I deleted practically all the comments on this quiz. It's a controversial topic, so if you decide to post please be extra polite. And both sides of the "argument" were equally impolite, so please don't take this as evidence that your "side" is right.
He doesn't delete comments for being controversial. He deletes them for being rude. Usually controversial issues get people fired up, and rudeness ensues.
He either doesn't know or doesn't care how rude he is, because there's comments of his going back almost a decade on here that are unabashedly rude and impolite.
In Russia it varies widely depending on methodology. Some people count simply "traditionally Muslim ethnicities", on the other hand there were some detailed researches asking also about practising a religion and including categories such as spiritual but not religious, religious but not organized (belonging to any church) etc.
Is the 10-17% for Russia in the European part of Russia only, or in Russia as a whole? Funny that Russia, as a transcontinental country counts, but Turkey does not.
Of course, Turkey is partially located in Europe, but to be considered a 'European country' like in the quiz title, it requires to have most of its population within the European continent. Thereby, it's a matter of fact not to include Turkey in any way. Every country belongs to a single continent, so does Turkey.
It is up to the quizmaker to decide, there's no ultimate answer, that's why it has to be noted in caveats. All I said is that there's a valid argument for such a decision, but it could be also different.
Parts of them stick out into the commonly accepted "borders" of Europe and Asia, specifically the border between European and Asian Russia. If you accept that border, then you can't start with a completely different border just because it's a different country.
Indonesia should be included because it has some embassies in European countries which is technically Indonesian soil on the European continent and Indonesia has WAY more Muslims than any of these countries.
I'm also surprised that Austria made it above Germany. I know that in terms of sheer numbers Germany must have more Muslims, but it's still somewhat surprise given that I hear all the time about Germany's huge Turkish population and their acceptance of refugees while I hear nothing about Austria's Muslim population.
Austria and Sweden surprised me. Is it because they're "safer" countries with a lower crime rate for migrants? Surprised UK didn't make the list - Probably because our population is already high
Yeah, large communities in London. But also here in Northern England, towns like Bolton, Blackburn, Oldham, Preston, Bradford, Leeds.. And then big cities like Manchester and Birmingham have many Muslim communities, so thought that rate might have been higher, but I guess as it is a percentage it could be as there's so many people in the UK to start with.
That's absolutely wrong. The State and public officials cannot ask about religious affiliation, but if you're a private person or entity, you can ask all you want.
It's not illegal. Racial surveys and polls are illegal, but it's not when it comes to religion. For instance, one of the last polls of Ifop was about the Laïcité in high school. There were stats about Muslims' feelings about Laïcité.
The Balkans, except some country (for example Serbia), are correct answers. It isn't a big surprise, if you know that, these countries were part of the Ottoman Empire. The other muslim countries are well-know imigration countries. Russia is interesting. The chechens and tatars are muslims, maybe because the islamic world has big impact on these territories. I'm curious about your opinion in this topic.
The parts of Russia that are majority-Muslim were also part of the Ottoman Empire, or else inhabited by other Muslim Turkic or central Asian people. Look at a map. You'll see Russia is closer to Turkey than Bosnia is.
If France was so worried about this they might have wanted to consider it before colonizing much of North Africa. Austria and Sweden are nice places to live with relatively low populations that receive a disproportionately high number of immigrants. In each of these three cases the present number of Muslims in the country I think points toward some success the country enjoyed in the present or recent past. Each new generation faces new challenges. If these societies are strong they will continue to thrive in the future.
People from Islamic countries do not share the values the majority of Europeans share. In my opinion, all religions are a barrier to progress, and Islam is currently the largest barrier to progress. I cannot see continued levels of Islamic immigration to Europe ending well.
Part of the problem I think is that Muslims tend to stick together in their host country, they stick to their culture and this is definitely a problem.
@purplememes "ancestors", like colonization was 1000 years ago. 80 years ago almost all Asia and Africa still belonged to Europe. This is the beautiful world Europeans created, immigration is part of it. Enjoy.
So what if they did? Was France there to punish Muslims for their imperial past? Or to set up an empire of its own? If the latter (and it obviously was the latter), well there are consequences for doing that. And no, it's not a punishment. It's just observing the fact of cause and effect.
In fact the opposite is true, up until the 20th century the vast majority of science and technology in Europe and the Middle east was create by religious sponsered organisations and individuals.
It was churches and mosques that promoted studies of medicine, astronomy, physiology and arcitecture through out the middle ages and early modern period.
Even the very concept of human rights and movements like abolisionism was created by christian sects like the quakers.
Just look at how many charitable organisations are christian or mulsim, the red cross, red crescent, save the children, city mission to name a few.
Even ethical consent is religious in origin.
Read a history book or two before making bland infactual statements.
@Bdubz - I can't recall saying people shouldn't be allowed to keep their culture?
It is not authoritarian to dislike cultures that are overwhelmingly homophobic and sexist and it is perfectly acceptable to wish that anyone who wants to immigrate to the West, will adopt the culture of their host country.
If you disagree with progressive values then I don't want you in my country.
On the one hand, I agree. I do not want more homophobia and misogyny. On the other hand, I think it's... bizarre... to presume that a Muslim MUST adopt the culture of their host country to not be homophobic and misogynistic.
Muslim cultures are not defined by either of these prejudices. They are common prejudices in many Muslim societies, but it is perfectly possible for an Egyptian immigrant for example to continue practicing Islam, speaking Arabic, cooking Egyptian meals, following Egyptian etiquette, and involving himself in the local Muslim community without being a homophobe or a misogynist, and such cases have happened. I would not consider that assimilation.
Also, while not as strongly as in literal Islamic theocracies, homophobia and misogyny are both present and healthy in many European societies. "Adopting host culture" could mean joining a far-right hate group (which is not unknown among ex-Muslims who "overcorrect", unfortunately).
This is very true and should seem obvious. A lot of Muslims in the United States adopt some of the values of their host countries without assimilating, especially after a generation or two. Most young, American-born immigrants are not massive racists or sexists or homophobes. In fact, many find common cause with minority groups because of a shared history of discrimination. This doesn't take away from their ethnic or cultural identity. I'm not a Muslim, but as a Bangladeshi, there are values that I find backward and outdated about American culture. There are also values I find backward and outdated about Bengali culture. I'm allowed to cherry pick what values I think are best from both cultures and I think I'm a better person because of it.
@mizu - Very surprising that religious institutions promoted learning in Europe. It's almost as if the vast majority of people were religious and such institutions had all the wealth...
Yeah, mizu, that's so off... Just because the Church controlled literally everything in Europe for so long doesn't mean that religion generally is not an impediment to scientific progress. Same goes for Islam in the Muslim world. This is like saying the United States and Soviet Union were chiefly responsible for keeping the number of nuclear warheads in the world low because in the 1990s they each agreed to destroy thousands of them while those war mongers in Switzerland didn't get rid of any.
Religion and Science until the 20th century always went hand in hand. People constantly talk about how religion has always worked against science which as pointed out is simply not true.
Yes religion has been used to impede scientific process but to no where near the level that it has supported it and certainly not to the level many often claim.
The idea that religion is bad for society and is responsible for all the evils of the world is wrong and not based on any reality.
They are a country according to the US and many other countries that believe in national autonomy. If you don't agree with that, well then they probably should be allowed to be a country so they can protect themselves and their culture.
The definition of a country is so broad that no one can tell defiantly if an area is actually a country and not an autonomous area/semi-autonomous area. If your definition is an area where all other "countries" accept it, then China and the Korean Peninsula just don't belong to anyone. If your definition is any autonomous area, then there are over 250 countries.
Cyprus is a European country because it's culturally closer to Europe, and has been for thousands of years. Its also on the Eur(asian) tectonic plate, and so must be European.
Back in Amsterdam for the first time in about 18 years. I knew that the number of Muslim immigrants had increased dramatically here in the interim, but actually seeing it it's almost shocking that The Netherlands doesn't show up on the quiz. The neighborhood I'm in in Western Amsterdam is quite large and has to be 90-98% Muslim - mostly Turks and Algerians. I was just in Austria about a week ago and didn't see nearly as many. Maybe other cities are different.
You can see the islamophobia increase as time goes on in the comments, but hey lets elect more extremist european leaders and spread more hatred towards eachother on this continent...
edit
generally true throughout history.
Otherwise, great quiz! The easiest was obviously Albania, due to the thumbnail...
Do you have quizzes like "Most Islamic Asian/African/American Countries"? That would be cool to know. :-)
Part of the problem I think is that Muslims tend to stick together in their host country, they stick to their culture and this is definitely a problem.
This is such a silly uneducated statement.
In fact the opposite is true, up until the 20th century the vast majority of science and technology in Europe and the Middle east was create by religious sponsered organisations and individuals.
It was churches and mosques that promoted studies of medicine, astronomy, physiology and arcitecture through out the middle ages and early modern period.
Even the very concept of human rights and movements like abolisionism was created by christian sects like the quakers.
Just look at how many charitable organisations are christian or mulsim, the red cross, red crescent, save the children, city mission to name a few.
Even ethical consent is religious in origin.
Read a history book or two before making bland infactual statements.
It is not authoritarian to dislike cultures that are overwhelmingly homophobic and sexist and it is perfectly acceptable to wish that anyone who wants to immigrate to the West, will adopt the culture of their host country.
If you disagree with progressive values then I don't want you in my country.
On the one hand, I agree. I do not want more homophobia and misogyny. On the other hand, I think it's... bizarre... to presume that a Muslim MUST adopt the culture of their host country to not be homophobic and misogynistic.
Muslim cultures are not defined by either of these prejudices. They are common prejudices in many Muslim societies, but it is perfectly possible for an Egyptian immigrant for example to continue practicing Islam, speaking Arabic, cooking Egyptian meals, following Egyptian etiquette, and involving himself in the local Muslim community without being a homophobe or a misogynist, and such cases have happened. I would not consider that assimilation.
Also, while not as strongly as in literal Islamic theocracies, homophobia and misogyny are both present and healthy in many European societies. "Adopting host culture" could mean joining a far-right hate group (which is not unknown among ex-Muslims who "overcorrect", unfortunately).
Yes religion has been used to impede scientific process but to no where near the level that it has supported it and certainly not to the level many often claim.
The idea that religion is bad for society and is responsible for all the evils of the world is wrong and not based on any reality.
.
Cyprus is a European country because it's culturally closer to Europe, and has been for thousands of years. Its also on the Eur(asian) tectonic plate, and so must be European.