Murder in Amsterdam: The Death of Theo Van Gogh and the Limits of Tolerance

The Netherlands has always had a well-deserved reputation for tolerance, they have been cited by many as being the most liberal country in Europe if not the world. Against this background, Dutch-born author Ian Buruma explores why, in 2004, filmmaker Theo van Gogh was shot and stabbed to death by a certain Mohammed Bouyeri. The ostensible reason was that Bouyeri, a Dutch Muslim of Moroccan descent, was deeply insulted by a film made by van Gogh and feminist Somali-born politician Ayaan Hirsi Ali regarding the mistreatment of women under Islam. On the whole, the non-Muslim Dutch were shocked and outraged, while Muslims simply had vague feelings of "understanding" for Bouyeri. Theo van Gogh was a classic "dorpsgek" or village idiot. Being of Dutch descent myself, I know the type only too well. As a provocateur, van Gogh was an equal opportunity insultor; he offended Christians, Jews, Muslims and about every other social grouping. In his film "Submission," which angered the Muslim community, there were verses of the Koran projected onto the body of a naked woman. It was a puerile and tedious excercise, the kind of thing that gives art a bad name. If he had been as clever as he thought he would have known there would be consequences - the provocation worked only too well. Mohammed Bouyeri was rather typical of European-born Muslims; in fact, he had many similarities with the 7/7 and Madrid bombers, and also, for that matter, the 9/ll bombers, particularly Mohammed Atta. He enjoyed the freedoms of Holland while at the same time feeling estranged from the mainstream. Dating, playing soccer, and smoking pot had its attractions, but when he saw that women had the same rights, he retreated to the mosque and started listening to the radical imams. The situation of Bouyeri is a microcosm of what is happening with Muslims throughout Europe. In Holland Muslims number 1 million out of a population of 16 million, but in cities they comprise as high as 40 percent of the populaton - and this percentage is growing because they have higher birth-rates. How does a liberal democracy assimilate a culture that fundamentally rejects the rights of women, not to mention civil rights in general? Buruma gives no easy answers, because there are none. Being Dutch and living in the shadow of Anne Frank, Buruma is well aware of minority rights. He feels - like Amsterdam mayor Job Cohen - that the Dutch could do more to accommodate Muslims, for fear of alienating this large minority. For my part, I think they have already taken the multicultural ideal too far and exposed its weaknesses. If all cultures are equal, the minority culture will feel no need to assimilate into the dominant culture and soon enough you have sectarian strife. The ideals of the Enlightenment should be adhered to and Muslims should be more accommodating. The ideal that all human beings have the same rights regardless of race, sex, or religion should be paramount. These rights should be

In November of 2004 on a street in Amsterdam, Mohammed Bouyeri, an angry young Muslim man, shot and killed the controversial Dutch film maker Theo van Gogh, great grand-nephew of the artist Vincent. Theo van Gogh had recently completed a movie with the Dutch Politician Ayaan Hirsi Ali titled "Submission" which Bouyeri considered an "insult to the Prophet Mohammed". After shooting van Gogh in broad daylight and in the view of several witnesses, Bouyeri took out a knife and cut his victim's throat, then calmly walked away to a nearby park where he was captured by the police. The murder horrified Holland, a country which prides itself on its tolerance of immigrants, and sent shock waves around Europe where many countries have provided haven to Muslim immigrants. The author returned to Holland to investigate the murder and to try to uncover its larger implications. His book is not so much a story of a murder as it is the story of the people of post-war Holland. There was in Holland according to Buruma, a sense of guilt as a result of their dismal record in protecting Dutch Jews from the Nazis during WWII. One consequence has been their liberal immigration policy attempting to "make up" for that, and as a result they have seen a massive influx of Moroccans and Turks and the establishment of a multicultural Christian/Muslim/Kurdish society in Holland. Ian Buruma, already a well respected writer has done a masterful job of investigating and reporting on this major shift in Dutch society. This book ranks with the very best I have ever read, and sounds a warning bell for those who might favor the development of muticulturalism in America.

Fantastic, to start things off. Buruma's writing, always exceptional, is at its top form. While not a long book, it is very much distilled and disciplined writing. For me, the end result was that it seemed much longer. Or, maybe a more accurate word is "bigger," as it is in may ways a big book. The subject he tackles may be the defining theme of this century, which began with a horrible cataclysm in Manhattan five years ago. The idea of preserving European culture continually resurrects the traumas of the Second World War and Nazi philosophy of racial purity. How does modern Europe preserve itself without appearing to regress to racial aversion which has been so systematically eradicated from European politics, philosophy, arts and letters since 1945? Stay tuned for the answer. Buruma courageously confronts the issues swirling around the subject of Islamic values, modern European liberalism/socialism, accommodating anti-democratic values in a democracy. Just yesterday, the Netherlands took steps to outlaw the veil in public places, which will ensure more spilled blood for sure. What I admired was Buruma's refusal to let the Dutch off the hook for the part they have played in creating their mess. The passages about modern Dutch politics were engrossing, as I know less than nothing about the subject. The chapter on Pim Fortuyn was a masterpiece, he seems like the archetypal figure in this unfolding drama. Not that Buruma is suggesting this is a Dutch problem, or that the Dutch are in the wrong. It is a world problem, with no easy answers getting worse daily as our own malevolent leaders insist on dealing with the problem with simplicity and deception, invasion and subjection, distortion and lunacy.

I had come back from Amsterdam and was looking for something to read that might make sense of this very cosmopolitan city with its seeming open door to the world. I couldn't have been more satisfied than with Buruma's engaging book that goes far beyond the death of Theo van Gogh in examining the natue of tolerance in this fair city and the greater Dutch Republic. The events which Buruma describes are still fresh, and he writes as if composing a blog on the Internet with a steady stream of thoughts and observations, along with pithy interviews with leading Dutch poltical and cultural figures, who all have something to say on the subject of Theo van Gogh and his killer, Mohammed B. The author links the death of Pim Fortuyn with that of Van Gogh, in showing how sudden celebrity brings with it repercussions that the Dutch seemed to feel didn't exist in their liberal society. But then Holland has not always been such a liberal-minded country, and Buruma explores some of the historic roots that led to the steady influx of immigrants that have come to dominate cities like Amsterdam, much to the chagrin of the proud Dutch. The book is an antidote to the smugness of European liberalism that seems to feel that assimilation is natural in a secular democratic society. Events such as the deaths of Theo Van Gogh and Pim Fortuyn not only wipe the smiles off complacent faces, but send shock waves through the country. Buruma demonstrates how illiberal liberals can be when confounded by the nature of successive waves of immigrants who hold onto their religious beliefs instead of adopting the conventions of the new secular state. Buruma illustrates that for many immigrants religion is all they have to help them face the overwhelming challenges of a new society, and when confronted by the likes of Theo Van Gogh, best known for his unapologetic confrontational style, they not only shout back, but sometimes fire back. Buruma seems to argue that you can't have it both ways. The ugly backlash against the Muslim community, particularly the Moroccans, that followed the death of Theo Van Gogh, was largely driven by ignorance. Dutch had long held the Moroccan community in contempt, and an event like this seemed to validate their viewpoint. Mohammed, or "Mo" as he was derisively called in the press, became the poster child for the misplaced Moroccan immigrant who couldn't adjust to Dutch Society. The only problem was that "Mo" was as Dutch as many Dutch, having been born in Holland to an immigrant father. He bore more similarity to the alienated youths that shot up Columbine High School in Colorado than he did an unreconstructed immigrant. Buruma shows that tolerance does indeed have its limits, especially when it really isn't tolerance at all, but rather a resentful acceptance of the immigrant nation Holland has become. In recent years, Social Democrats have suffered at the polls, and upstart political parties like that formed by Pim Fortuyn were able to s

Buruma shows how in the Netherlands, genuine concerns about the behavior of Muslim immigrants often do not get expressed due to concerns about accusations of "Islamophobia." After all, slanders against the Jews in the 1930s and 1940s proved to be extremely damaging to European society. But the author shows that in this case, a few simple truths need to be aired, even if they are unflattering to some people. As Buruma explains, Pim Fortuyn did that. He wanted all Dutch to be part of the Dutch community, not as some sort of fascist exclusivists but inclusivists who asked for loyalty towards common goals. That makes sense. While Jewish willingness to be loyal to Holland was manifest, many Muslims have been showing the opposite attitude. We also read about Hirsi Ali, who has indicated that we all need a film that casually spoofs Mohammed, much as the film "The Life of Brian" casually spoofed Jesus. Buruma's style is rather tame, but I think in this book, it is quite effective at raising concern about the effects of Muslim intolerance. He concludes that "what happened in this small corner of northwestern Europe could happen anywhere, as long as young men and women feel that death is their only way home." I often disagree with Buruma politically, but I recommend this book.