subscribe or follow us:                    

“Sensitivity”: The New Islamophobia

6 comments

Posted by Gonzo Times on Aug 31, 2010 in Around The Web | 6 comments

We need to be clear that the term “Islamophobia” is not something that is being brandished for political ends. It is not about demonizing people who hold views we disagree with. It is about challenging the larger political and intellectual climate that has made it acceptable to engage in blatant stereotyping, blanket accusations, smear campaigns based on guilt by association, and expressions of outright racism. It is about a discourse that has knowingly and intentionally fostered an environment that can only lead to more hate crimes and violent incidents. It is also about revealing the deep-seated bigotry that underwrites the claims made by opponents of Park51, as well as those opposed to other proposed mosques and cultural centers throughout the country.

The hate crime of stabbing a taxi driver because he identifies himself as Muslim is a clear expression of Islamophobia. Urinating on a prayer rug in a mosque while shouting “Terrorists!” is a clear expression of Islamophobia. Holding up a sign with a picture of a toilet and the words “This is a mosque,” as an “anti-Ground Zero Mosque” protester did at a recent rally, is a clear expression of Islamophobia. Claiming that the Park51 project “would consist of a Mosque for the worship of the terrorists’ monkey-god,” in the words of Mark Williams, chairman of the Tea Party Express, is a clear expression of Islamophobia.

But the demand that the Muslim community not exercise its rights to free speech and religious freedom out of “sensitivity” to those who died on September 11, 2001 is also a clear expression of Islamophobia. The “sensitivity” argument is not equivalent to the more violent expressions of anti-Muslim bigotry, but it is clearly related. It relies on linking those who have initiated the Park51 project with those who carried out the attacks on September 11, 2001. It implicitly or explicitly links all Muslims to terrorists and terrorism. And most blatantly of all, it relies on the argument that the mere presence of anything or anyone identified as “Muslim” near the site of the attacks somehow “dishonors the dead.”

via “Sensitivity”: The New Islamophobia | Dissident Voice.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

  • TheMuslimAgorist

    I appreciate what you’re doing, but to be fair, the latest updates are that the guy who urinated on the carpet in the Mosque was mourning his dead sister and so drunk he didn’t know he was in a Mosque. Reports of him screaming “Terrorist” were premature. Worshipers said he screamed slurs, not anti Muslim slurs. This explains it.
    http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/drunk_man_arrested_for_trespassing_in_queens_mosqu.php

    That aside… is their a term other than “Islamophobia” that can describe this stuff? It’s not fear. It’s hate that drives these bigots. We say Antisemitism, not Judeaphobia. Is there an equivalent for Muslims?

    • http://www.gonzotimes.com/ PunkJohnnyCash

      Many of what has been discussed has seen an abuse of language. I think many blanket terms are being brought out from all sides. Prejudice is present and that is often a better term for most of what is going on. In turn all the one side hears with any term like prejudice is ‘racism’ and they respond to this by bringing out a black friend who would share a prejudice or perspective as if this proves his prejudice is not prejudice or not the only word they hear ‘racism’.In the long run I think much of what is being said is tainted by these blanket terms. It is also being filtered through peoples perspectives of such terms and what they believe they mean which can be different fro many. This makes dialogue difficult. It also shuts down many before they even consider what is being said because they are unreceptive to certain terminology. So to find a more accurate term where should we look? Any suggestions? I’m all for it.

      As for the guy going pee perhaps you should post that at the original full article.

  • It’s me

    I’ll agree somewhat with TheMuslimAgorist. I’d say for the most part it’s Antisemitism, but there is probably some Islamophobia in there as well. It might be hard or impossible to tell.

    Islamophobia would be if the person is afraid of Muslims. Antisemitism would be if they hate them. So seems to me the majority would be Antisemitism.

    Regardless, seems like the majority is out for revense on Muslims. They want revenge for 9-11, thus they are condoning the invasion of another country.

    Then again, isn’t that what the whole US legal system is about? Trying someone for a crime, whether criminal or civil, is about revenge, since the crime isn’t currently taking place at the time of the trial (well, not usually). In the case of criminal, it’s trying to get punish someone for doing something wrong by locking them in a cage. Punishment isn’t justice.

  • TheMuslimAgorist

    I appreciate what you're doing, but to be fair, the latest updates are that the guy who urinated on the carpet in the Mosque was mourning his dead sister and so drunk he didn't know he was in a Mosque. Reports of him screaming “Terrorist” were premature. Worshipers said he screamed slurs, not anti Muslim slurs. This explains it.
    http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/…

    That aside… is their a term other than “Islamophobia” that can describe this stuff? It's not fear. It's hate that drives these bigots. We say Antisemitism, not Judeaphobia. Is there an equivalent for Muslims?

  • It's me

    I'll agree somewhat with TheMuslimAgorist. I'd say for the most part it's Antisemitism, but there is probably some Islamophobia in there as well. It might be hard or impossible to tell.

    Islamophobia would be if the person is afraid of Muslims. Antisemitism would be if they hate them. So seems to me the majority would be Antisemitism.

    Regardless, seems like the majority is out for revense on Muslims. They want revenge for 9-11, thus they are condoning the invasion of another country.

    Then again, isn't that what the whole US legal system is about? Trying someone for a crime, whether criminal or civil, is about revenge, since the crime isn't currently taking place at the time of the trial (well, not usually). In the case of criminal, it's trying to get punish someone for doing something wrong by locking them in a cage. Punishment isn't justice.

  • http://www.gonzotimes.com/ PunkJohnnyCash

    Many of what has been discussed has seen an abuse of language. I think many blanket terms are being brought out from all sides. Prejudice is present and that is often a better term for most of what is going on. In turn all the one side hears with any term like prejudice is 'racism' and they respond to this by bringing out a black friend who would share a prejudice or perspective as if this proves his prejudice is not prejudice or not the only word they hear 'racism'.

    In the long run I think much of what is being said is tainted by these blanket terms. It is also being filtered through peoples perspectives of such terms and what they believe they mean which can be different fro many. This makes dialogue difficult. It also shuts down many before they even consider what is being said because they are unreceptive to certain terminology.

    So to find a more accurate term where should we look? Any suggestions? I'm all for it.