I’m pleased to be able to put before you all a guest post from Jacob on the subject of Islamic reformist Maajid Nawaz and the latest invented word ‘Muslimness’. Like Jacob I tend to think that Islam is the motherlode of bad ideas in today’s world. Islam is where you look for an example of how not to run a civilized society and long observance of how Pakistan has run itself under Islam among other things has taught me that. Islam has replaced Communism and Fascism as the premier ideology that threatens all the various freedoms that the West has over a very long period created.
The author of this guest post is correct, any replacement word for ‘Islamophobia’ will be exploited mercilessly by those in the Muslim community who are offended by everything but ashamed of nothing. This new word will be used to club the naive and cowardly political classes into granting yet more concessions to Islam, concessions that will benefit nobody and will bring little more than extra division and distrust. Jacob’s assertion, one that can be shown to be true from numerous examples, that activities that we would call ‘extremist’ are just normal for the Islamic world does indeed show that we have the need to criticise those who choose this ideology, and therefore support its bestial actions. Being wary and critical of those who choose believe that a seventh century warlord is the pinnacle of human achievement is should be just as acceptable as criticising someone who chooses Communism or Fascism as their life path.
I’m interested to see this criticism of Maajid Nawaz as I also am critical of this man. Of course I respect the fact that he gave up violent extremism and found a personal way of reading the Koran that wasn’t violent, but his audience is not as big as he might like to think it is. Islamic reformists are, despite what many of us would like, very much in the minority. Reformists are voices crying out in the wilderness and in places like Pakistan, these voices are too often snuffed out violently. Whilst Maajid’s words are interesting, I doubt they carry any weight outside of the middle class Left wine bar set or those secular Muslims who are already receptive to reformist views.
As I said at the start the guest post below is excellent and I am delighted to be able to feature it.
MUSLIMNESS BY JACOB
Maajid’s Nawaz has another article out, and the cover picture for it is, as usual, of his face (it’s rarely a picture relating to the content of the piece). This time he’s looking contemplatively at the viewer. At other times he’s staring wistfully in a pastel-coloured turtleneck, or gazing off into the middle-distance as though enthralled by a beatific vision, or in contemplation of a deeply profound wonder. In his article, Maajid tells us that the word Islamophobia is a “misnomer.” In the wake of the New Zealand terrorist attack, Maajid says Islamists have used the word in order to insist that Islam is above scrutiny, and that any condemnation of Islam is simply a phobia attributable to anyone who doesn’t like their reading and interpretation of the quran. Keep in mind that if there is a jihadist or extremist reading to be found in the quran, then it was put there by the quranic author/s, compilers, and is therefore a very legitimate reading of it – Pope Maajid doesn’t get to tell his fellow Muslims what is or what is not the correct way to read the quran or any other book for that matter.
In the UK, the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on British Muslims have put forward a definition of Islamophobia which states, “Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.” http://faithsforum.com/appg-on-british-muslims-launches-islamophobia-definition/ Notice how they managed to get two references to race in that one sentence, even although, as allegedly educated adults and Muslims, they should know very well that Islam is not a race. As a solution to all of this, Maajid has put forward his own word. He would like us to use “Muslimphobia” instead of Islamophobia. Maajid claims that, “Islamophobia” conflates scrutiny of Islam, a powerful world religion, with hatred of all Muslims…the word “Islamophobia” is too blunt. It fails, in principle, to distinguish between hating Muslims and criticising Islamic doctrine.” https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/opinion-the-word-islamophobia-and-its-definition-are-not-fit-for-purpose/
I would argue that the word Muslimphobia is “too blunt” and that it tightens the noose around the necks of non-Muslims, and the wrong kind of Muslims, more than the word Islamophobia does. Maajid claims in the article that the APPG’s definition is bringing the blasphemy laws in through the back door. In my opinion, if people start using the word Muslimphobic then the blasphemy laws are kicking down your front door, with no need to knock first, and definitely no need to ask permission to enter. At least with Islamophobia it’s quite clear that it is Islam that is being discussed; the texts, the cultural practices that it gives rise to, the constant bloodshed and unrest between sects and unbelievers, and not individual Muslims in general. Muslims are already masters of victimhood. It is their stock in trade. Introducing a word like Muslimphobia into the public discourse would be giving these people more ammunition to beat us over the head with in their bid to be perceived as the biggest casualties in society. This is the way in which Muslims are imposing themselves and their will onto the rest of us here in the West. Islam, to my mind, is one of the worst ideas ever to have been made manifest on planet Earth, and it’s not just Muslims that I call in to question for adhering to Islam. I question anyone who looks at Islam and thinks it’s a good idea, and that’s regardless of race and gender. What better word could we come up with to describe people who aren’t too keen on Islam and the doings of so very many Muslims? Entire villages in Pakistan killing a mentally ill man for blasphemy, for example – no lone wolf or crazed individual there, simply your everyday, next-door neighbour kind of Muslims. The same Muslims who are hunting for Asia Bibi, you know the Christian lady whose crime was to drink from the same water container as her superior Muslim co-workers. Similiarly disturbing things are also happening in Afghan, Yemen, Africa, and across the Middle East. Death to blasphemers, and a good old-fashioned stoning for adulterers. It’s an insult to the dead and the currently oppressed to say that anyone has a phobia about Islam. Maybe Maajid and Muslims have a phobia against criticism.
Everything offends Muslims and every time they say they’re offended they get their own way. Muslims jump on any and all perceived slights or wrong-doings to further the false narrative that they are the constant victims. Requests for government handouts and public donations skyrocket every time a Muslim gets called a name. It’s like watching a rugby scrum to see all of the Muslim community leaders in their rush to get on to the TV or the front page of the newspapers to see who can whine the loudest and the longest about Islamophobia. The public are sick to death of it, and speaking out about it is not and can never be a crime, although it will be if Islam gets its way. If Maajid and co. want “Islamophobia” to disappear, there’s a very easy solution – stop whining and stop wanting preferential and special treatment above everyone else. Just get on with the business of living, and most importantly stop moaning and foot-stomping like little girls with hurt feelings. London’s Muslim mayor has suddenly found money to give mosques extra protection after the New Zealand attack, even although the city is under-policed and experiencing unprecedented crime levels. Catholic churches didn’t receive this special treatment after Father Jacques Hamel was slaughtered on his altar by two Muslims. Maajid and co. don’t seem to realize where the public discontent towards Muslims is coming from. It’s coming from exactly this place of Muslims constantly whining and wanting more and more privileges. Muslims are no better than any other group of people on the planet. It’s time they realized that.
To be fair, in the article Nawaz is condemning the government for allowing “pro-Islamist” supporting group MEND to define Islamophobia (I’ll call them terrorist supporting, because Islamist and terrorist are one and the same to my mind, and there’s too many -ists and -phobias going around just now that I feel the need to simplify language in relation to Islam). But I also sense a little bit of jealousy in Pope Maajid’s article. I get the impression he would have liked the government to call on him, and have him define exactly what Islamophobia is. Thank God they didn’t, otherwise we would be having to use the word “Muslimphobia.” Muslimphobia is far more sinister and dangerous than Islamophobia because it concentrates the criticism or the hatred or the dislike onto an individual and that in turn makes it a personal assault. Muslims would relish in this. At least Islamophobia is broader, more vague, and being accused of it isn’t an attack on a person in the way that a racist attack or a Muslimphobic attack would be.
