Al-Jazeerah History  
	 
	
	
	Archives  
	 
	
	
	Mission & Name   
	 
	
	
	
	Conflict Terminology   
	 
	
	Editorials  
	 
	
	
	
	
	Gaza Holocaust   
	 
	
	Gulf War   
	 
	
	Isdood  
	 
	
	Islam   
	 
	
	News   
	 
	
	
	News Photos 
	  
	 
	
	
	Opinion 
	
	
	Editorials  
	 
	
	
	
	US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)   
	 
	
	www.aljazeerah.info
	  
      
       
      
        
        
     | 
     | 
    
       
	 Islamophobia in Western Media  
	By Stephen Lendman 
	Al-Jazeera, CCUN, January 3, 2011 
	  
	Kumar argues that "Confronting Islamophobia and challenging American 
	racism toward the people of the Middle East is an essential precondition for 
	the rebirth of a strong antiwar movement." Its inability or unwillingness to 
	challenge Islamophobia has been one of its biggest weaknesses. "Our future, 
	quite literally, depends on building such a movement." Progressive change 
	depends on a foundation of peace, equal justice, and democratic freedoms, 
	achievements so far nowhere in sight. 
	***   Post-9/11, Western media, especially in America and Britain, 
	describe Muslims as fundamentalists, extremists, terrorists, and fanatics. 
	Throughout the West, Islam is identified with violence, when, in fact it has 
	common roots with Christianity and Judaism. Their tenets are based on love, 
	not hate; peace, not violence; charity, not exploitation; and a just, fair 
	society for people of all faiths. You'd never know it from Islamophobic 
	media reports.   Islamophobia Defined   The Runnymede Trust 
	identifies eight components, characterizing Islam as:   -- monolithic, 
	static, and unresponsive to change;   -- having differing values from 
	other cultures and religions;   -- being inferior to Western 
	societies;   -- barbaric, irrational, primitive, sexist, violent, 
	aggressive, threatening, supporting terrorism, and clashing with Western 
	civilization;   -- an ideology used for political or military 
	advantage;   -- irrationally criticizing Western values;   -- 
	warranting discriminatory practices that exclude Muslims from mainstream 
	society; and   -- believing anti-Muslim hostility is natural and 
	normal.   A 2004 UK Commission on Muslims and Islamophobia report 
	titled, "Islamophobia: issues, challenges and action," said 1.6 million 
	British Muslims live "on a diet of death, hypocrisy and neglect that is 
	traumatizing and radicalizing an entire generation. What does the future 
	hold" it asks? How can secular Britain accommodate religious Muslims? What's 
	been done to counter Islamophobia's debilitating effects? Why has official 
	action been absent? "Why is the antiracist movement so reluctant to address 
	prejudice, hate and discrimination based on religion?" Is Western 
	Islamophobia institutionalized, and at what cost?   Its societies are 
	led by white, mainly Christian, middle and upper class men. They're 
	responsible for serving all their citizens. However, non-Muslim white people 
	institutionalize Islamophobia, instead of denouncing and expunging it.    
	It's a new term for an old fear since eighth century Europe. Key since the 
	1960s is the presence of 15 million Western European Muslims, millions more 
	in America. Resource wars is another factor, mainly for oil and gas. Others 
	include misperceptions of Islam, wrongly associating it with violence and 
	terror, as well as exploiting this notion for political advantage. 
	Supportive media reports then stoke fear and hostility, portraying Muslims 
	stereotypically as dangerous and threatening.   In America, noted 
	academicians like Bernard Lewis and Samuel Huntington promote a clash of 
	civilization thesis, Huntington saying the West's underlying problem "is not 
	Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilization whose people 
	are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the 
	inferiority of their power."   On October 22, 2001, Edward Said's 
	Nation magazine article, titled "The Clash of Ignorance," criticized both 
	men, calling their thinking "belligerent." Citing Huntington's 1993 analysis 
	"The Clash of Civilization?" and Lewis' 1990 "The Roots of Muslim Rage," he 
	said both men treat Islam(ic) identity and culture in "cartoonlike" fashion, 
	"where Popeye and Bluto bash each other mercilessly," the more "virtuous" 
	one prevailing. They and others like them rely on stereotypes and gimmickry, 
	not reason or informed analysis, Hollywood and the major media always in 
	lockstep.   Huntington also said "Western ideas of individualism, 
	liberalism, constitutionalism, human rights, equality, liberty, the rule of 
	law, democracy, free markets, the separation of church and state, often have 
	little resonance in Islamic societies." In fact, "Western values" are mirror 
	opposite of what Huntington claimed.   A 2002 Paul Weyrich/William 
	Lind essay headlined, "Why Islam is a Threat to America and the West," 
	calling it a fifth column and religion of war. In September 2001, hatemonger 
	Ann Coulter wrote:   "We should invade their countries, kill their 
	leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about 
	locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officials. We carpet bombed 
	German cities and killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."   In 
	November 2001, Franklin Graham (son of Billy Graham) told NBC Nightly News 
	that "Islam is a very evil and wicked religion."   In February 2002, 
	Pat Robertson said Muslims "want to coexist until they can control, dominate 
	and then, if need be, destroy. (You) can't say that Muslim religion is a 
	religion of peace. It's not."   Also in February 2002, Attorney 
	General John Ashcroft called Islam "a religion in which God requires you to 
	send your son to die for him. Christianity is a faith in which God sent his 
	son to die for you."   From then until now, it hasn't let up, notable 
	figures and media reports spreading hate and fear, supporting global 
	imperial wars. Contrasting a West/East dichotomy, Edward Said wrote about 
	colonizers v. the colonized, "the familiar (Europe, West, us) and the 
	strange (the Orient, East, them)." The strong against the weak. The superior 
	against the lesser. The belief that might makes right, no matter how 
	misguided, destructive or hateful.   Professor Deepa Kumar is active 
	in social movements for peace and global justice. She also conducts research 
	in areas of war, imperialism, globalization, class, gender, and the media, 
	including how it treats Islam.    Her recent essay titled, "Framing 
	Islam: The Resurgence of Orientalism During the Bush II Era" deals with 
	post-9/11 events relating, explaining the reemergence of "clash of 
	civilizations" extremism. Under Bush II and Obama, it became "commonsense," 
	a dominant political logic.   Kumar considered "five key 
	taken-for-granted" post-9/11 myths, that:   (1) Islam is monolithic. 
	In fact, as practiced in dozens of countries globally, it's diverse within 
	many Sunni and Shiite branches.   (2) It's uniquely sexist. In fact, 
	no more or less than all  major religions. Christian dogma says Eve was 
	created out of Adam's rib. European and American women once were burned at 
	the stake as witches. It took them a 100 year struggle to be able to vote. 
	Their rights have always been attacked, including over their own bodies, 
	Christian fascists promoting male gender dominance, and right to fetal life 
	over pregnant women and men.   (3) It's inherently violent and 
	intolerant, the term "jihad' wrongfully used to connote holy war. In fact, 
	it refers both to an internal struggle to overcome one's weaknesses, as well 
	as a lesser one for self-preservation and defense.   (4) The "Muslim 
	mind" is incapable of reason and science. On September 12, 2006, Pope 
	Benedict XVI equated Catholicism with reason, saying violent Islam lacked 
	it. Many others before him made the same argument, as spurious and racist 
	then as now.   (5) "The West spreads democracy, while Islam spawns 
	terrorism." As a result, Western civilization must modernize and tame it. 
	America, of course, disdains democratic freedoms, preferring easily co-opted 
	despots, not social justice and liberation.   Kumar fights myths with 
	scholarly analysis, exposing them as hateful and bogus.   In a 
	September 22, 2010 interview, she examined Islamophobia in America, saying 
	fear and animosity toward Muslims prevail.    "I don't think, however 
	that (it) comes from regular Americans. Rather, (post-9/11), the mainstream 
	media and the political elite have helped generate an attitude toward 
	Muslims that has been largely negative. Most recently," Tea Party extremists 
	exploited it. Another group called "Stop Islamization of America" promotes 
	the notion "that Muslims are conspiring to take over the US."   Films, 
	the major media, and hate groups have manipulated ordinary Americans. "Every 
	country that seeks to obtain the consent of its citizens for war must 
	construct an enemy that is feared and hated." Bush officials used Islam, 
	much like Cold War tactics vilified communists and Japanese Americans were 
	denigrated and abused during WW II. "Today all Muslims are viewed as 
	responsible for the events that took place on 9/11," hatemongering and fear 
	replacing truth, Hollywood and major media reports in the lead.   
	Films especially depict "Arab men as barbaric, violent, gaudy, lascivious, 
	and of Muslim majority countries as uncivilized, misogynistic, irrational, 
	and undemocratic." Major media reports pick it up, "tak(ing) their cues from 
	the 'primary definers of news,' that is, people who are the key political 
	and economic leaders." They've largely "branded the Muslim community as 
	untrustworthy and anti-American." Mainstream media reports echo the same 
	theme.   On January 10, Kumar titled a Monthly Review article, "How to 
	Fight Islamophobia and the Far Right, in Europe and the United States," 
	saying:   "An alarming trend (swept) Europe." Far right parties bashed 
	Muslims and immigrants to achieve "electoral gains in (numerous) European 
	countries." It showed up in France, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Italy, the 
	Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Bulgaria, Latvia, Romania and 
	Slovakia, hard times the driving force for change, including in America. 
	  "What we are seeing is a right-wing populist movement beginning to 
	manifest racism at its core." It's both electoral and grassroots "based on 
	intimidating Muslim communities and Latino immigrants." Islamophobia incites 
	"war on terror" hysteria and "serv(es) the domestic agenda of the far right 
	in ways similar to what has gone on in Europe."   A weak-kneed 
	centrist approach "only strengthens the far right," as true in America as 
	abroad. Combating  Islamophobia demands exposing it "as the 
	scapegoating tactic of a system in crisis." To prevail, however, requires 
	"political and economic alternative(s) to neoliberalism and war," but don't 
	expect major media help promoting them.   Kumar's International 
	Socialist Review March/April 2007 article titled, "Islam and Islamophobia" 
	explained how, over the previous year, Muslim-bashing in America and Europe 
	was relentless. It's no different today. Their common thread "is a polarized 
	view of the world," a classic good v. evil struggle, hyperbolically 
	portraying a democratic West against barbaric, uncivilized Islam, wanting to 
	create "an Islamic empire stretching from Europe to South East Asia." Never 
	mind that people of all religions and ethnicities everywhere want social 
	justice, freedom and peace.   Orientalists, however, view the West as 
	"dynamic, complex, and ever changing," while Islam "is static, barbaric, and 
	despotic." It needs "Western intervention to bring about progressive 
	change," what Islamic societies can't do for themselves.   Kumar 
	argues that "Confronting Islamophobia and challenging American racism toward 
	the people of the Middle East is an essential precondition for the rebirth 
	of a strong antiwar movement." Its inability or unwillingness to challenge 
	Islamophobia has been one of its biggest weaknesses. "Our future, quite 
	literally, depends on building such a movement." Progressive change depends 
	on a foundation of peace, equal justice, and democratic freedoms, 
	achievements so far nowhere in sight.   Stephen Lendman 
	lives in Chicago and can be reached at
	lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. 
	Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to 
	cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio 
	News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time 
	and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy 
	listening.  http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/ 
	  
	  
       | 
     | 
     
      
      
      
      
     |