On Muslims
This year’s 9/11 has had a different tone than in years past, enough to take notice. In previous years 9/11 was a very straightforward day: it was the day that today’s America remembers its morality. Remembers that we, too, can suffer, that we, too, may be asked to sacrifice. There’s something terribly human in this that brings us together on days like these. But times have changed, it seems. For this 9/11 was clouded by two things above all: first, the controversy over the construction of a mosque. Second, the decision by a preacher in Florida to burn several copies of the Qu’ran, later cancelled (thank the gods). That these two things happened at the same time, and around 9/11, is mostly coincidence (‘mostly’ because the Qu’ran burning was planned for 9/11 for obvious reasons). That they both represent the same thing is not coincidence.
In both cases, the anger is about Islam. The mosque being built near the site of the former World Trade Center, which is actually a prayer room rather than a full mosque, is, according to some, an Islamic victory mosque celebrating what happened on 9/11: “A mosque is built on the site of a winning battle,” he said. “They are symbols of conquest. Hence we have a symbol of conquest here? I don’t think so.” Terry Jones, the leader of the church that was to have the “International Burn a Koran Day,” has in the past posted a sign that said “Islam is of the Devil.” The conflict is one of either American or Christian values (some conflate the two) against Islam.
I’ve followed these parallel stories long enough, and there is much to be said. Luckily, most of it has been said, so I will only linger on a particular point I want to make, one that can be emphasized by reflecting on the good pastor himself:
I don't want to address everyone who opposes the center at Park51 near the World Trade Center site, as they're clearly not all quite that bad (though I'm not going to make exceptions for members of Jones' congregation). Though I think those who oppose the center are generally wrong for other reasons, some of which I'll give a sentence to below, they are not what I'm interested in here. Rather, I'm interested in people like those quoted above, who exhibit what is simply an appalling level of stupidity. It’s not just because burning the Qu’ran is a surefire way to bring Al Qaeda more recruits, though it is. It’s not just because the 9/11 mosque is actually one part of a community center that will include, among other things, a swimming pool and a 9/11 memorial, nor is it just because there are, among other things, adult stores at a similar, if not closer, distance to the WTC. These things are true, but my concern is something else.
Islam is the world’s second largest religion, having about 1.5 billion adherents. It appeared almost thirteen hundred years ago, and has expanded to include most of the Middle East as well as much of South Asia and Africa, and is currently expanding in Europe. Both Terry Jones and those who call the prayer room a “9/11 victory mosque” seem quite certain that they know what Islam is. Why, in Terry’s case, it’s not even necessary to know anything contained in their holy text! No, they know what Islam is, all right.
So what is it, according to these people? Clearly, it’s a single, unified religion, all of whose adherents follow the exact same list of tenets, with the exact same beliefs and goals. The Muslim, apparently, is an appendage of the Islamic system, which is a single strain of belief that is bent towards clear goals towards which all Muslims expend their efforts. All Muslims think, act, and believe the same. They all have the same ideas of what society should be, and there is no other option. All one billion, five hundred plus million of them.
Apparently, the concept of the individual is unimportant to people like pastor Jones. Either that or individuals with independent capacities for thought do not exist outside of their narrow worlds. Not that everyone is so simple: pastor Jones would quite likely agree that not all of Christianity agrees with his particular interpretation of his religion. There are those who believe that the pope is supreme, and those who think he is the mouthpiece of the antichrist. There are social liberals and those who think that blood transfusion is a sin. There are literalists and those who take the Bible as symbolism. There are some that think some of these groups do not count as Christian at all. This profusion is, as I'm sure even Terry understands, the work of human beings over history, taking Christianity in accordance with their own understanding of the world and the meaning of life. Obviously, people take Christianity to mean different things, because they are different people. Even if there is one Christian truth, the simple fact that we are talking about human beings means that there will be vast difference of opinion. I don't think any of the people against the "victory mosque" would disagree there.
But apparently, then, the people who follow Islam are not humans in the proper sense. Instead, Muslims are like the Communist armies of the 50’s, mindless waves of perfectly organized machines that act upon the singular mission of the manifesto, in this case the Qu’ran. Its purpose is to fulfill its role as the power, and to replace all else that has any difference from its clear dictates, and the Muslim individuals exist for nothing else than its fulfillment.
Whether they admit it or not, those people who say that what’s being built is a “victory mosque,” those who think that we are at war with Islam, they believe this. How else could you explain being at war with Islam? That puts us at war with millions upon millions across all the continents. The Middle East, South Asia, Africa, large portions of Europe are all full of the enemy, and wherever they go, the goal is the same: install Sharia law and overthrow democracy. Those Muslims who say otherwise are apparently not to be counted. This is what is being held, consciously or not, by the people who never stop to ask whether Islam is a real thing, or whether it’s a collection of over a billion individual Muslims who all have thoughts and perspectives their own. They never stop to consider that they are making claims about real, existing human beings; rather, it’s reduced to a group, and the group is the enemy. This is the only proper way to interpret a mosque as a monument to victory against America: assuming that all adherents of Islam are against American values, that they all basically agree with the actions of Al Qaeda on 9/11.
Is it any better to say, as one man does, “Not all Muslims are extremists, but all the extremists are Muslims.” Does Islam really have a monopoly on extremists? Was it Muslims that were behind the Oklahoma City bombing? How about the attack on the IRS building early this year? Were Muslims behind the Holocaust? How about the Crusades? Islam has no monopoly on extremism. But does Islam, as a religion, support extremism as a principle? When one stops reading news stories about radical Muslims and starts to talk to ordinary, non-radical Muslims (which, as it turns out, exist), one finds otherwise. Christianity has its radicals, yet it is far more than that. The point is obvious: extremism is a human thing; you'll find it wherever there's room to interpret it in. It's not a religion defined by extremism that could preserve Greek philosophy during the European Dark Ages.
Whether there are legitimate concerns about the prayer room at Park51 (I see none) is not the point. Nor is freedom of speech the point. The point is that, nine years ago, nineteen men launched an attack on American soil, nineteen out of 1.5 billion. Al Qaeda probably has, at most, a number of members in the four-digit range. Even if you claimed the entire Middle East as one groupthink block, you have less than 500 million people; that is, less than one third of all Muslims. The point is that Islam is Sunni and Shiite, who are in conflict more with each other than with America, as well as the mystically-bent and peacefully minded Sufis. The point is that, just like we all know there is no singular entity called "Christianity," but rather a profusion of different sects and systems that fall under that general heading, and as we know that there is no single set of beliefs and practices that defines an American, there is no “Islam;” there are Muslims, who are people with real lives and concerns all their own. There are liberal and conservative Muslims, those who take the Qu’ran literally and those who don’t, those who support terrorism and those who don’t, and many who are too busy being poor and downtrodden and trying to get on with their lives rather than caring about such things. They’re human beings; it’s about high time they were recognized as such by those who would demonize them.
In both cases, the anger is about Islam. The mosque being built near the site of the former World Trade Center, which is actually a prayer room rather than a full mosque, is, according to some, an Islamic victory mosque celebrating what happened on 9/11: “A mosque is built on the site of a winning battle,” he said. “They are symbols of conquest. Hence we have a symbol of conquest here? I don’t think so.” Terry Jones, the leader of the church that was to have the “International Burn a Koran Day,” has in the past posted a sign that said “Islam is of the Devil.” The conflict is one of either American or Christian values (some conflate the two) against Islam.
I’ve followed these parallel stories long enough, and there is much to be said. Luckily, most of it has been said, so I will only linger on a particular point I want to make, one that can be emphasized by reflecting on the good pastor himself:
Mr. Jones said that nothing in particular had set him off. Asked about his knowledge of the Koran, he said plainly: “I have no experience with it whatsoever. I only know what the Bible says.” (Source)
I don't want to address everyone who opposes the center at Park51 near the World Trade Center site, as they're clearly not all quite that bad (though I'm not going to make exceptions for members of Jones' congregation). Though I think those who oppose the center are generally wrong for other reasons, some of which I'll give a sentence to below, they are not what I'm interested in here. Rather, I'm interested in people like those quoted above, who exhibit what is simply an appalling level of stupidity. It’s not just because burning the Qu’ran is a surefire way to bring Al Qaeda more recruits, though it is. It’s not just because the 9/11 mosque is actually one part of a community center that will include, among other things, a swimming pool and a 9/11 memorial, nor is it just because there are, among other things, adult stores at a similar, if not closer, distance to the WTC. These things are true, but my concern is something else.
Islam is the world’s second largest religion, having about 1.5 billion adherents. It appeared almost thirteen hundred years ago, and has expanded to include most of the Middle East as well as much of South Asia and Africa, and is currently expanding in Europe. Both Terry Jones and those who call the prayer room a “9/11 victory mosque” seem quite certain that they know what Islam is. Why, in Terry’s case, it’s not even necessary to know anything contained in their holy text! No, they know what Islam is, all right.
So what is it, according to these people? Clearly, it’s a single, unified religion, all of whose adherents follow the exact same list of tenets, with the exact same beliefs and goals. The Muslim, apparently, is an appendage of the Islamic system, which is a single strain of belief that is bent towards clear goals towards which all Muslims expend their efforts. All Muslims think, act, and believe the same. They all have the same ideas of what society should be, and there is no other option. All one billion, five hundred plus million of them.
Apparently, the concept of the individual is unimportant to people like pastor Jones. Either that or individuals with independent capacities for thought do not exist outside of their narrow worlds. Not that everyone is so simple: pastor Jones would quite likely agree that not all of Christianity agrees with his particular interpretation of his religion. There are those who believe that the pope is supreme, and those who think he is the mouthpiece of the antichrist. There are social liberals and those who think that blood transfusion is a sin. There are literalists and those who take the Bible as symbolism. There are some that think some of these groups do not count as Christian at all. This profusion is, as I'm sure even Terry understands, the work of human beings over history, taking Christianity in accordance with their own understanding of the world and the meaning of life. Obviously, people take Christianity to mean different things, because they are different people. Even if there is one Christian truth, the simple fact that we are talking about human beings means that there will be vast difference of opinion. I don't think any of the people against the "victory mosque" would disagree there.
But apparently, then, the people who follow Islam are not humans in the proper sense. Instead, Muslims are like the Communist armies of the 50’s, mindless waves of perfectly organized machines that act upon the singular mission of the manifesto, in this case the Qu’ran. Its purpose is to fulfill its role as the power, and to replace all else that has any difference from its clear dictates, and the Muslim individuals exist for nothing else than its fulfillment.
Whether they admit it or not, those people who say that what’s being built is a “victory mosque,” those who think that we are at war with Islam, they believe this. How else could you explain being at war with Islam? That puts us at war with millions upon millions across all the continents. The Middle East, South Asia, Africa, large portions of Europe are all full of the enemy, and wherever they go, the goal is the same: install Sharia law and overthrow democracy. Those Muslims who say otherwise are apparently not to be counted. This is what is being held, consciously or not, by the people who never stop to ask whether Islam is a real thing, or whether it’s a collection of over a billion individual Muslims who all have thoughts and perspectives their own. They never stop to consider that they are making claims about real, existing human beings; rather, it’s reduced to a group, and the group is the enemy. This is the only proper way to interpret a mosque as a monument to victory against America: assuming that all adherents of Islam are against American values, that they all basically agree with the actions of Al Qaeda on 9/11.
Is it any better to say, as one man does, “Not all Muslims are extremists, but all the extremists are Muslims.” Does Islam really have a monopoly on extremists? Was it Muslims that were behind the Oklahoma City bombing? How about the attack on the IRS building early this year? Were Muslims behind the Holocaust? How about the Crusades? Islam has no monopoly on extremism. But does Islam, as a religion, support extremism as a principle? When one stops reading news stories about radical Muslims and starts to talk to ordinary, non-radical Muslims (which, as it turns out, exist), one finds otherwise. Christianity has its radicals, yet it is far more than that. The point is obvious: extremism is a human thing; you'll find it wherever there's room to interpret it in. It's not a religion defined by extremism that could preserve Greek philosophy during the European Dark Ages.
Whether there are legitimate concerns about the prayer room at Park51 (I see none) is not the point. Nor is freedom of speech the point. The point is that, nine years ago, nineteen men launched an attack on American soil, nineteen out of 1.5 billion. Al Qaeda probably has, at most, a number of members in the four-digit range. Even if you claimed the entire Middle East as one groupthink block, you have less than 500 million people; that is, less than one third of all Muslims. The point is that Islam is Sunni and Shiite, who are in conflict more with each other than with America, as well as the mystically-bent and peacefully minded Sufis. The point is that, just like we all know there is no singular entity called "Christianity," but rather a profusion of different sects and systems that fall under that general heading, and as we know that there is no single set of beliefs and practices that defines an American, there is no “Islam;” there are Muslims, who are people with real lives and concerns all their own. There are liberal and conservative Muslims, those who take the Qu’ran literally and those who don’t, those who support terrorism and those who don’t, and many who are too busy being poor and downtrodden and trying to get on with their lives rather than caring about such things. They’re human beings; it’s about high time they were recognized as such by those who would demonize them.
posted by Derek at 1:19 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home