, , ,

Banning the burka would be stupid and pointless virtue signaling, which no identitarian should support. Merkel’s sudden decision to support such a ban may be political opportunism, or she may argue it is necessary to preserve secular Germany, but it does not matter. The problem of Muslims has never been that they are religious. The problem, rather, is they are very different in historical and racial terms—and hence they represent an existential problem for both Germany and European civilization as a whole. Banning the burka, then, is like giving a band aid to a man with a collapsing lung. Even if there is cause for the band aid, it does not treat cause, only the effect.

But, insofar that the burka is an effect, it is not a bad effect altogether. It is not like the mass rapes of European women on the streets of Cologne, Hamburg, and elsewhere; these were also effects of that existential problem. It is instead a symbol of religious tradition, devotion, and female virtue and modesty. I do not forget that these traditions are different than European traditions, but I nonetheless find these to be admirable. Damning these traditions requires that we also damn our traditions as Europeans, so social degeneracy and destruction is the only result.

Moreover, for identitarians, the burka can have positive social consequences. The burka acts as a mechanism for identity as a juxtaposition of “us” versus “them.” The people who wear burkas are signaling that they are not part of our ethno-cultural community (“us”) but part of their own (“them”). In this sense, the burka makes obvious more substantial differences between Europeans and Middle Easterners. It is similar to how difference in skin color makes the differences between Europeans and Africans more obvious. Liberal cosmopolitans (e.g., Merkel) would like to erase these differences to ensure that we are all part of the raceless and cultureless machine of international Capitalism. For these cosmopolitans, then, it is a very ethical thing to ban the burka.