NOTES TO PAGES 522–36- Ibid.
- See, e.g., Pena-Ruiz, ‘‘Laı ̈cite ́et e ́galite ́, leviers d’e ́mancipation,’’ and Pierre Tevanian, ‘‘Une
loi antilaı ̈que, antife ́ministe et antisocial,’’ both inLe Monde diplomatique, February 2004. - Nawal al-Saadawi, ‘‘An Unholy Alliance,’’Al-Ahram Weekly, February 18, 2004.
- Vincent Geisser,La Nouvelle Islamophobie(Paris: La De ́couverte, 2003), 31; emphasis in
original. Geisser cites theNouvel Observateurfor the picture now favored by much of the media:
‘‘Are these young girls from the St. Etienne suburb—a sinister territory controlled by fundamental-
ists—manipulated? They are, at any rate, indoctrinated by an active Muslim environment. In the
course of their conversation, one learns that they benefit from educational help from an association
close to the UOIF, that one of the girls goes every year to Nie`vre in order to follow courses of
religious education given by Saudi Arabian imams, that another devotes every Sunday to religion:
recitation in the morning, the study of texts in the afternoon. They often go to the Islamic book-
shops and to the new Association of Emancipated French Muslim Women in Lyon, and they talk
calmly of militants of the pietistic Tabligh movement’’ (ibid., 32). - ‘‘Il ne peut se contenter d’un retrait des affaires religeuses et spirituelles [It cannot limit
itself to withdrawal from religious or spiritual matters]’’ (Laı ̈cite ́et Re ́publique, 32). - Tevanian, ‘‘Une loi antilaı ̈que, antife ́ministe et antisocial,’’ 8.
- ‘‘L’avis e ́nonce que le principe de laı ̈cite ́impose que ‘l’enseignement soit dispense ́dans le
respect, d’une part, de cette neutralite ́par les programmes et par les enseignants, d’autre part, de la
liberte ́de conscience des e ́le`ves’ [The decree states that the principle of secularism demands that
education be provided respecting, on the one hand, by that neutrality on the part of the programs
and the teachers, and on the other hand, the freedom of conscience of pupils]’’ (Laı ̈cite ́et Re ́-
publique, 66). - A well-known example of this is the ambivalence with which many people in rural France
regard Parisians.
Peter van der Veer, Pim Fortuyn, Theo van Gogh, and the Politics of Tolerance in the
Netherlands
note: First published inPublic Culture18, no. 1 (2006): 111–25;2006 Duke University
Press. Reprinted by permission; all rights reserved. I want to thank Claudio Lomnitz, Markha Va-
lenta, and my audience when I presented the argument at the New School in February 2005 for
incisive comments.
- These events have been reported in the Dutch newspapers. A general description has been
given in a book by the Dutch journalist Hans Wansink,De Erfenis van Pim Fortuyn na de opstand
van de kiezers(Amsterdam: Meulenhoff, 2004). - I am thinking here not only of such great and classy entertainers as Wim Kan and Wim
Sonneveld, but also of more low-class entertainers, such as Albert Mol and Andre van Duyn. - On the process of globalization and its discontents in Holland, see Peter van der Veer,
‘‘Nederland bestaat niet meer,’’ inIslam en het ‘‘beschaafde Westen’’(Amsterdam: Meulenhoff,
2002). - For a general description of these events, see Kees Schuyt and Ed Taverne, ‘‘1950: Welvaart
in zwart-wit,’’Nederlandse cultuur in Europese context(The Hague: Sdu, 2004).
5.In het zicht van de toekomst—Sociaal en Cultureel Rapport(The Hague: Sociaal-Cultureel
Planbureau, 2004).
PAGE 772772.................16224$ NOTE 10-13-06 12:34:39 PS