It’s Our Choice: Standing up to Extremisms of all Shades

Reprinted with the kind permission of the author as part of a new feature here at The Agonist sponsored by FSB Associates which will run on Mondays: The FSB Book Club. Full disclosure: absolutely no money is changing hands here. FSB has generously agreed, at my request, to provide us with book excerpts and from time to time interactions and chats with the authors themselves.

by Sumbul Ali-Karamali
In Ohio, early voting began yesterday. In a seemingly unrelated event, four days ago in Ohio two men sprayed a noxious chemical into the babysitting room at a mosque in Dayton, causing babies and children to suffer burning eyes and throats, and forcing panicked evacuation of the mosque. Two apparently disparate events, perhaps, but they’re unexpectedly connected.
The incident at the mosque occurred at the end of the same week that an anti-Muslim propaganda dvd was distributed by mail in Ohio. Twenty-eight million copies of this same dvd had previously distributed as a paid advertisement in major newspapers in swing states, of which Ohio is one.
Called “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War on the West,” this film has been described as perpetuating anti-Muslim hate speech, characterizing Muslims as followers of a violent religion, and equating Muslims with Nazis (though Muslims are a faith group and Nazis were members of a European state with a standing military). The movie features Islamophobic pundits speaking on behalf of all Muslims.
Several organizations, including the “Hate Hurts America” coalition (www.obsessionwithhate.com) – a nonpartisan diverse community coalition that brings together Americans of various faiths, races and backgrounds in a unified stance against intolerance – have already thoroughly debunked much of what the dvd claims as truth. In fact, Dr. Khaleel Mohammed, the only Islamic Studies professor featured in the film, issued a statement communicating distress “that [the filmmakers’] alarmist drivel should be mixed with [his] whittled down interview” and that it “proves that the intent of the film is not to educate, but to mislead.”
At least two lawsuits have been filed because a nonprofit, which the distributor of the film purportedly is, cannot participate in political activities. Although the filmmakers claim that they simply wish to inform both parties about the “threat of radical Islam,” the film, three years old now, was distributed in battleground states just weeks before the upcoming election. Moreover, one of the talking heads in the film has insisted elsewhere that Obama, whatever he says, is still a “political Muslim” (whatever that is). And the Republicans are clearly reputed to be the party “tough on terror,” with McCain repeatedly using the threat of “Islamofascism” (whatever that is) to garner support for his campaign.
But here’s the obvious point that so many are missing: the so-called “war” this film talks about and allegedly inevitable “clash of civilizations” isn’t about incompatibility between Muslims and the Jewish-Christian world. Or even between Islam and the West. It’s a war of ideology between the dogmatic, rigid, exclusivist people on both sides.
A friend of mine recently mentioned in an email that he’s come to realize that the world is divided into two religious groups. “Nope,” he wrote, “it’s not Jewish-Christian and Muslim. It’s thoughtful and dogmatic.” And it’s the dogmatic fear-mongers in this film, the very parallels of the dogmatic fear-mongers in the Islamic world, which are precipating a war here.
The message of the Obsession dvd is to convince Americans that Muslims are on a violent mission to further their goal of global domination. In other words, they say that Muslims despise the West and are out to convert or destroy it. The filmmakers are recruiting Americans to their side with this argument and attempting to affect the election to stop this claimed calamity.
Well, guess what? Muslim extremist groups do exactly the same thing.
Al-Qaeda and similar groups of Muslim extremists busily translate American anti-Islam hate literature into Arabic so that they can convince Muslim populations that the West abominates Islam and means to crush it. They had the Crusades as proof, after all, and now they have Iraq and Afghanistan, as well. Samuel Huntington’s clash of civilizations mindset simply plays into their hands and proves their own correctness: the West despises Islam and means to destroy it.
So the real war is between hate-mongering, fear-mongering extremists on both sides who recruit followers to perpetuate an eternal war against “the other side.”
Airing bin Laden’s videos and declaring him an enemy legitimizes him and perpetuates hate speech. Would we interview prominent members of the Ku Klux Klan on national television? Would we distribute a KKK dvd on racist philosophy? No, because it would be tantamount to hate speech. Distributing the Obsession dvd is the same thing; it’s distributing hate speech.
And, as the children at the Dayton, Ohio mosque can attest, perhaps it’s already resulted in at least one hate crime committed by Americans.
Thank goodness, though, that at least one newspaper in this country understands that freedom of speech comes with the responsibility to use it wisely. The Greensboro News and Record in North Carolina refused to distribute the Obsession dvd and declined the money that came with it. The publisher stated that the dvd was divisive and it played on people’s fears. Editor John Robinson said that “just because you can publish doesn’t mean you should.”
Today is Eid ul-Fitr, the Festival of the Fast-Breaking, the holiday that comes immediately after the fasting month of Ramadan. Muslims all over the country, and indeed the world, are celebrating Eid. And despite the dvd, despite all the flourishing hatred the 9/11 attacks unleashed, a wonderful thing happened today: The Empire State Building in New York, the self-same city that suffered those attacks, lit its world-famous tower lights in green today Eid, in the same tradition of its yearly lightings for Christmas and Hanukah.
It’s there, I think with pride in America, my country, it’s that way that peace lies.

©2008 Sumbul Ali-Karamali

Sumbul Ali-Karamali grew up in California frequently answering difficult questions about Islam and its practices posed by friends, colleagues, and neighbors. (”What do you mean you can’t go to the prom because of your religion?”) She holds a B.A. from Stanford University and a J.D from the University of California at Davis and earned a graduate degree in Islamic law from the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies. She has served as a teaching assistant in Islamic Law at SOAS and a research associate at the Centre of Islamic and Middle Eastern Law in London. Her book, The Muslim Next Door, is available from White Cloud Press. www.muslimnextdoor.com

Joe Hussein the Plumber

A friend of a friend – a physician – declared categorically almost 18 months ago that she could never vote for anyone whose middle name was “Hussein.” In stark contrast, a Jewish friend of mine recently joined a Facebook group of over a thousand participants who have all adopted the middle name, “Hussein.” The purpose of this group, of course, is to protest against the unflagging use of Obama’s middle name as a negative propaganda tool, not to mention as an occasional near-expletive. But I like to think that the Jews and Christians and Muslims and others who are adopting Hussein as a middle name are doing so not only in solidarity with Obama, but with the hundreds of thousands of people worldwide named Hussein, which is, after all, just as common a name as “Joe.”

In his manifesto advocating the middle-name movement, Jeff Hussein Strabone wrote, in February of 2008, “We are all Hussein.” And he’s right. But, loosely speaking, the converse is true, too.

Because plenty of Husseins are American. In fact, plenty of Muslims are Joe-Hussein-the-Plumber average Americans who are being vilified by the very politicians who claim to care so much about average Americans. Those who elevate Joe the Plumber as the symbol of America while simultaneously denigrating Obama for being Hussein miss the point: Obama, along with his American Joe-Hussein-the-Plumber namesakes, are symbols of the greatness of America, too.

Even more troubling, though, is that never have religious prejudices, xenophobia, and racism been so widely exported to the rest of the world. The prejudice that we export rebounds back upon us. Our images are no longer limited to American media, but are spread far and wide by global media.

These attitudes are exported because Muslims – not just Arabs, who constitute only one-fifth of Muslims worldwide – watch television. They watch Hollywood movies, too, in which the vast majority of Arab characters that are depicted are racist caricatures. And they read the hate literature that abounds in the United States concerning Muslims.

These images are so potent that Muslims abroad have wondered, since long before 9/11, why Americans hate Islam and Muslims. Just as Osama bin Laden’s or Ahmadinejad’s statements are broadcast all over the American media, American anti-Islam and anti-Muslim statements are broadcast all over media in Muslim-majority countries.

Take a recent example of what Muslims abroad might see. We Americans pride ourselves on our separation of religion and state, and many Americans erroneously assume Islam requires a unity of religion and state (it doesn’t). Yet, last week CNN covered a McCain rally in Iowa, at which Reverend Arnold Conrad delivered the invocation, including this passage: “there are millions of people around this world praying to their God – whether it’s Hindu, Buddha, Allah – that [McCain's] opponent wins… and Lord I pray that you would guard your own reputation, because they’re going to think that their god is bigger than you, if that happens.

Add this incident to negative campaigning, the racist movie caricatures, and the hate literature, and what’s the result? Extremists can say with impunity to Muslim populations: “Look; the West despises Islam and means to destroy us.” Just as extremists in the West use translated hateful statements by Muslims to say: “Look; Muslims despise the West and mean to destroy us.” The net result is that we have shown each other the very worst of ourselves.

Just this weekend, former Secretary of State General Colin Powell spoke on how damaging negative campaigning can be, specifically referring to “who’s a Muslim, who’s not a Muslim.” In his interview, General Powell insisted, “Those kinds of images going out on al-Jazeera are killing us around the world….we have got to say to the world, it doesn’t matter who you are – if you’re American, you’re an American . . . We have got to stop this nonsense, pull ourselves together, and remember that our great strength is in our unity, in our diversity.”

This week has seen prominent Americans of both political parties urging the negative campaigning to stop, because finally media and political personalities are beginning to understand that hate hurts America. It divides and conquers us.

We can continue to highlight the worst of both sides and render the “clash of civilizations” a self-fulfilling prophecy. Or we can use our freedom of speech with responsibility, not with insulting carelessness; we can use our freedom of religion with pluralistic understanding, not with dogmatism. We can stand up and adopt “Hussein” as a middle name in celebration of our common humanity. It’s our choice.

Sumbul (Hussein) Ali-Karamali, author of The Muslim Next Door: the Qur’an, the Media, and that Veil Thing.

Obama Is Not A Muslim — (But Would it Be So Terrible if He Were?)

I was recently conversing with a local schoolteacher, a thoughtful woman I admire, when she exclaimed, “I would love to talk to you more when we have time! I mean, I’d love to know what you think about Obama, since he’s black and, oh, well, Muslim.”

I’m afraid my face must have communicated the sudden blankness of my thoughts. Obama may be black, but he’s not Muslim. I am Muslim, but I’m not black. My momentary lack of response reflected the disconnect in the logic of her statement.

I do understand, as a troubling number of Americans do not, that Barack Obama has never been Muslim. Merely living in Indonesia does not cause metamorphosis Islamica, some (imaginary) loathsome disease to be contracted from environmental contact. Wearing Somali dress in a laudable attempt to show multicultural respect is not proof of religious convictions. Attending a madrasa as a child does not a Muslim make, since madrasa is simply the Arabic word for school and, as such, can be applied to Harvard Law School with as much accuracy as it can be applied to a Taliban religious school.

I understand all these points. That is why I admit to difficulty understanding why the hazy suspicions surrounding Obama’s connection to Muslims have not dissipated. To be a Muslim, it is absolutely necessary to believe in this declaration of faith: “There is no god but God and Muhammad is the messenger of God.” The first phrase signifies belief in one God, the God, as opposed to many gods. The second phrase indicates belief that Muhammad, the prophet of Islam who died in 632, was the messenger of God who brought God’s word to his fellow humankind.

Obama has unequivocally stated that he is not a Muslim. If he does not believe in the declaration of faith, then he cannot be Muslim.

Amongst the many flying rumors is one that goes like this: because Obama’s father was Muslim, Obama is Muslim, too — no matter what he personally believes. But this is not true. In Islam, there is a presumption of faith based on parentage. In pre-modern societies of all faiths, religion was one of many factors that contributed to identity and citizenship. Therefore, there were rules regarding religious adherence. But it is only a presumption. It is rebuttable by faith itself. The definition of a Muslim is not “someone whose father was a Muslim.” Rather, the definition of a Muslim is someone who believes that there is only one God and that Muhammad was the messenger of God. Obama does not fit this definition.

What I find most troublesome about this entire subject is the xenophobia involved. After all, even if Obama were a Muslim — which he has repeatedly denied — why would that be so catastrophic?

As an Indian-American, Muslim, female, corporate lawyer and author, I typify American Muslim women far more accurately than the do the images of the black-clad, oppressed Muslim women featured in the media. I am just as American as my Irish-Catholic best friend. I speak English with a standard West Coast American accent. I have no first-hand memories of the country from which my parents emigrated. Yet, I was recently asked by a new acquaintance whether I would “go back” to the Middle East, since I was Muslim.

Well, I am not from the Middle East. I’m from Southern California.

This attitude does enable me to empathize with the probable feelings of Victorian English Catholics. In 19th century England, English Catholics paid an extra tax for the privilege of remaining Catholic and not belonging to the Anglican Church. They were often viewed as treasonous because of suspicions that their allegiance would belong to Catholic France or Catholic Spain rather than to England, the country in which they were born and raised.

American Muslims are already integrated into American society. We don’t get much of a voice in the media, but we are, as a group, middle class and mainstream. Only about 15-20 percent of us attend the mosques in the U.S. — not because we’re unobservant, necessarily, but (in many cases) because mosques since the early 1980s have come under the influence of Saudi-type Islam, which is just not what most American Muslims are about. The Pew Research Center notes that we are “decidedly American in [our] outlook, values, and attitudes.”1 Moreover, our allegiance is not to the country our parents or grandparents emigrated from, but to the United States — our own country.

During World War II, Japanese Americans were sent to internment camps because they were presumed to be loyal to Japan (no matter how many generations their families had lived in America). The destruction of the World Trade Towers was a type of Pearl Harbor, casting suspicion on American Muslims this time instead of Japanese Americans. But al-Qaeda is no more representative of Islam than the Ku Klux Klan is representative of Christianity.

So even if Obama were a Muslim, he wouldn’t be any less American or any less intelligent or any less competent. The unabating furor reminds me of how John F. Kennedy’s Catholic faith was considered a factor in his presidential campaign.

Obama’s childhood years in Indonesia are a factor in his campaign, too. But why a negative factor? Should we not wish for a president with global understanding? The President of the United States interacts not only with Americans, but also North Koreans, Russians, Iranians, and people of all faiths and nationalities. Should we not aspire to bridge cultural gaps and elect a president who views the world through a big-picture, worldwide, multicultural lens rather than through a narrow one limited to his own faith and background?

Several of my acquaintances have tried to convince me over the years that I should send my children to Catholic schools. “No,” I say, “we have good public schools; I’d rather just send them there.” Someone actually said to me in response, “Well, going to mass and taking religion classes won’t force your children to be Christian or anything!”

Yet the thought of Obama attending both Islamic and Catholic schools in Indonesia strikes fear into some hearts. Instead, it should give us hope that finally we might just have a president who would know how to communicate with the leaders of both Muslim and Christian countries. It is not civilizations that are antithetical and which must clash – it is the misunderstandings of those civilizations that cause clashes. Perhaps, in Obama, we might have a president who would know better than to characterize post-9/11 military actions as a “crusade.”

The tendency to disbelieve Obama’s unequivocal statements that he’s a Christian reminds me of what Norman Daniel writes in his history of Western perceptions of Islam: “It was with very great reluctance that what Muslims said Muslims believed was accepted as what they did believe.”2

Of course, Obama isn’t Muslim, so I guess that analogy doesn’t apply.