‘How was your trip?’ Camp asked first off. 

‘Travelling, or more precisely, flying is just not what it used to be,’ I said. ‘It’s a common refrain that I hear over and over, especially in airports.’

‘I suppose it’s true. It’s definitely not the same as back in the seventies when you could smoke on the plane, gourmet meals were incentives to get travellers to book with that airline, seats were generous and tickets were certainly cheaper,’ Camp said. ‘That’s why I don’t go anywhere. It’s best right here at home.’

‘I remember flying on a Jumbo Jet and the upstairs was an open lounge. Also, there was virtually no security. No searches, no stripping down to your socks at the automated roll-cages, walking through the body scanner and practically being cavity searched. Thanks to Richard Reed, also known as the shoe bomber, who in 2001 tried unsuccessfully to blow up a transatlantic flight from Paris to Miami, millions of people have to take their shoes off at airport security checkpoints the world over until this day. Back in the day, the name on the ticket didn’t even have to be your own. I sold a ticket from Vancouver to Montreal to my friend Derek because I didn’t need it anymore and he got it from me for a bargain.

‘I remember. You could also post your tickets for sale in the newspapers’ classified columns.  And you could show up an hour before your flight time.’

‘Imagine that. These days you have to arrive 3 hours prior to your departing flight and after you passed all the checkpoint and security procedures and pointless searches for contraband like water bottles or too big a tube of toothpaste you get to sit in overcrowded waiting rooms. Shopping is reduced to so called ‘duty-free’ shops which are just shiny booze and perfume outlets.’ 

‘I remember the days when there was a bookstore or two at the airport. A Smith or a Hudson News. Now, a few best sellers are displayed between glamour mags and junk food.’

‘Yes, travelling is a different kettle of fish these days. Hours and hours of pointless waiting in one line or another, waiting on uncomfortable seats with armrests so nobody can lay down. Restaurants are twice as expensive as anywhere else. A pint of beer is twelve bucks, a small glass of wine sixteen dollars. What’s with that? I guess we’re all one-time, no-return customers. Let me tell you about our latest trip, from Toronto to Vancouver. Simple, right? Our flight was scheduled to leave at 10AM. We were at the airport at 6:30. Clare likes to be first in line. After we found where the domestic bag drop was we joined the queue for the poxy security, then sat at the wrong gate until we figured out that there was a gate change.’

‘Nothing like relaxing under pressure,’ Camp quipped. I ignored his remark.

‘Finally, we were allowed to board, along with 300 other people. We found our seats, as usual at the back since we don’t like to pay for upgrades or seat selection. I figure we all get to our destination at the same time. We were lucky to find a space to jam our bag in the overhead bin. We had a middle and an aisle seat back in row 38. There were 42 rows on this Airbus which is more comfortable than the Boing 737. We were almost celebrating that the window seat was going to remain empty which would have given us more space to sprawl. It was not to be. ‘I took a s sip from my pint. ‘Here comes the good part.’

A large, swarthy young man came panicky towards us, sweating profusely, because I think he had been at the wrong gate like us because there was a last-minute gate change or just late for some other reason. He also couldn’t speak much English. When the stewardess asked him if he was Italian, he proudly bellowed: ‘I am Greek.’ He then proceeded to jam his suitcase in the overhead bin, right in front of Clare, thereby thrusting his rather large and hairy belly into her face. Next, he dropped something on the floor and while bending over to pick it up exposed a dark hairy crack, deeper than the grand-canyon; a view that made Clare’s eyes water and she gagged but held it together. Barely. When he finally clambered into his window seat, beside me, since I had the middle, he spread his large legs to accommodate them in the narrow space ahead of him. I ended up with half the leg space. Remember he was also sweating.’

Camp grinned with unrestrained merriment. 

 ‘The scheduled time for takeoff had long since passed and there was nothing but silence on the intercom. Half an hour later, the pilot, I assumed, told us that there was a weight problem, as in too many bags loaded because of extra fuel since we had some serious headwinds to get through. As least some news although they left me baffled. What? Dump some fuel or luggage? Neither solution appealed to me. We finally left an hour late which caused all sorts of problems for passengers with connecting flights. ‘

‘How was the food?’ Camp had the audacity to ask.

‘ Camp there was no food on this Air Canada flight and the scant bistro menu for purchase was sold out by the time the food cart arrived at our seats. We made do with chips and nuts. It was after all only 5 hours from Toronto to Vancouver.’

‘Just then Vicky collected our empties and brought two fresh brews. She knew our routine by now. I asked her if she enjoyed flying.

‘Flying where?’

‘Just asking if by chance you had any thoughts about air travel these days.’

‘I hear that travelling is just not what it used to be from my mom but how would I know. I don’t go anywhere.’

‘I can tell you, it’s no fun anymore,’ I said. 

Muslim TikTok influencers are spreading ultraconservative, misogynistic content that receives millions of likes. Author Stefan Kaltenbrunner warns of a radicalization of the young immigrant generation in the German-speaking world.

As an Arabist and journalist, Stefan Kaltenbrunner has been dealing with Islamist extremism for years. For his book “Allah’s Powerful Influencers” (written together with Profil author Clemens Neuhold), the Austrian delved deep into the world of German-speaking Muslim preachers who may appear modern with baseball caps and expensive watches—but who promote ultraconservative, misogynistic, homophobic, and antisemitic ideas that also concern state security authorities. For these influencers, the headscarf in particular is considered a symbol of rejecting the West.

Mr. Kaltenbrunner, Switzerland is discussing a headscarf ban in schools, and in Austria such a ban for girls under 14 has been in place since the beginning of the year. How did that come about?

Across all parties, from left to right, there was a growing recognition that a liberal and open society has a responsibility toward children. The headscarf ban for girls under 14 is about ensuring they are not sexualized or subjected to religious coercion, but can develop freely.

Was there no significant opposition?

There was. The Islamic Religious Community in Austria wants to challenge the law before the Constitutional Court. They consider it discriminatory. They believe many girls wear the headscarf voluntarily and can decide for themselves.

They invoke religious freedom. Wrongly?

Yes, because in reality the headscarf is a visible political signal. A red line must be drawn here.

What do you mean by that?

In the West, women have had to fight hard for their rights. No one should be allowed to dictate what they wear and what they do not—neither politicians nor a religious community. But a headscarf ban for children protects Western, liberal values in order to give young girls equal opportunities in a pluralistic society. Interestingly, many on the left oppose such a ban.

Indeed, the Swiss Social Democratic Party has just rejected a headscarf ban for female students and teachers with the slogan “For real self-determination—against anti-Muslim racism.”

A headscarf ban has nothing to do with Islamophobia. The vast majority of the Muslim community is secular or liberal; they do not make their daughters wear headscarves. It is about those who propagate a backward-looking to radical Islam. And for them, the headscarf and the role of women are central.

In what way?

The headscarf is the symbol of political, conservative Islam, which is gaining influence across Europe. It serves to make Islam visible, to claim space. That is why radical preachers, both online and offline, are almost obsessively concerned with it. Great pressure is exerted on women and girls to wear it, even though this is always denied. Many young girls told us they comply so their brothers or classmates will leave them alone. Those who take it off are insulted and threatened.

In your book, you describe how an ultraconservative-extremist Islam has become the new normal on TikTok. Is it really that bad?

Yes, because the sheer amount of such content is incredible—and we are talking only about the German-speaking region. It shocked us that teenagers who grew up in Austria, Germany, or Switzerland and have all the opportunities and freedoms of a multicultural society choose to hate the West. State security officials consider the scene to be growing and threatening.

Why does this extremist ideology resonate?

Many of the new preachers do not appear with long beards, but rather hip, wearing sneakers, baseball caps, and Rolex watches—they seem cool like rappers or gangsters. The superstars among them have over 600,000 followers; their posts receive millions of likes. I don’t know how many soccer stars in Switzerland can keep up with that. The preachers may seem modern, but their messages are radical, homophobic, and antisemitic. And they promote a maximally backward image of women.

What is their main message?

Muslims are discriminated against, oppressed, and not accepted in the West. Ultimately, their aim is to divide society; it’s about “us versus them.” Islam is elevated to a question of identity, as a distinction from the majority society. Emancipation is portrayed as an attack by unbelievers on Islam, and any veil or burkini ban certainly is. When 13- and 14-year-olds see such videos daily on their smartphones, it is not surprising that they insult classmates without headscarves as “whores,” as has become common in some schools.

What exactly is said in the videos?

At first glance, the preachers spread simple messages about what is “permitted” and what is “forbidden” in Islam, what is halal and haram. For example: Is it allowed to beat your wife? Who may see her hair? May a strange man sit next to her on the bus? The problem is: these commandments and prohibitions contradict a liberal society and are highly hostile to democracy.

Do you have an example?

Recently, a German preacher was asked whether Muslims are allowed to become teachers. His answer was: No, because teachers as civil servants must swear an oath to the constitution. “We don’t do that,” he said; Muslims do not accept the unjust state of Germany. They are also not allowed to work in a supermarket because alcohol is sold there, and women may not work in a room with men. How is integration supposed to succeed like that?

“Yes, how?”

That is precisely not the point. The message is: We are Muslims and want nothing to do with non-Muslims, the unbelievers. One must realize that this message is constantly seeping into the minds of many Muslim teenagers.

It is not only men who promote this; there are also so-called halal influencers. Why?

They celebrate ultraconservative, radical Islam as a new lifestyle. In glossy videos, the ideal of the chaste and veiled Muslim woman is propagated as a counter-model to the “sinful” Western woman. The idea that Islam particularly honors women is now also advocated by a growing number of converts, including many academics.

For example?

The most well-known hijabista is the German Hanna Hansen, who used to be a model, then a boxer, and now proselytizes for a radical Salafist Islam. She has over 500,000 followers. Hansen says things like “Only Islam gave women their rights” or that the glittering world of the West will end in the abyss.

Aren’t these just extreme examples?

No. With their content, Islamist influencers and hijabistas reach millions of girls and boys and thereby shape the religious awareness of a young digital generation. And October 7 gave them even more momentum. Radical preachers could say: Now you see that we are right—they are killing us, they are oppressing us, they are imperialists. This victim narrative is now even gaining traction in secular circles.

Is that why there is so little criticism from within their own ranks? This backward-looking, divisive stance must displease many Muslims as well.

Secular Muslims are being taken hostage by the small but extremely loud minority. However, October 7 also had a unifying effect here; it normalized extremism. A German state security official told us that October 7 has led to far more radicalization in the Muslim community than 9/11, and that this will occupy us for decades. But even before that, Muslims with differing views knew that they would quickly be branded as unbelievers if they voiced criticism. And that it can be life-threatening: many critics of Islam require police protection—because of an opinion that in a liberal society is absolutely legitimate and must be protected. At the same time, there are no mosques that need to be guarded—unlike synagogues.