Is it bigoted to say things that are not politically correct or insensitive?
If so, then maybe Rick Sanchez was right to call Jon Stewart a bigot for saying insensitive things about him (though he was absolutely wrong for suggesting that Jews control the media. For an in-depth examination of if criticism of Israel is really anti-Semetic, click here).
But if it is not bigoted to say things that are not politically correct or insensitive, then why are Jon Stewart, Charles Johnson, and the mass media at large going on a rampage accusing anybody that dares to repeat what terrorists themselves proudly declare about attacks in the US and around the world (that the attacks are committed in the name of Islam) of being bigots and racists? I firmly believe that this is what is single handedly causing a major schism in American society.
The other day I was reading the blog LittleGreenFootballs, once a conservative powerhouse. Its founder Charles Johnson got fed up with the actual bigotry he saw in right wing American politics and moved towards the center, a move I respected and agreed with. In his blog I encountered a piece titled "Should People be Afraid of Islam" (now renamed Reza Aslan vs. Robert Spencer.
I had written Charles directly in the comments section of this article, suggesting that he can ask that question until he’s blue in the face, but pointing out that those conducting the attacks and declaring they were conducted in the name of Islam make the case all by themselves, and that subsequently its natural that some people are going to be afraid of Islam. Then I went on to note that to accuse people who admit fear of Islam of racism and bigotry is not only wrong, it is a form of bigotry in itself. I got into an argument with a group of people who then accused me of being a bigot, not least of which was Charles himself, who a short time later banned me. An event you can read about here.
And therein lies the rub. On one side you have a group of fanatics targeting and killing innocent people in the name of their god and religion, on another you have people that fear they might become the victims of these attacks. In the middle you have people belonging to this faith in who's name these attacks are being conducted, and you also have a large group of people that are trying to shelter those of this faith that are good, law abiding citizens, from the feeling accused or implicated in crimes they have nothing to do with.
It’s important to understand why it is without doubt problematic (and to many wrong) to emphasize the connection between terrorism and Islam. There are a number of reasons. First, not all Muslims support the actions of terrorists. And of those living in Western societies, it’s only a tiny fraction. Second, openly making the connection between Islam and terror can incite those intolerant or ignorant and lead to prejudiced and violent acts against innocent Muslims. Third, and by far the most important reason, is the basic fact that it leaves innocent, tolerant people of the Muslim faith feeling vulnerable, alienated, marginalized, and even persecuted. And finally, these feelings may push some of them into supporting the actions of the fanatics.
These are most likely the reasons behind of President Obama’s policy of stripping out all mention of Islam when relating to such attacks or reporting on them. We can see how this policy was initially put into effect with the report released on the Fort Hood attack perpetrated by Nidal Hassan which didn't mention the motive for his attack, the word Islam, or even the name of the perpetrator himself.
Even though the attack was perpetrated by an American of Palestinian origin, who screamed Allah Akbar (Allah is Great) as he strafed dozens of American soldiers and killed 12, and had a proven connection to Anwar al-Awlaki, an American born citizen of Yemenite origin, who fled to Yemen, is linked to Al Qaida, and is the first American citizen who it has been targeted for extra judicial killing (at least publicly).
This set a precedent for how the US government treats terrorist attacks committed in the name of Islam; as felonies lacking any motive or common thread. And subsequently, this policy has trickled down, and been adopted by much of the national media and American society at large.
This policy is severely flawed because when you remove the motive of a crime, you remove objectivity as to how and why they were committed, and severely handicap your ability to prevent crimes of a similar nature from reoccurring. And while granted it is most likely that in practice the American government has only removed these references publicly, it sets the guidelines for how these issues are dealt with in public, and has led to the a great amount of anger among those who feel justifiable fear yet are accused of bigotry.
As much as its not politically correct to say, Jihad, hatred of the West, and beliefs taken from Islam were the primary motives for the attack at Fort Hood, and many like it. One can argue that it is only a minority of adherents that interpret Islam in a manner similar to that used to justify attacks, one can argue that it is only extremists who conducted the attacks, but the fact is none the less that Islam in some form or another played a role in these attacks.
I understand the dilemma. No decent individual wants to assign blame for terrorist attacks to all Muslims, insinuate that all Muslims are terrorists, or alienate a portion of our fellow citizens. It really is a problem for American society at large. Make a public connection between Islam and the attacks and you're inevitably alienating Americans of the Islamic faith. But don't, and as we said earlier you're eliminating the common thread that ties these different attacks together, and leading to the situation where you're creating anger in those that dare express their feelings of fear of Islam.
And in the politically correct world of the United States of America, it has become wrong in polite company to publicly acknowledge the link between terrorism and Islam in any way shape or form.
Unfortunately, the policy of stripping these attacks of their common thread has caused a large chasm in American society. For while there are plenty of people who agree with President Obama's policy that dictates mentioning the connection between terrorism that purposely targets innocent civilians across both the Eastern and Western world is problematic as to its effects of alienating their own Muslim populace, there are those that have a real and genuine fear as a result of the ongoing attacks we see in the West, and in the rest of the world.
Living in Israel, I am acutely aware of this problem. Having seen Israelis lynched by angry Palestinian mobs, seen a 16 year old boy lured by a young Palestinian woman, where he was kidnapped and then murdered by his captors, seen young Palestinians children that were indoctrinated into a culture of death chase down two young lovers in the forest of Jerusalem and murder one of them, and of course, living in a country in which dozens of suicide bombers have strapped bombs to their chests and killed and maimed scores, I can understand the fear of these people. Yet if I dare to admit that I have weighed getting off the bus after seeing a suspicious person on the bus (that was also most likely Arab), most in the Western world would call me a racist. I'd have to strongly disagree and say I'm just trying prevent myself from getting caught in a terrorist attack.
So I strongly believe that it is wrong to accuse them of bigotry and racism. Sure there are some out there who really are racist, but for the most part, those people out there protesting and screaming their lungs out are doing so as reaction to being accused of racism. There is no dialog, no discussion. The moment they dare casually mention the role of Islam in these attacks (and it is undeniably there), they are attacked publicly, humiliated. And no one seems willing to address this issue.
This phenomenon can also be seen with Jon Steward. He rips on people that express a fear of Muslims, as if their ignorant, childish, racist pigs. But in fact what he's really doing is turning them off of dialog, building resentment, and driving a wedge through American society.
So what's the bottom line? America is divided. There are those that admirably don't want Muslim Americans to feel alienated and therefore try to prevent people from pointing out the link between Islam and the terror attacks taking place around the world. And there are those that are genuinely concerned, that see this connection, that hear threats like the one we heard today from Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square Bomber, who said “the war of the Muslims has just begun,” adding that “the defeat of the US is imminent, God willing.” and warning that “more attacks are coming.”
And in between there is a great big chasm. One sadly in which people like Charles Johnson accuse any that dare to state the obvious are automatically accused of bigotry and racism. But is it really? Are these people saying all Muslims are bad? Are they saying all Muslims are terrorists? Are they really being racist? No they are not. And those casually throwing these accusations are the very same people that are dividing American society.
It is absolutely important that we are sensitive to the feelings of others. But at the same time, the feelings of those afraid of terrorist attacks and the role of Islam in them have to be acknowledged. By trying to obfuscate this most common thread between them is nothing less than lying, both to yourself and others. And to accuse those who, for no other reason admit their fear and make the logical connection to Islam, the same connection the thousands of terrorists around the world that have set out to kill and maim as many as they can make themselves, is political correctness gone bad, and bigotry in itself.
Charles Johnson, this one's for you:
No comments:
Post a Comment