Sunday, July 25, 2021   

  Home     About     Guest Editorials     Advertise     Blog     Site Map     Links     Contact      Subscribe RSS      Subscribe Email  
Home »

Anti-‘Islamisation’ float on German carnival parade

Anti-‘Islamisation’ float on German carnival parade

A papier-mache frog with the text “Islamisation” on its tongue and a butterfly with “Arab Spring” – a float on the traditional Rose Monday carnival parade in the western German city of Düsseldorf on 20 February.

Evidently there is something of a tradition of Islamophobic carnival floats in Germany.


  1. Indonesian Against Islamophobia by Christianophobia/Anti-Christ.

  2. Not a nice thing to write. But what do you expect from Germans?

  3. well I hardly think the demonizing of one particular ethnic/religious group in Germany is reason for concern….

  4. ^you know this is sarcasm, right?

  5. its a good looking float, let the germans have thier parade, no big deal.

  6. This float doesn’t depict Muslims as violent, it doesn’t really allege a conspiracy to destroy western culture, and it doesn’t incite violence. All it does is point out out that many of the revolutions in the Arab Spring, which democratic nations in the West had lauded, are giving way to theocracy rather than modes of governance the makers of the float would prefer, perhaps systems where the liberty of the individual is more fundamental than collectivist choices about religion. Islam isn’t the only religion to have theocracies built around it, but unless Rick Santorum gets elected, it’s the only religion currently having theocracies built around it. Does that mean that it’s Islamophobic to oppose theocracy? If so, then perhaps that term is used as a gag more than most of us subscribed to this page would like to admit.

    I am opposed to the “us-versus-them” type of talk that a lot of Westerners take to, and think that people should be treated as people rather than as representatives of a group, but to me it seems that this float is about political issues rather than about individuals. It’s one thing to respect someone’s personal choices about religion but quite another to say someone has the prerogative to force their own choices about religion on others en masse.

    If you want to see an example of a horrible float, look at the one linked in the article that depicts Muslims as terrorists.

  7. Well I suppose right-wing xenophobia IS traditional in parts of Germany and they do have to protect the putridy of the race. I would like t’ take a moment t’ point out that I am not racist towards Germans, I just despise the supremacists who set themselves up as seperate and superior t’ the rest of mankind inevitably the first things they exhibit are their limitations.

  8. Because obviously corporatism and foreign hegemony aren’t serious problems 😛

  9. Of course they are problems. But the solution to the problems created by the industrial and information ages aren’t going to be found in political structures founded in the dark ages. Many people are tempted to look there, though. The Arab Spring was a great opportunity to throw Western corporate interests off the backs of people in the Middle East and North Africa, but theocracy is probably not the best solution in the long term.

  10. unbelievable

  11. There is nothing wrong with arab spring. But we run to a major problem when Islam is misrepresented like this. It’s all over the frogs face! What are they trying to convey to public? That islam taking over would an evil thing? History shows that when decent devout Muslims ruled many parts of the world they granted peace, security and prosperity to everyone including those non Muslim faith.

  12. The idea that everything was golden and lovely under muslim rule is a main component in the gross delusion that a muslim theocracy or any theocracy would be a good thing. In a theocracy, the gov. thinks it is God. One has no rights under God.

    Hell yes Islam taking over the world would be an evil thing. We are now going to watch miserable theocracies being fastened on the long suffering muslim peoples.

    It will be like communism, people are going to have to do it until they realize it doesn’t work.

  13. I agree w/ u amina. Even i aint moslem 😉

  14. Theyre german hatred and bigotry are in their genetic make up. Germans are disgusting people but make great cars i must say.

  15. I’ll definitely grant that theocratic Islam has a better track record of religious tolerance than theocratic Christianity does. Europe invaded the Middle East to ‘take back the holy land’ and ‘kill the infidel’ under the Papacy, while the Ottoman Empire merely sought territory in its expansion into Europe, not forcing followers of other Abrahamic faiths to convert. To leave it at that paints a very rosy picture where the situation was much more draconian, though. While its true that anyone whose father was a Christian or a Jew was not require to convert to Islam, practitioners of polytheistic religions were faced with a choice between conversion and death or slavery. Anyone who converted away from Islam in the Ottoman Empire was executed for apostasy.

    So yes, compared to Christian or Jewish theocrats (or Aztec theocrats for that matter), Muslim theocrats have historically been rather benign. However, it becomes a much less favorable comparison if you put a Muslim theocracy next to a non-theocracy where full religious tolerance is part of the law. Enforcement of Sharia law from the outside, rather than making the personal choice to obey its precepts, restricts individual freedom unjustly.

  16. i lived in germany for a few years off and on it racist there

  17. Annon, I would have to agree with you. I am a Christian but look what happened in Spain under Catholic rule. In England the rulers belief set determined which religious group would be killed or jail. The problems with religious rule is people get to thinking they know God’s will and they act upon their beliefs or people feign belief in order to gain positions within the government from which they can oppress others in the name of that religion. One only has to look at Islamic countries to see that Islamic rule does not work. I fully support having religious men in government but I would never support having a religious government. I think the implications of the verse “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s” has more than one meaning, but one of its meanings is that there will and should always be a Caesar to render too.

    Religious governments, by nature, are not Godly and are generally oppressive rendering them to Caesar status albeit an evil Caesar as their rule reflects poorly upon God’s mandates. A secular government does not pretend to speak for or represent God but may still be influenced by men of religious beliefs. In this case the zealots wishes will be tempered by men, religious or otherwise reducing the threat of the oppression brought on by religious extremism.

Have your say!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>