What is Wrong With the Swiss Minaret Ban?

In Jonathan Seglow & Andrew Shorten (eds.), Religion and Political Theory Secularism, Accommodation and the New Challenges of Religious Diversity. pp. 175-194 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper, we aim to complement and extend Cécile Laborde’s argument against the Swiss minaret ban, which emphasizes the exclusion of Muslim citizens from equal national belonging. We argue that if we take seriously the normativity that is embedded in the Swiss direct democratic context (Carens 2004), especially in its ability to determine the substance of national belonging, then the symbolic exclusion of Muslims from political belonging is more relevant than the former with regard to democratic justice. Section 1 defines basic notions and presents some arguments that were circulated in Swiss public political debate during the referendum campaign. Section 2 will present extant arguments in normative political philosophy about the ban. Section 3 expands our argument, which can be summarized as follows: the double absence of recognition of Muslims as (i) equal autonomous subjects and (ii) as political agents calls into question the legitimacy of the direct democratic process that led to the ban, making it unjust by the standards implicit within democratic practices in Switzerland.

Author's Profile

Esma Baycan-Herzog
University of Geneva

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-01-08

Downloads
181 (#74,084)

6 months
90 (#49,408)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?