Being unequal means being more responsible
The other day I was listening to this excellent interview of Ayaan Hirsi Ali by NewMatilda.com. At one point Hirsi Ali lamented the lack of a progressive Muslim leader to counter the rhetoric of Osama bin Laden. As I listened to her say that I started asking myself, why? Why do we need to have a hippy Osama? Why do we ALL have of to prove that we're not terrorists or terrorist sympathisers? Why must we be measured by our worst standard?
Of course, this has nothing to do with avoiding responsibility for violence inspired by Islam. But I had nothing to do with September 11. I'm not particularly violent. The last time I got into a fight was before I hit 17 and it only lasted 30 seconds before me and other bloke shook hands.
Should every citizen whose army is occupying Iraq be expected to join the next protest against it a Trafalgar Square or Washington DC or wherever?
This attitude, which expects every Muslim to be accountable for every vice committed by someone who is somehow inspired by Islam, while at the same time refusing to acknowledge our more positive attributes, is a very dangerous thing. I think there are two main reasons for this. First, because those pointing their fingers at us get diverted from things that they could more effectively contribute towards. In other words, they could and should worry about the dirty linen in their own backyard and leave our backyard literally (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, um and about 20 other countries) and metaphorically alone. Second, it reduces the likelihood that Muslims will think critically about the interaction between their faith and contemporary social issues.
We need robust debate as Muslims. That's right WE, Muslims, amongst ourselves. It reminds me of a moment in the life of Malcolm X. A young white woman once went up to him asking what she could do to help his cause. His answer was simple and to the point: "Nothing."
posted by Iqbal Khaldun @ 11:07 PM
2 comments
2 Comments:
It is true that every community must take responsibility for the excesses of its own members. In the run-up to the Iraq war, millions - yes, millions! - of Americans marched in DC, New York and other cities protesting the war. Websites and blogs routinely protest George Bush and his policies. As a Hindu, I always make it a point to condemn Hindu fundamentalist groups whenever they get out of hand. I don't care whether it's falling into "western traps". Mahatma Gandhi called off an entire national movement at its peak in 1922 because 20 innocent police constables were burnt to death by a mob protesting British rule. Why should Muslims be the exception? Get your act together. You have nothing lose except your own loonies.
But are we the exception? I'm not sure we are. Most oppressed peoples who happen also to be Muslim don't blow themselves up. Why is Osama emblematic of Islam? Just as Gandhi is emblematic of Hinduism (and not the man who shot him, who was also Hindu). Or the Americans, Britons and others who protested the Iraq war. Many of who were Muslim too.
There is much action required as a Muslim to combat the extremism, of course there is. But you could say the same about every faith. But Islam in particular is painted a threat to the world, a menace around the horizon. I think this idea of Islam is actually a myth.
Post a Comment
<< Home