The success of the Swiss popular initiative to ban the construction of minarets has energized the Islamophobes in Germany. Henryk Broder, writing in the conservative daily Die Welt, is ecstatic at this victory of direct democracy, Even more, Broder sees the Swiss vote as slap in the face of the liberal press he so despises:
Unabhängig davon, wie man das Ergebnis bewertet – nicht die Moslems
sind die Verlierer, die niemand in der Schweiz daran hindert, ihre
Religion zu praktizieren, es sind die Gutmenschen, die eine andere
Kultur immer verteidigenswerter finden als die eigene, die
Trittbrettfahrer, die schon immer für totalitäre Versuchungen anfällig
waren,(Regardless of how one interprets the results, it is not the Muslims who lost, since no one in Switzerland is preventing them from practicing their religion. Rather it is the "do-gooders" who lost – those who would rather come to the defense of cultures other than their own, the freeloaders who are always tempted by totalitarian ideals.)
The winners in the plebiscite were the forces of fear and intolerance, the same forces that Henryk Broder always supports in everything he writes. The right-wing populism that Broder nurtures is gathering steam in Europe and in the US. If left unchecked, it will surely devour its champion, Henryk Broder
The New York Times outlines what is at stake here:
First, xenophobic and, specifically, Islamophobic sentiment is much
more widespread than even the most pessimistic observers had thought.
Opinion polls in the run-up to the referendum consistently showed a
majority of voters to be opposed to the ban.How wrong they
were. In the privacy of the voting booth, silent prejudices found their
voice. The situation is probably similar across Europe; the success of
far-right parties in the recent European Parliament elections certainly
suggests so. Indeed, the only surprise in Switzerland was how surprised
we were.Second, the failure of civil society and the leading
mainstream political parties to campaign aggressively against the
referendum was clearly a big mistake.
The Times forgot to mention another failure, namely, the journalist Trittbrettfaher like Broder who misuse their pulbic platform to nourish the silent prejudices.

0 comment
I think it is wrong to interpret the referndum as “fobic”, as long as it is possible to read the views of those who cast the votes. Their reasons are not in any sense “fobic” og irrational, on the contrary. They just adress something else than the religion.
They are afraid of the sharia. This fear may be “unfounded”, but no one as far as I have seen has tried to show this. Instead it is more important to use the event as evidence in campaigns against “the right”. While failing at the same time to identifiy that the political use of religion in case of sharia represents exactly the extreme, authoritarian “right” – and that is why people are worried.
The Prime Minister of Turkey complicates things further when he labels minarets “our rockets” and mosques “our barracks”. Taleban, Al Qeida, Hamas, Iran and many other, significant players, is founded in the axiom that religion is politics when it comes to islam. This triggers a reaction towards those policies.
Is this not permitted? After the second world war and the cold war, all in a sudden europeans may not critizise totalitarian ideas?
People will not accept this, of course. The question is not if they may be silenced by large scale social conditioning or the law. The choice is whether the educated and reasonable adresses these difficulties, or leave it to the extremists to take care of.
France is about to take back the core values of the republic from Le Pen. In Denmark something similiar is on the way under the leadership of Villy Sovndal (Socialists Party).
Those who spend their energy brandishing fear of political violence and human degradation combined with firebrand antisemitism and hatred of “kafirs” as beind somehow “wicked”, are just wasting everybody’s time.
Dear writing “intellectuals”, who do you think you are to label everything and decide what the truth is. How do you know that “In the privacy of the voting booth, silent prejudices found their voice.” I thought that these are not “prejudices” but others’ people considerations. Some of those people much more educated and clever than you, “intellectuals”. What arrogance and chutzpah and real “misuse of the public platform” of NYT.
one may say the follwing
the authors of the christian bible were all jewish by birth.
and as fr the muslim kuran, about three-quarters of it is jewish.