What is 'Islamophobia'?

[loverofhumanity]

I have addressed islam in another post. I must however address what you call a "lie" regarding WMD's in Iraq. Here are some facts. Iraq did have a nuclear weapons program. After they were thrashed for invading Kuwait, they agreed to stop the program, allow inspections, and abide by UN policies on the issue. They did, for a while. Iraq attacked and killed men, women, and children in Kurdish villages, with WMD's, poison gas, which they were forbidden to have. They blocked all inspections of their nuclear facilities, they were in violation of 22 UN resolutions for inspections, they were in violation of the cease fire they agreed to follow to keep their country and government. They were given an ultimatum to allow inspections, or else, they once again refused. What conclusions would YOU draw from this ? BTW, WMD's, poison gas rockets and storage WERE found. There were no lie's. A lie is a lie if you know it isn't true, there was more than adequate evidence to confirm the belief that Iraq was working on or had nuclear weapons.

It's common knowledge that they didn't find what they tricked everyone into believing was there.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Report concludes no WMD in Iraq

 

[shmogie]

I'm not totally convinced that it was Muslims who did 9/11, but this isn't the debate.

I spent 25 years as a criminal investigator. I am very capable at looking at evidence evaluating facts. Having said that, I will further state that anyone who doubts that moslems were responsible for 9/11 should be easily able to doubt the existence of the moon. A conclusion most would find a bit ignorant. Conspiracy theories exist because the particular perspectives of some people compel them to seek alternate explanations for facts they cannot and will not accept

 

[shmogie]

It's common knowledge that they didn't find what they tricked everyone into believing was there.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Report concludes no WMD in Iraq

Your response is irrelevant. Saddam tricked them into believing they had WMD's. You never addressed the FACTS of my post.

 

[McBell]

As other nations and tribes did. Violence is just in islamic countries????

History of China ,Mongolia , Europe especially Britain show clearly that violence is everywhere
But u try to say just Muslims commit violence.

Be honest please

Bold faced lie.
It was not presented that "just" muslims commit violence.

Ironic you plead for honesty in the same post you tell such a bold faced lie.

 

[Kemosloby]

It's one of those fun words to say, once you start saying it you can't get enough of it.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What is wrong with those people who don't use paragraphs?

The editor side of me wants to gouge their eyes out! That's what's wrong with 'em!

 

[YmirGF]

Voted "meaingful term".

This reply turned out to be longer than I expected but here's a sort of rough guide to how I'd undetstand it or recognise it:

-equating "Islam" as a religion and culture with "Arab" as a race given the historical roots in the middle east and north africa. I.e. A "muslim" cannot be a white european and doesn't fit into ethno-cultural narratives about american or european identity and are an excluded "other".

-In a way the Islam-Arab equivalency falls into colonial sterotypes about the middle east being in a permanant state of victimhood by self-inflicted propensity for violence and destructiveness by virtue of following a "primitive" or "barbaric" religion. I have to concede that the belief in Islamic Reformation is often dangerously close to the "civilising mission" of imperialists to remake the region as a secular, liberal capitalism when it is imposed from outside. It can be Islamophobic in its own strange way by denying Muslims their freedom to chose if that is how they want to live because white europeans know whats best for them-particuarly when Oil is concerned.

-Treating Islam as an intrinsically violent religion responsible for terrorism and war through "jihad". The problem centres on the "intrinsic" nature of violence as something innate to the ideas rather than as one aspect of Islam among many. This treats Islam as a religion as a single monolithic bloc, that lacks diversity of opinion and is treated as by definition as incapable of reform into secular, liberal systems because its so medieval, primitive and inferior. (Describing Islam as intrinsically peaceful is arguably Islamophobic as again it denies diversity, disrespects Muslims by simplifying the history and traditions of Islam and doesn't take responsibility for when religion is a rationale or motivation for violence. obviously it doesn't carry such negative connotations. Blaming US foreign policy as solely or primarily for muslim violence is also a sort of reverse Islamophobia because it treats exclusively Muslims as helpless victims who must be saved by the west.)

-delegitimising Islam as a religion by saying it is a totalitarian ideology, or a form of "Islamo-fascism" imports and projects western moral standards about the universal nature of human rights and individual liberty as a basis of criticism of Islam. This is essentially a ******** argument that plays on the power of sensationalised nazi eqivilencies in western culture rather than as a source for rational comparisons based on historical evidence. When we don't know something- we call them nazis because that makes everyone shut up and try not to engage in "appeasement" for fear of looking weak. Its also helpful to summon the nazi comparision because we can demonise group X (in this case Muslims) as being totally evil and therefore we have no reason to actually understand them because they are pathological liars who cannot be trusted. Evidence is not necessary and suspicion is sufficient to judge an entire group of people because this evil is beyond the comprehension of our reason: i.e. "Don't read the Qu'ran! You may become infected with spiritual impurities as your mind is controlled by satan! If you read the Quran you become one of THEM!" This fails to take into account that secularism and liberalism have historical roots in Christian theology and so may not necessarily be 100% applicable. The weirdness continues when you have people frothing at the mouth about the evils of Islam despite the fact as westerners we basically share two-thirds of Islamic beliefs in the effects of jewish and Christian religions on our culture or that fascism had a close relationship with Christianity as a force for social conservativism. When all else fails- use Nazis as the measure of evil because we popuarly assume that the west's long history of christian anti-semitism or colonial genocide is totally unrelated to Nazi ideology and our moral consciences are unblemished by our such association.

-the "one line of evil" approach to reading scripture in which a single line in the Quran or the hadith is treated as a basis for condemning the whole religion because it is assumed muslims are too stupid, ignorant, oppressed, etc to think for themselves and so are incapable of having original ideas. The assumption that Islamic dictorine fossilized or written in stone from the 6th century fails to take into account the fact it was made and practied by humans. This sort of attitude is opposed to recognising Islam is a living doctorine which changes, evolves and diversifies according to new situations and contexts. So the evils of Islam in the 6th century mean its evil today because we assume Islam hasn't changed in nearly 1500 years.

Rant Over. I think I'm done now.

That is one of the funniest rants you have written, to date, on RF. We might be able to make a comedian out of you yet!

 

[YmirGF]

In regards to the OP, it is a relatively meaningless term intended more to stifle discussion than any other purpose.

 

[illykitty]

Well, I'm not sure how to vote for this.

There's genuine Muslim bigotry and there are people who are scared of Muslims just because of their identity without even getting to know them. Sometimes there's misunderstandings about Islam. For instance, there's many views within the religion, and I'd hope the majority doesn't agree with the extreme views that often hurt Muslims as well. There's various shades of views, it's not a single entity.

But then, there's criticism of Islam, and this should be allowed and not silenced. No idea should be off limits to critique. Why be scared of this? If the idea hold up to scrutiny, there's no reason to be apprehensive.

I do not agree with silencing people who criticise Islam. If this person doesn't incite violence but simply talks about the ideas, such as the writings, the Sharia and so on, they should be allowed to do so. There are many Muslims who do engage in these debates and do not seek to silence others by throwing buzzwords at them. I applaud these Muslims in being honest, open and being able to have conversations with others, even if it could get heated. Such events often end in amicable terms! Debating an idea is not a personal attack, it is NOT Islamophobic.

Also, Islamophobia... The last word phobia indicates an extreme and/or irrational fear of something - that is the definition. Someone can fear an idea without it being irrational? Could, for example, a homosexual fear Islam without it being irrational?

 

[Laika]

That is one of the funniest rants you have written, to date, on RF. We might be able to make a comedian out of you yet!

I guess I have to do something with my life other than reply on RF. comedian sounds like a good idea.

 

[Notanumber]

My spokesman has something to say on this topic.

 

[Kirran]

I said it was meaningful, but I'd like to add the proviso that the criticism - silencing usage predominates.

 

[Deathbydefault]

A phobia is an unreasonable fear of of something. I have no fear of moslems, only utter contempt for their stone age government system pretending to be a religion, and their utter barbarianism portrayed in their "holy books", the koran and hadith, which they practice in their home country's and in host nations where the majority of them live on the taxpayers. My dog sometimes get's flea's, they irritate him, he does his best to get rid of them, he doesn't have fleaphobia

That's a medical sort of phobia, it's reasons for creation are much different than politically created phobias such as Islamophobia.

Islamophobia

Scroll down a page or two in that link and you'll see what I mean.

 

[Talmai]

And does it exist at all?

IMO it is a buzzword used to silence people who voice criticisms of Islam.

We never hear of 'Christianiophobia' or 'Judeophobia' or 'Paganophobia' etc.

Islamophobia is probably supposed to mean hatred and/or fear of Islam and/or Muslims. I'm certain it exists as a phenomenon. At the same time I think it is mostly used as a buzzword to shut up people who voice rational criticism of Islam. We know the types who detest people who express criticism of the religion: some Muslims and a lot of the political left.

Christophobia exists. However, it is not used in the mainstream media because it would imply Christianity is an unfairly targeted religion, and we know who loves to throw around the -phobia words!

Judeophobia exists but I think the term people prefer to use is antisemitism.

Paganophobia does not exist yet because most people have yet to watch The Wicker Man starring Nicholas Cage.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Paganophobia does not exist yet because most people have yet to watch The Wicker Man starring Nicholas Cage.

I'd say it's died down considerable over the years, but it's hardly nonexistent (and I suspect much more common in Conservative areas than moderate or liberal areas).

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Christophobia exists. However, it is not used in the mainstream media because it would imply Christianity is an unfairly targeted religion, and we know who loves to throw around the -phobia words!

Hardly. I'm not denying there are some ******** that target Christians, but 70% of the population is Christian, and those who aren't Christian are often looked down upon and those who challenge and question it are often prone to greatly upsetting others.

 

[McBell]

Hardly. I'm not denying there are some ******** that target Christians, but 70% of the population is Christian, and those who aren't Christian are often looked down upon and those who challenge and question it are often prone to greatly upsetting others.

Seems to me it depends upon where you draw the line.
How many Christians dis Mormon?
How many Christians dis Catholics?
How many Christians dis Westboro Baptist Church?

Now, how many people believe that the ones being dissed above are Christians?

 

[interminable]

I have addressed islam in another post. I must however address what you call a "lie" regarding WMD's in Iraq. Here are some facts. Iraq did have a nuclear weapons program. After they were thrashed for invading Kuwait, they agreed to stop the program, allow inspections, and abide by UN policies on the issue. They did, for a while. Iraq attacked and killed men, women, and children in Kurdish villages, with WMD's, poison gas, which they were forbidden to have. They blocked all inspections of their nuclear facilities, they were in violation of 22 UN resolutions for inspections, they were in violation of the cease fire they agreed to follow to keep their country and government. They were given an ultimatum to allow inspections, or else, they once again refused. What conclusions would YOU draw from this ? BTW, WMD's, poison gas rockets and storage WERE found. There were no lie's. A lie is a lie if you know it isn't true, there was more than adequate evidence to confirm the belief that Iraq was working on or had nuclear weapons.

I'm Iranian and my people were victims of 8 years imposed war

Would u please tell me that Who gave those weapons to Iraq???

Weren't they some European countries???

 

[YmirGF]

It's common knowledge that they didn't find what they tricked everyone into believing was there.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Report concludes no WMD in Iraq

People interested in another viewpoiint on this would be well served by reading ...

He talks at some length how much they doubted the intel (coming from a single person in German custody) and told the Bush administration of their doubts - repeatedly - but it was a story that had its champions in the Administration and they simply won the war of words.

At the Center of the Storm - Wikipedia

 

[interminable]

Bold faced lie.
It was not presented that "just" muslims commit violence.

Ironic you plead for honesty in the same post you tell such a bold faced lie.

I said that generally because I have read her posts before about Islam and violence