Islamophobia has become one of today's buzz words often used loosely to denote practices deemed anti-Islamic, anti-Arab, anti-Muslim, and anti-fundamentalism. The notion of “anti-Muslimism” was coined to describe many attacks that are often labeled Islamophobic and to contain the essential meaning of islamophobia as a way to better confront this phenomenon.
The notion suggests that most of the attacks coming from the West are not against Islam as a religion but against Muslims as people. In the present day, however, attacks against the faith of Islam in the West are more common as compared to the year of 2000 when this notion was first presented. Islamophobia and “anti-Muslimism” today can be described, using the words of Eduard Said (1987), as “uniformly ubiquitous,” but in a long strategic quest to dispel these practices it is essential that we draw clear lines between them and address them on an individual basis.
The picturing of Muslims in negative stereotypical images has been a ubiquitous practice in the West long before the events of Sept. 11 happened. Said (1987) wrote: “Whether one looked at […] grad school history books, comic strips, television serials, films, and cartoons, the Iconography of Islam was uniform, was uniformly ubiquitous, and drew the same time-honored view of Islam.” (p.6)
In the present day, studies in Europe and the United States attest to the proliferation of anti-Muslim attacks. In Britain, Clived Field (2007) in an examination of opinion polls related to Muslims in Britain, notes that “Islamophobia” has increased since the attacks of Sept. 11, and that Muslims are increasingly seen “as slow to integrate into mainstream society, feeling only a qualified sense of patriotism, and prone to espouse anti-Western values that lead many to condone the so-called Islamic terrorism” (p.447).
In Italy, Rinella Cere, a researcher in contemporary European mass media and culture, notes that Italy has witnessed three major “Islamophobic” waves since Sept. 11. The first occurred when Prime Minister Selvio Berlusconi stated that the European civilization is superior. The second occurred when a prominent political leader proposed the removal of Mosques in the downtown the city of Naples. The third wave began when another political leader, Francesco Speroni, asked the EU Parliament to bar Muslims from entering Europe.
The record-beating “Islamophobic” attack in Europe, however, came when the Danish newspaper Jullands-Posten published cartoons of the Profit Mohammed portraying him as a terrorist. As riots broke out in the Islamic world, other publications across Europe took the opportunity to republish the cartoons on the basis of newsworthiness. This “Islamophobic” trend in Europe escalated into a new phase where it is disseminated through motion pictures following the release of Dutch film Fitna.
In the United States Hollywood produced The Siege in 1998, a film that focused on “Islamic terrorism” contrasted with indulgent Irish white nationalists. But a great deal of American islamophobia is buried in the pages of numerous books and publications released every year and widely distributed in the United States without the knowledge of majority Muslims. One of the well-known authors who work in this Islamophobia publishing industry is Robert Spincer who in his bestseller “The Politically incorrect Guide to Islam” provocatively lists in the book cover five “truths” that make Islam a religion of war and legitimizes the crusades. So what usually comes out in the mainstream media is but the tip of the iceberg and both Islamophobia and anti-Muslimism are rampant in the West.
Remedies
Effective remedies need to come through constructive planning not through blind-folded demonstrations and counter-attacks.
First, it is essential that Muslims themselves define Islamophobia as attacks primarily against Islam or against Muslims on the basis of their religion as a potential threat. Islam as subject of attack needs to be clearly defined because describing an act against a Muslim immigrant on grounds not religious as Islamophobia is likely to be used by extremists to retaliate in the name of Islam. Besides, critics who challenge conservative readings from even within the Islamic world would be prone to accusation of being Islamophobe if this concept is not clearly defined.
Second, the Muslim civil society needs to actively engage in fighting all sorts of discriminatory practices based on universal principles of human rights and not limit their struggle to fighting Islamophobia or anti-Islamism. If Muslims do not demonstrate support for the victims of the London and the Madrid bombings or even for the people in Tibet how can they expect international support for their causes, primarily the Palestinian one. Third, the United States and the European countries need to do more to convince people, especially those working in the media business, that freedom of expression comes with the social responsibility not to be misused.
Finally, it is essential from the modernist theory’s point of view that the current anti-Islamic or anti-Muslim practices stop be seen as a carry-over from the perceived historical conflict between Islam and the West. Why? Because if the current situation is justified in historical contexts as perennialists, such as V .S. Naipaul and Samuel Huntington, tend to do, we shall assume no capacity to reach a solution and we would surrender to ideas of continuous conflict or “clash of civilizations.” Instead, it is important that we focus on the problems as products of present circumstances and developments if we should have any hope to solve them.
Islamophobia has been employed widely to denote both anti-Islam and anti-Muslim attacks, and while anti-Islam attacks have increased markedly since Sept. 11, it becomes necessary to define the meaning of Islamophobia. Without such definition, it is likely that it will be employed as “imperialism,” “communism,” or even “anti-Semitism” to silence people of free speech at home and abroad. Concrete measures need to be taken from both Muslims and non-Mulims, among which it is to confine the problem to its present not the historical context.
The notion suggests that most of the attacks coming from the West are not against Islam as a religion but against Muslims as people. In the present day, however, attacks against the faith of Islam in the West are more common as compared to the year of 2000 when this notion was first presented. Islamophobia and “anti-Muslimism” today can be described, using the words of Eduard Said (1987), as “uniformly ubiquitous,” but in a long strategic quest to dispel these practices it is essential that we draw clear lines between them and address them on an individual basis.
The picturing of Muslims in negative stereotypical images has been a ubiquitous practice in the West long before the events of Sept. 11 happened. Said (1987) wrote: “Whether one looked at […] grad school history books, comic strips, television serials, films, and cartoons, the Iconography of Islam was uniform, was uniformly ubiquitous, and drew the same time-honored view of Islam.” (p.6)
In the present day, studies in Europe and the United States attest to the proliferation of anti-Muslim attacks. In Britain, Clived Field (2007) in an examination of opinion polls related to Muslims in Britain, notes that “Islamophobia” has increased since the attacks of Sept. 11, and that Muslims are increasingly seen “as slow to integrate into mainstream society, feeling only a qualified sense of patriotism, and prone to espouse anti-Western values that lead many to condone the so-called Islamic terrorism” (p.447).
In Italy, Rinella Cere, a researcher in contemporary European mass media and culture, notes that Italy has witnessed three major “Islamophobic” waves since Sept. 11. The first occurred when Prime Minister Selvio Berlusconi stated that the European civilization is superior. The second occurred when a prominent political leader proposed the removal of Mosques in the downtown the city of Naples. The third wave began when another political leader, Francesco Speroni, asked the EU Parliament to bar Muslims from entering Europe.
The record-beating “Islamophobic” attack in Europe, however, came when the Danish newspaper Jullands-Posten published cartoons of the Profit Mohammed portraying him as a terrorist. As riots broke out in the Islamic world, other publications across Europe took the opportunity to republish the cartoons on the basis of newsworthiness. This “Islamophobic” trend in Europe escalated into a new phase where it is disseminated through motion pictures following the release of Dutch film Fitna.
In the United States Hollywood produced The Siege in 1998, a film that focused on “Islamic terrorism” contrasted with indulgent Irish white nationalists. But a great deal of American islamophobia is buried in the pages of numerous books and publications released every year and widely distributed in the United States without the knowledge of majority Muslims. One of the well-known authors who work in this Islamophobia publishing industry is Robert Spincer who in his bestseller “The Politically incorrect Guide to Islam” provocatively lists in the book cover five “truths” that make Islam a religion of war and legitimizes the crusades. So what usually comes out in the mainstream media is but the tip of the iceberg and both Islamophobia and anti-Muslimism are rampant in the West.
Remedies
Effective remedies need to come through constructive planning not through blind-folded demonstrations and counter-attacks.
First, it is essential that Muslims themselves define Islamophobia as attacks primarily against Islam or against Muslims on the basis of their religion as a potential threat. Islam as subject of attack needs to be clearly defined because describing an act against a Muslim immigrant on grounds not religious as Islamophobia is likely to be used by extremists to retaliate in the name of Islam. Besides, critics who challenge conservative readings from even within the Islamic world would be prone to accusation of being Islamophobe if this concept is not clearly defined.
Second, the Muslim civil society needs to actively engage in fighting all sorts of discriminatory practices based on universal principles of human rights and not limit their struggle to fighting Islamophobia or anti-Islamism. If Muslims do not demonstrate support for the victims of the London and the Madrid bombings or even for the people in Tibet how can they expect international support for their causes, primarily the Palestinian one. Third, the United States and the European countries need to do more to convince people, especially those working in the media business, that freedom of expression comes with the social responsibility not to be misused.
Finally, it is essential from the modernist theory’s point of view that the current anti-Islamic or anti-Muslim practices stop be seen as a carry-over from the perceived historical conflict between Islam and the West. Why? Because if the current situation is justified in historical contexts as perennialists, such as V .S. Naipaul and Samuel Huntington, tend to do, we shall assume no capacity to reach a solution and we would surrender to ideas of continuous conflict or “clash of civilizations.” Instead, it is important that we focus on the problems as products of present circumstances and developments if we should have any hope to solve them.
Islamophobia has been employed widely to denote both anti-Islam and anti-Muslim attacks, and while anti-Islam attacks have increased markedly since Sept. 11, it becomes necessary to define the meaning of Islamophobia. Without such definition, it is likely that it will be employed as “imperialism,” “communism,” or even “anti-Semitism” to silence people of free speech at home and abroad. Concrete measures need to be taken from both Muslims and non-Mulims, among which it is to confine the problem to its present not the historical context.
