The changing image of the Kurds in Turkish cities: middle-class perceptions of Kurdish migrants in İzmir

ABSTRACT

Saraço?lu deals with the ways in which the Kurdish migrants living in the western cities of Turkey have been identified in middle-class discourse by certain pejorative labels and stereotypes. He argues that this new Kurdish image demonstrates the ethnicization of longstanding anti-migrant sentiments in Turkey. He develops and substantiates the argument by means of qualitative data gathered in a field study in ?zmir between June 2006 and July 2007. The study involved ninety in-depth interviews with middle-class individuals living in the city and explored their anti-Kurdish attitudes. Through a close analysis of two of the common stereotypes that these interviewees deployed in the interviews—namely, that the Kurds were ‘benefit scroungers’ and that they ‘disrupt urban life’— Saraço?lu explores the formation of the urban social context in which such perceptions have emerged. Close examination of the narratives of the middle-class respondents indicates that the development of a new image of the Kurds has occurred in an urban context shaped by the neoliberal transformation of Turkish cities, on the one hand, and the internal displacement of Kurdish migrants, on the other.     

Moderate Secularism, Religion as Identity and Respect for Religion

Political secularism takes many forms but a fundamental distinction is between radical and moderate kinds. The latter is a genuine secularism and not just a failure to take secularism to its logical conclusion. The failure to appreciate this obscures the secularism that exists in western Europe. Namely, an accommodation of organised religion which sees it as a potential public good or national resource (not just a private benefit), which the state can in some circumstances assist to realise—even through an 'established' church. I adumbrate five types of reasons the state might be interested in religion: truth, danger, utility, identity and respect. The challenge facing such secularism today is whether it can be pluralised or multiculturalised, in particular whether it can accommodate Muslims. A ground for optimism is the respect that some people, especially some Muslims, have for religions other than their own.     

The Monarchy,the State and Religion: Modernising the Relationships

Aspects of contemporary monarchy and government in relation to religion are out of step with contemporary society and require systematic reform. The removal of religious and gender discrimination in the arrangements for succession to the monarchy would be in conformity with modern anti‐discrimination attitudes. The monarchy should also consider stepping back from its religious role. The monarch has an official role as Supreme Governor of the Church of England but less than a quarter of the population identify as Anglican and in its current attempts to be inclusive the monarchy seeks to respect and support other religions whose beliefs and practices are at variance with those of the C of E and the general population. In Scotland a new settlement could be promoted by the disestablishment of the Church of Scotland (comparable to the situation in Wales and Northern Ireland) and the ending of separate Roman Catholic state education.     

Another Opportunity Lost? Victorian Labor's Enactment of Sustainability, 1999–2010

‘Sustainability’ provides the dominant frame for environmental policy debate, even though there is considerable debate to as to what sustainability is, why is it needed, and how can it be progressed. From 1999 through to 2010, Victoria was governed by Australian Labor Party (ALP) led governments that, at times, actively pursued the goal of sustainable development. This culminated in the stated ambition for Victoria to be ‘world leaders in environmental sustainability debate and practice’. This paper explores the way in which sustainability was enacted by Victorian Labor while in government. The evidence indicates that the potential of Victorian Labor's vision was never realized, and that it failed to significantly reform the neoliberal policy settings it inherited.     

Three theses about political theology: some comments on Seyla Benhabib’s ‘return of political theology’

In this short piece, I explore Seyla Benhabib’s suggestion that hijab controversies can be interpreted as a return of political theology. I first clarify what political theology is; I then ask what it means to talk about a ‘return’ to it in relation to hijab controversies; and I finally ponder how much of the return of political theology is a genuine challenge to secular political theory.     

Did Secularism Win Out? The Debate over the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill

The debate over the 2008 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill marks the latest in a series of conflicts between secularism and religion in the public sphere. The failure of religiously motivated campaigners to alter the Bill's most substantive and controversial provisions, however, should not be seen as a victory for a homogeneous secular camp. Although campaigners motivated by religious belief were almost universally opposed to the Bill, secular campaigners reflected a more varied mix of opinion. Moreover, the degree of organisation and mobilisation shown by the religious lobby during the course of the debate, are a sign that attempts to secure a greater role for religion in the public sphere are likely to remain a prominent feature of British political life.     

Multiculturalism in one country?

Abstract

This review is persuaded by Modood's account of what multiculturalism should look like in the early twenty-first century underpinned as it is by well-made critiques of liberalism and radical secularism. But is far less convinced that Modood has successfully charted a strategy that will achieve his desired outcome of a flexible process of integration and a Britishness to which all can belong.     

Neutrality of what?

In what sense should a liberal state be neutral between the conceptions of the good held by its citizens? Traditionally, liberals have provided two different answers to this question. Some have adopted a conception of neutrality of justification, while others a conception of neutrality of effects. Recently, Alan Patten has defended an alternative, novel and sophisticated, conception of neutrality – neutrality of treatment. In this article I assess whether neutrality of treatment is, in fact, a superior conception of neutrality. I try to show that neutrality of treatment suffers from the very same weaknesses that Patten attributes to its alternatives and that, overall, neutrality of justification, properly construed, provides a more promising account of both the sense in which a state ought to be neutral and of the object of neutrality. Finally, I argue for a broader account of the normative bases of liberal neutrality than the one proposed by Patten. This account includes, beyond considerations of fairness, a relational principle of equal standing.