

While Le Pen framed this fixation on the dietary requirements of her fellow citizens as a defence of state secularism, the FN mayor of the south-western town of Arveyres, Benoit Gheysens, suggested the move was simply to cut costs and to prevent "staff being distressed" by excessive food waste. This mix of environmental concern and secular commitment illustrates just how eclectic the far right can be in its defence of order, and Le Pen's conversion to republican values is shaped by this strategic elasticity.

As recently as 2011, Le Pen was threatened with prosecution for describing Muslims praying in the streets as comparable to the Nazi occupation of France, rather than opting to oppose it as an assault on the neutrality of public space. Her subsequent cultivation of a rightwing defence of secularism is based on the realisation that the supposedly universal values of the republic can be appropriated as a productive front in the struggle for national identity.

The prime reason for this conversion, of course, is that it provides a fertile opportunity for consistently reproducing public controversies regarding the "Muslim problem" and its threat to national identity.

As Arun Kundnani says in his newbook, The Muslims are Coming, the social and political construction of racism in the post-9/11 period has relied in part on translating "cultural markers associated with Muslimness (forms of dress, rituals, languages) … into racial signifiers".

This constant manufacture of controversy is a ritual whereby yet another dimension of Muslim life can be stereotyped, held up for public scrutiny and marked out as a problem that requires resolute political intervention. Symbols can be endlessly generated, leaving every cultural marker to be labelled as yet more evidence of the excessive demands of eternal foreigners on an overly tolerant "host".

Much of this pig-whistle politics, which is becoming more prevalent across western Europe, is opportunistic. Heinz-Christian Strache of the Austrian Freedom party, for instance, who in 2012 posted an antisemitic caricature on his Facebook page, also circulated a picture of himself with a roast suckling pig and the caption "Isst du Schwein, darfst du rein" (If you eat pork you can come in).

The Danish People's party, fully invested in a culture war over Danish values, was an early adopter of animal welfare in order to campaign against halal meat and has long sought to politicise the provision of halal options in nurseries as the "forced adoption" of Muslim tradition.

When it was reported last summer that some Copenhagen kindergartens, in consultation with parents, had stopped serving pork products, the DPP complained of discrimination against Danish food culture. The intensity of the resulting debate – and of the charge that only the DPP spoke for the silent majority victimised by overly indulged minorities – prompted the Social Democrat prime minister, Helle Thorning-Schmidt, into the absurd public affirmation of the importance of meatballs to Danish culture and identity.

That a centre-left politician competitively declares her fidelity to a meat product is a predictable effect of the European politics of integration of the last decade. Integration, for all its suggestion of a weighty national project, is in practice a series of public demands: they must do this, they shouldn't do that. Integration politics responds to the social anxieties of the neoliberal era by producing symbolic problems that can be politically addressed through cost-free symbolic action.

Yet, they are never cost-free for those racialised as the problem. It is, for instance, in this context that a sinister genre of direct action has developed around symbolically and physically imposing pork products on Muslims. The French "anti-white racism" group Bloc Identitaire has occupied mosques and tried to organise a march to kick back against the "racist refusal" of Muslims to eat pork.

In what it later, predictably, described as a joke, the Flemish Vlaams Belang stormed a food festival at a school in Schoten and reportedly forced pork sausages into the mouths of some children. When some enterprising young people in Helsinki wanted to humiliate an Afghan asylum seeker on hunger strike for 30 days in front of the Finnish parliament, they made a video of themselves inviting him to warm his hands on a fire before cooking sausages on it.

Pork has become a racist meme, endlessly adapted through practices of harassment: mosques in Europe have had pig's heads nailed to their doors, pork-filled envelopes sent in the mail,slices of ham rubbed on door handles, bacon slices slipped in the shoes of worshippers as they prayed.

This is the political context in which Le Pen's pig-whistle politics seeks a register, for all its lofty appeals to the conceits of the republic. And when the pork has been exhausted, a new affront, or burning source of resentment, will be produced.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/15/le-pen-pig-whistle-politics

On top of all that, the treatment of pigs to produce pork in Denmark is a disgrace. I love pork, but I always make sure I never buy Danish pork, would rather go hungry.

then go hungry

in fact why dont you fucking starve

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 7:11 pm

by Tommy Monk Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:42 pm

Guest wrote:
lovedust wrote:
From the article quoted in the OP:
"It is, for instance, in this context that a sinister genre of direct action has developed around symbolically and physically imposing pork products on Muslims. The French "anti-white racism" group Bloc Identitaire has occupied mosques and tried to organise a march to kick back against the "racist refusal" of Muslims to eat pork.
In what it later, predictably, described as a joke, the Flemish Vlaams Belang stormed a food festival at a school in Schoten and reportedly forced pork sausages into the mouths of some children."
is it an attack on jewish children..

Why is the serving of pork or shell fish seen as an attack on some, while the serving of unwanted halal to others is not...?
All in the name of equality mind!

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:47 pm

Ah, you call forcing sausages into children's mouths 'serving'. OK.

by Ben Reilly Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:47 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Guest wrote:
lovedust wrote:
From the article quoted in the OP:
"It is, for instance, in this context that a sinister genre of direct action has developed around symbolically and physically imposing pork products on Muslims. The French "anti-white racism" group Bloc Identitaire has occupied mosques and tried to organise a march to kick back against the "racist refusal" of Muslims to eat pork.
In what it later, predictably, described as a joke, the Flemish Vlaams Belang stormed a food festival at a school in Schoten and reportedly forced pork sausages into the mouths of some children."
is it an attack on jewish children..
Why is the serving of pork or shell fish seen as an attack on some, while the serving of unwanted halal to others is not...?
All in the name of equality mind!

Tommy, I challenge you to find anyone here who doesn't think that halal should be labeled; we've talked about it quite a bit.

by Tommy Monk Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:10 pm

Not the point I was making.... halal has been 'symbolically and physically imposed' on others for years without their permission or knowledge and agaist their religious beliefs without being labelled as an attack on anything, so why now a problem if this is done the other way round?

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:19 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Not the point I was making.... halal has been 'symbolically and physically imposed' on others for years without their permission or knowledge and agaist their religious beliefs without being labelled as an attack on anything, so why now a problem if this is done the other way round?

Because Muslims are not stopping it being labelled, companies are.

And why are you worried about halal, when 88% of it is prestunned, when you never mention kosher, none of which is prestunned? And on previous posts I have already shown where kosher meat is used without anyone knowing.

by Tommy Monk Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:27 pm

Again not answering the point I was making....!

Try again!

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:30 pm

I answered exactly the point you were making, you just don't want to acknowledge it. No halal food has been forced on anyone by Muslims. It has been done by meat companies. And all halal and kosher meat should be labelled.

Now, answer my point about kosher.

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:34 pm

Percentage of pre-stunned halal meat is:-

81-88% according to the Food Standards Agency

75-100% depending on the animal according to the EU

90% depending on the animal according to the RSPCA

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:36 pm

lovedust wrote:
Percentage of pre-stunned halal meat is:-

81-88% according to the Food Standards Agency

75-100% depending on the animal according to the EU

90% depending on the animal according to the RSPCA

Exactly Lovedust. The fact that they say it is not prestunned is the excuse they are using for this terrible behaviour, picking on schoolchildren. But it is false. The meat that is DEFINITELY not prestunned is kosher, but they are all carefully avoiding that.

by Tommy Monk Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:40 pm

Tommy Monk said....
"Not the point I was making.... halal has been 'symbolically and physically imposed' on others for years without their permission or knowledge and agaist their religious beliefs without being labelled as an attack on anything, so why now a problem if this is done the other way round?"
The article talks of an 'attack' when pork or non halal is served in OUR COUNTRY, why only one way but not seen as the same with the years of halal being surreptitiously forced onto everyone?

by Guest Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:45 pm

And? Blame the people who did it, Muslims didn't. Kosher was forced on you as well, gonna make a fuss about that? And if the halal meat was prestunned, whats the problem?

And the pork wasn't served, it was forced into children's mouths.

by Tommy Monk Fri Apr 18, 2014 12:06 am

It was 'symbolically and physically imposed' on people done surreptitiously, against the wishes/knowledge/beliefs of the whole of UK population and elsewhere in other countries.

This was never seen as an 'attack' on anyone so why is it if other way round?

And I found this rather factual and informative debate elsewhere.....

http://inaflap.forumotion.co.uk/t9403-is-it-or-isn-t-it

by harvesmom Fri Apr 18, 2014 12:10 am

Quoting percentages is great, the reality is that there are 600,000 animals PER WEEK slaughtered in Britain in religious abbatoirs. And here is what the head of the BVA says about it

The religious slaughter of animals should be banned if Muslims and Jews do not agree to stun all the animals unconscious first to minimise their suffering, Britain's top vet said
But Mr Blackwell warned animals were suffering as a result of ritual slaughter, based on ancient religious customs.

He said: “They will feel the cut. They will feel the massive injury of the tissues of the neck.

“They will perceive the aspiration of blood they will breathe in before they lose consciousness.”

Likening the feeling of blood in the windpipe to the pain felt when food is swallowed down the wrong way, he said: “When you check the lungs of these animals there is clearly blood that has been aspirated.

“People say we are trying to focus on the last five or six seconds of an animal’s life when it could be 18 months old. It’s five or six seconds too long.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/agriculture/meat/10679907/End-religious-slaughter-of-animals-without-stunning-first-urges-top-vet.html

The RSPCA are totally against not pre stunning, and as an animal lover I don't care what religion determines animals should be killed this way, it is wrong and it should be stopped.

by Guest Fri Apr 18, 2014 12:14 am

Nothing on Flap can be informative by definition.

Lets get back to basics. You say halal has been symbolically imposed. The supposed reason for objections to eating it is because of belief it is not prestunned. And yet it has been shown that nearly all of it has been prestunned. So what makes it any different from any other meat to object to? Kosher is not prestunned, so shouldn't the objections be about kosher?

The people who have eaten the halal meat, have eaten meat that is not against their religion. There is nothing in Christianity that says you should eat halal meat. In fact, the bible says pigs are dirty and shouldn't be eaten.

The only objection and sense of 'imposition' should be about kosher if you object to meat that is not prestunned.

Non halal meat is against the religion of Muslims, and pork is banned. Therefore, forcing them to eat it, is an imposition.

by Guest Fri Apr 18, 2014 12:18 am

harvesmom wrote:Quoting percentages is great, the reality is that there are 600,000 animals PER WEEK slaughtered in Britain in religious abbatoirs. And here is what the head of the BVA says about it

The religious slaughter of animals should be banned if Muslims and Jews do not agree to stun all the animals unconscious first to minimise their suffering, Britain's top vet said
But Mr Blackwell warned animals were suffering as a result of ritual slaughter, based on ancient religious customs.

He said: “They will feel the cut. They will feel the massive injury of the tissues of the neck.

“They will perceive the aspiration of blood they will breathe in before they lose consciousness.”

Likening the feeling of blood in the windpipe to the pain felt when food is swallowed down the wrong way, he said: “When you check the lungs of these animals there is clearly blood that has been aspirated.

“People say we are trying to focus on the last five or six seconds of an animal’s life when it could be 18 months old. It’s five or six seconds too long.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/agriculture/meat/10679907/End-religious-slaughter-of-animals-without-stunning-first-urges-top-vet.html

The RSPCA are totally against not pre stunning, and as an animal lover I don't care what religion determines animals should be killed this way, it is wrong and it should be stopped.

And they also said that 88% - 100% of halal IS prestunned depending on the animal, so if it prestunning that you are worried about, you only need the small percentage that is not prestunned labelled or stopped. You would also need the chickens that are killed by our methods and wake up before they are killed etc, and you would need ALL kosher meat, that gets into the food chain to be labelled and you would need the kosher method banned completely. So why is everyone focusing on the halal, when so little of it isn't prestunned.

by Tommy Monk Fri Apr 18, 2014 12:35 am

The pre stunning illusion is covered in the link provided.

That (fine chap) mattiducatti's arguments are all backed up with links to most excellent sources.

by Guest Fri Apr 18, 2014 12:44 am

There is no prestunning illusion, it was checked by the RSPCA remember?

As for Matti, hush my mouth and pass the soap.

by harvesmom Fri Apr 18, 2014 12:51 am

Where in my post does it say I am focussing on halal? Please don't put words into my mouth Sassy.

And I don't care if it is one animal a week, its too many. I don't know where you have the 100 % from, the last survey done showed 88% were pre stunned, which out of 600,00 per week is still a hell of a lot of animals.

by Guest Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:00 am

lovedust wrote:
Percentage of pre-stunned halal meat is:-

81-88% according to the Food Standards Agency

75-100% depending on the animal according to the EU

90% depending on the animal according to the RSPCA

Lovedust looked it up but can't paste links.

You might not be focusing on halal, but everyone else seems to be.

Have you ever looked into the scientic surveys that show animals brains show more pain with stunning and electrocution than with their throats being cut. I have, and as I have said so many times, my daughter experienced when a doctor made a mistake with a canula in her carotid artery. She was unconscious with 2 seconds and remembered nothing. What about the ones that are stunned and wake up etc. All animals that are killed have their throats cut after stunning, they have to let the blood out for hygiene reasons.

I really believe that the fuss about halal is simply racially motivated. If you eat meat the chances are that the animal you are eating suffered in some way, there simply isn't a humane way of killing them.

by Tommy Monk Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:24 am

Sassy wrote:Nothing on Flap can be informative by definition.
Lets get back to basics. You say halal has been symbolically imposed. The supposed reason for objections to eating it is because of belief it is not prestunned. And yet it has been shown that nearly all of it has been prestunned. So what makes it any different from any other meat to object to? Kosher is not prestunned, so shouldn't the objections be about kosher?
The people who have eaten the halal meat, have eaten meat that is not against their religion. There is nothing in Christianity that says you should eat halal meat. In fact, the bible says pigs are dirty and shouldn't be eaten.
The only objection and sense of 'imposition' should be about kosher if you object to meat that is not prestunned.
Non halal meat is against the religion of Muslims, and pork is banned. Therefore, forcing them to eat it, is an imposition.

It has been imposed on people regardless, and never seen as an attack so why now if other way round?

And as Christianity pre dates Muslim beliefs, it would not be specifically listed in their faith, but the Bible is against worshipping false idols.....

And isn't that only in the old testament? Before Christ and not followed by Christians?

But besides that, what about everyone else being secretly fed this but never being classed as an attack on them?

by harvesmom Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:38 am

Maybe Love dust can tell us where she had the 100 % from then if she cant post links.

Of course there is no kind way to kill anything, but I believe that the non pre-stunning of animals is an animal welfare issue, not racially motivated. If I were going to be killed by having my throat cut, I know I would rather be knocked unconscious first.

by Guest Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:38 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Sassy wrote:Nothing on Flap can be informative by definition.
Lets get back to basics. You say halal has been symbolically imposed. The supposed reason for objections to eating it is because of belief it is not prestunned. And yet it has been shown that nearly all of it has been prestunned. So what makes it any different from any other meat to object to? Kosher is not prestunned, so shouldn't the objections be about kosher?
The people who have eaten the halal meat, have eaten meat that is not against their religion. There is nothing in Christianity that says you should eat halal meat. In fact, the bible says pigs are dirty and shouldn't be eaten.
The only objection and sense of 'imposition' should be about kosher if you object to meat that is not prestunned.
Non halal meat is against the religion of Muslims, and pork is banned. Therefore, forcing them to eat it, is an imposition.

It has been imposed on people regardless, and never seen as an attack so why now if other way round?

And as Christianity pre dates Muslim beliefs, it would not be specifically listed in their faith, but the Bible is against worshipping false idols.....

And isn't that only in the old testament? Before Christ and not followed by Christians?

But besides that, what about everyone else being secretly fed this but never being classed as an attack on them?

Are you a vegetarian?

by Guest Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:47 am

Come on it is not hard, I would like to see why if you are so bothered about meat being labelled based upon humane rights for animals, when they are all slaughtered to place a steak on our plates for example?

Surely Tommy if you cared about the humane treatment of animals, what does it matter what method they are slaughtered with, because there is nothing humane about killing something which we do not even have to eat, that is nothing but gluttony. I mean if you truly cared for the humane treatment of an animal, you would not wish it to be slaughtered in the first place.

Come on, we all know this has fuck all to do about methods, it has everything to do with you and others promoting a view about using similar arguments the Nazi's used on the Jews, to stereotype Muslims. We know you have no case, because either it is wrong to kill animals, or you eat meat and accept them having no rights to anything, as how do you think when getting stuck into your steak the animal was treated humanely being slaughtered?

by harvesmom Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:56 am

Why is no one allowed a view on here without being branded a racist? Just wondering.... only its getting bloody tedious now.

by Sponsored content