The horrific shooting at the office of Charlie Hebdo today—and reports that the terrorists spoke perfect French—will once again raise questions about radicalism among Europe’s growing Muslim community and identity. In 2005, I and some colleagues at the American Enterprise Institute visited the Netherlands for a conference examining Islam and democracy in Europe. At a meeting with some members of the Rotterdam city council, we asked about what it was to be Dutch. Surprisingly, the question seemed to stump the politicians. To require Dutch competency would be racist, it was explained, as would forcing Dutch liberalism upon illiberal communities which might restrict the freedom of their wives or daughters. Moral and cultural equivalency had won the day. Then again, this Europe largely acknowledged its anchorless identity when many of its countries began using euro bank notes and coins in 2002. In order to avoid favoring any one country or making anyone feel deprived, the currency featured fictional designs of buildings and monuments rather than actual ones.
History shapes identity, and there’s nothing illiberal about standing up for certain values, nor should it be racist to understand citizenship as a compact, one in which the benefits of citizenship are bestowed only upon those who accept the supremacy of the values around which that nation is organized. The same holds true for the United States. American citizenship should be no entitlement (hence the problem of jus soli citizenship which prioritizes accidents of geography above values). For all the talk of amnesty in the United States today, no one—Jewish, Christian, or Muslim—should win citizenship or even residency if they do not uphold the supremacy of the constitution above all else in daily, communal life. Spiritualism, morals, and values can be an individual choice, but not something that should be imposed on others. Free speech should be paramount, whether Islamists like it or not. Most Americans—religious or otherwise—understand that, but European society as a whole has been rudderless and, as Tom Wilson notes, “is losing its soul.”
The contributions of European civilization to society have been rich, indeed, disproportionately so. There is much for which Europeans should be proud. Let us hope that the European response to the Charlie Hebdo shooting will be retrenchment on the importance of free expression rather than self-censorship. Europeans should recognize that the dark clouds of fascism or totalitarianism accompany censorship. Perhaps it might be time for every newspaper and every website in Europe to replicate the cartoons and essays in the latest Charlie Hebdo edition in order to declare forthright that Islamists and terrorists cannot silence Europe.
Likewise, it is long past time for Europeans to declare for what they stand. Enough with fictional designs on Euro notes. Let each note be a monument to real cathedrals, castles, and monuments. If a conservative and intolerant Muslim (these are not synonymous) in Europe wants to buy bread, let him or her hand over a five or ten euro note sporting an image of Notre Dame or an image of the Battle of Tours.
Europe should be diverse, tolerant, and multi-confessional. If migrants want to live in Europe—and if European society wishes to have them—then they should come for Europe’s freedom, and not simply for its welfare. If they will not accept European freedoms and liberalism, then they should seek to make their lives in societies which mirror their own value systems. If Europe does not understand that there can be no compromise on basic values, then today’s attack is a harbinger of more tragedy to come.