Norway is a civilized, modern and liberal country. It is a wealthy nation where tolerance for diversity is supposed to be strong. A foreign columnist writing for a Turkish daily said last week that liberals are people who have a problem keeping empathy under control. Therefore, it seems logical to assume that societies which have internalized a liberal ideology have also systematized empathy, made it part of the culture and disseminated it through the entire society by way of education.
If that is the case, how can we explain the Islamophobia, xenophobia and racism of the Norwegian murderer? Anders Behring Breivik does not appear to be someone who has strayed from the mainstream. On the contrary, he is an ordinary person who accepts a commonplace racism despite a soft outward appearance. It is not as though Westerners are not aware of the existence of this ordinary racism. But they assumed that their culture would eventually dominate and prevail. The recent incident did not come as a great surprise for, say, those living in Turkey because similarly motivated smaller incidents in Europe affecting migrants have long made us aware of the possibility for such a grave incident. European states and politicians have also pursued racially exclusive policies and laws, claiming that they must maintain their assimilation policies, presenting them as necessary to the process of integration. Recently the growing impact and strength of extreme right-wing political parties everywhere in Europe demonstrates that this state of ethnic exclusion become the general state of mind of the people.
In short, when it comes to Islamic identity and the immigration issue, Europe has slipped back to a fascist stance. Just this week, Belgium's preoccupation with its chador ban and the Breivik case in Norway demonstrate that Europe's capacity to take care of itself is diminished. The issue is that Europe's tolerance and empathy consider only those who share its own culture. The mindset that constitutes modernity calls for a balance between authoritarianism and relativism. Political and ethical values are perceived in reference to the issue of hierarchy alone. It is possible to take meaningful steps in respect to the relationship between society and the state and toward equality, freedom and human rights. However, both mentalities upon which modernism is built perceive social heterogeneity as a threat -- and, more importantly, do not know how to manage it. Of course, we cannot consider authoritarianism and relativism as equal. Authoritarianism is an approach that ensures homogeneity by force, while relativism favors tolerance towards diversity and recognizes almost infinite freedom for diversity. But that tolerance is not apparent in the cultural identities in the public sphere. The modern liberal West recognizes the diversity and differences of individuals who have similar lifestyles and worldviews to the European mainstream, and do not show a tendency to become a separate community within the public sphere.
“Well-educated” Europeans feel a drive toward homogenization when they detect the occupation of their public sphere by a different community. Those who consider themselves liberal, tolerant and emphatic can, in this case, move toward a racist and authoritarian mindset without feeling that this is a contradiction. The Western world is able to generate democracy out of diversity in cases where cultures are fairly similar, but the problem in today's world is different. The forerunners of modernity are not sufficient for the establishment of democracy in the absence of cultural similarities. We are living in a period where Europe, while not actually representing the most advanced possible values, possesses the most advanced values in practice. Arrogance and self-satisfaction will diminish Europe's ability to reconstruct the future. The Western world needs a change of mindset. It has to ready itself for a non-hierarchical, pro-freedom, pro-equality and heterogonous world. If Europe appreciates this need soon, any future assaults committed by other Breiviks will become meaningless. Otherwise, the West will produce more such “heroes.”
