Why Muslim Integration Fails in Christian-Heritage Societies

Amid mounting fears of violent Islamic extremism, many Europeans ask whether Muslim immigrants can integrate into historically Christian countries. In a groundbreaking ethnographic investigation of France’s Muslim migrant population, Why Muslim Integration Fails in Christian-Heritage Societies explores this complex question. The authors conclude that both Muslim and non-Muslim French must share responsibility for the slow progress of Muslim integration. Claire Adida, David Laitin, and Marie-Anne Valfort found that in France, Muslims are widely perceived as threatening, based in large part on cultural differences between Muslim and rooted French that feed both rational and irrational Islamophobia. Relying on a unique methodology to isolate the religious component of discrimination, the authors identify a discriminatory equilibrium in which both Muslim immigrants and native French act negatively toward one another in a self-perpetuating, vicious circle. Disentangling the rational and irrational threads of Islamophobia is essential if Europe hopes to repair a social fabric that has frayed around the issue of Muslim immigration. Muslim immigrants must address their own responsibility for the failures of integration, and Europeans must acknowledge the anti-Islam sentiments at the root of their antagonism. The authors outline public policy solutions aimed at promoting religious diversity in fair-minded host societies.

About the Author :
Claire L. Adida is Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of California, San Diego. David D. Laitin is the James T. Watkins IV and Elise V. Watkins Professor of Political Science at Stanford University. Marie-Anne Valfort is Associate Professor of Economics at the Paris School of Economics and Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne.

Review :
Using a variety of resources, research methods, and an innovative experimental design, the authors contend that while there is no doubt that prejudice and discrimination against Muslims exist, it is also true that some Muslim actions and cultural traits may, at times, complicate their full integration into their chosen domiciles. This book is timely (more so in the context of the current Syrian refugee crisis), its insights keen and astute, the empirical evidence meticulous and persuasive, and the policy recommendations reasonable and relevant.-- (07/01/2016) The authors of this compelling, innovative, policy-relevant study move the debate about 'who hates whom' out of the realm of opinion and conjecture. Do Muslims, or people presumed to be Muslim, face significant discrimination in historically Christian societies, simply because they are believed to be Muslim? Everyone has an opinion on this question, whose importance is demonstrated by newspaper headlines on an almost daily basis. Using a full palette of social science methods--interviews, survey data, experimental games--Claire Adida and her colleagues make a persuasive case that anti-Muslim discrimination is a significant social phenomenon, not just in France (the focus of their research), but across historically Christian societies, including the United States. The problem, they warn, will not solve itself, and they conclude by offering a comprehensive set of policy recommendations. Their book deserves the attention of citizens, scholars, and policy-makers.--Anne Sa'adah, Dartmouth College This top-level work by three top-level social scientists shows that there is discrimination against Muslims on grounds of their religion, but also that Muslims are to be partially blamed for hostility against them. Spiked with the provocative message that multiculturalism does not improve the situation, this is a milestone in the debate over failing Muslim integration in Western societies.--Christian Joppke, University of Bern