|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
coler651

Joined: 24 Jul 2007
|
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:49 am Post subject: Why Islamophobia is a brilliant term |
|
|
WhyIslamophobi is a brilliant term
Dennis Prager
What do anti-Semitism, racism and Islamophobia have in common?
In fact, nothing.
An Afghan police officer frisks a man at a checkpoint in Ghazni province where South Korean hostages were kidnapped in Afghanistan, Sunday, July 29, 2007. Afghan President Hamid Karzai said Sunday the kidnapping of 22 South Koreans by Taliban militants was shameful and that abducting women in particular was against Islam. But according to Islamist groups, Western media and the United Nations, they have everything in common. Anti-Semites hate all Jews, racists hate all members of another race, and Islamophobes hates all Muslims.
Whoever coined the term "Islamophobia" was quite shrewd. Notice the intellectual sleight of hand here. The term is not "Muslim-phobia" or "anti-Muslimist," it is Islam-ophobia -- fear of Islam -- yet fear of Islam is in no way the same as hatred of all Muslims. One can rightly or wrongly fear Islam, or more usually, aspects of Islam, and have absolutely no bias against all Muslims, let alone be a racist.
The equation of Islamophobia with racism is particularly dishonest. Muslims come in every racial group, and Islam has nothing to do with race. Nevertheless, mainstream Western media, Islamist groups calling themselves Muslim civil liberties groups and various Western organizations repeatedly declare that Islamophobia is racism.
To cite three of innumerable examples: The Guardian published an opinion piece titled, "Islamophobia should be as unacceptable as racism"; the European Union has established the European Monitoring Center for Racism and Xenophobia; and the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation Commission of Australia notes that "Muslims have also been the target of racism in Australia, often referred to as Islamophobia."
Even granting that there are people who fear Islam, how does that in any way correlate with racism? If fear of an ideology rendered one racist, all those who fear conservatism or liberalism should be considered racist.
Of course, some may argue that whereas conservatism and liberalism are ideas, Islam is a religion, and while one can attack ideas, one must not attack religions. It is, however, quite insulting to religions to deny that they are ideas. Religions are certainly more than ideas -- they are theological belief systems -- but they are also ideas about how society should be run just as much as liberalism and conservatism are. Therefore, Islam, or Christianity, or Judaism, or Buddhism should be just as subject to criticism as conservatism or liberalism.
However, the only religion the West permits criticism of is Christianity. People write books, give lectures and conduct seminars on the falsity of Christian claims, or on the immoral record of Christianity, and no one attacks them for racism or bigotry, let alone attacks them physically. The head of the Anti-Defamation League announces that conservative Christians are the greatest threat to America today, and no one charges him with racism or Christianophobia.
The statement may be an expression of hysteria and of ignorance, but not of racism. But if one says that Islam does not appear compatible with democracy or that the Islamic treatment of women is inferior to the West's, he or she is labeled a racist Islamophobe.
An Afghan police officer frisks a man at a checkpoint in Ghazni province where South Korean hostages were kidnapped in Afghanistan, Sunday, July 29, 2007. Afghan President Hamid Karzai said Sunday the kidnapping of 22 South Koreans by Taliban militants was shameful and that abducting women in particular was against Islam. One might counter that maligning people for criticism is not only true of those who criticize Islam, it is also true of critics of Israel and of America -- the former, it is said, are immediately labeled "anti-Semitic" and the latter are immediately labeled "unpatriotic." Neither is true at all. Both are, and I use this word rarely, lies.
No one is labeled anti-Semitic for merely criticizing Israel. People are labeled anti-Semitic for denying Israel's right to exist, for siding with those who wish to exterminate it or for singling out the Jewish state alone among all the nations of the world for attacks that most other countries deserve far more.
And no one in any responsible capacity has called anyone "unpatriotic" just for criticizing America. Sen. Hillary Clinton claimed during the last Democratic presidential debate that the Defense Department called her "unpatriotic" for asking whether the Defense Department has a plan to withdraw American troops from Iraq. Yet the term "unpatriotic" was not only not used in the response to the senator, it was not even hinted at.
The fact remains that the term "Islamophobia" has one purpose -- to suppress any criticism, legitimate or not, of Islam. And given the cowardice of the Western media, and the collusion of the left in banning any such criticism (while piling it on Christianity and Christians), it is working.
Latest proof: This past week a man in New York was charged with two felonies for what is being labeled the hate crime of putting a Koran in a toilet at Pace College. Not misdemeanors, mind you, felonies. Meanwhile, the man who put a crucifix in a jar of urine continues to have his artwork -- "Piss Christ" -- displayed at galleries and museums. A Koran in a toilet is a hate crime; a crucifix in pee is a work of art. Thanks in part to that brilliant term, "Islamophobia." |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Alyallen

Joined: 29 Mar 2004 Location: The 4th Greatest Place on Earth = Jeonju!!!
|
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Very interesting piece...
It is confusing when a religion is tied up with an ethnicity or race. Throw in some PCism, stir the pot and wait for things to spin further away from reality... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003 Location: I walk along the avenue
|
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Latest proof: This past week a man in New York was charged with two felonies for what is being labeled the hate crime of putting a Koran in a toilet at Pace College. Not misdemeanors, mind you, felonies. Meanwhile, the man who put a crucifix in a jar of urine continues to have his artwork -- "Piss Christ" -- displayed at galleries and museums. A Koran in a toilet is a hate crime; a crucifix in pee is a work of art. Thanks in part to that brilliant term, "Islamophobia."
|
Some context to the Pace case...
| Quote: |
The incidents came amid a spate of vandalism cases with religious or racial overtones at the school. In an earlier incident on Sept. 21, the school reported another copy of the Quran was found in a library toilet, and in October someone scrawled racial slurs on a student's car at the Westchester County satellite campus and on a bathroom wall at the campus in lower Manhattan. Police did not connect Shmulevich to those incidents.
|
I would like to know more about the details of the other incidents, as well as the atmosphere that had been prevailing on the campus as a result of them. Because I think that could probably be a mitigating factor in classifying the recent desecration as a hate crime.
I don't know what type of graffiti was scrawled on the guy's car and on the washroom wall. However, imagine for a moment that it was something like...
We're gonna shove cut your balls off and flush them down the toilet with your koran, ya stupid camel jockey!!"
If the graffiti had been something like that, we can probably imagine the tension that would result. And it would not be at all unreasonable for someone to assume that any subsequent desecrations of a Koran were intended to reference the criminal threats contained in the graffiti.
But like I say, I don't know what the content of the graffiti was, nor what atmosphere had ensued as a result. I'll withhold jufgement until further details emerge.
Last edited by On the other hand on Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:42 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003 Location: I walk along the avenue
|
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The article |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003 Location: I walk along the avenue
|
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Some of the details...
| Quote: |
It�s the third bias incident in the past two weeks. Earlier, vandals scrawled a swastika on a bathroom wall, and someone also sprayed the n-word onto a car at the Westchester campus.
|
Okay, most of us would probably agree that a swastika spraypainted on a public wall contains a pretty strong implication of threatened violence, although it probably doesn't fit the legal definition of uttering a threat. Same, albeit to a slightly lesser degree, with the word "nig ger".
Granted, there is nothing technically racist or white-supremacist about desecrating a Koran. But it's hard for me to imagine that the guy in the "toilet" incident wasn't aiming to have his actions understood in the context of those other acts of vandalism.
But anyway, draw your own conclusions. I'm against hate crime laws anyway, though that doesn't mean I deny the hatred that lies behind some of these actions.
http://www.wcbs880.com/pages/96457.php?contentType=4&contentId=217031 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|