Breaking Islamic Stereotypes

The LA Times had an interesting article in its 2-06-08 issue by Borzou Daraghai (“Lebanon Cleric Advises ‘Modern Shiites’”). It’s a good tonic against the rising tide of Islamophobia engulfing the West in general and the US in particular. Just think of the hysterical reactions we have read about when a Muslim was elected to Congress and a high school dedicated to Arabic studies and language was opened in New York City.

The impression most Americans get from the popular, mostly right wing and conservative, media is that Islam is a backward religion run by medieval throwbacks to the Dark Ages. To counter such outlooks progressives can refer the neocons to the web site of the Lebanese cleric Grand Ayatollah Fadlallah. Now don’t expect a Marxist, but the GA has decidedly progressive views when compared to the Christian right in this country and many of the more backward looking reactionary Islamists.

What is a Grand Ayatollah? Well, an Ayatollah is someone so respected for his knowledge of Islam that his faith community (in this case the Shia branch of Islam) grants him that title. A GA is an Ayatollah the other Ayatollahs respect and elect as it were. He can pronounce fatwas, that is, give an authoritative interpretation of Islam for the faithful to model their behavior on. It is a nonbinding but very powerful statement of what is good conduct and vice versa.

GA Fadlallah is reported to have outraged “conservative” (i.e., culture bound reactionary) Muslims with his fatwas based on more enlightened and modern perspectives. Here are some examples. “A woman can respond to physical violence inflicted on her by a man with counter-violence as a self-defense measure.” The reactionaries considered this fatwa from the highest-ranking cleric in Lebanon scandalous. He also ruled against “using any sort of violence against a woman, even in the form of insults and harsh words.”

The GA is also quoted as saying, “The belief that it is disgraceful for the man to manage household tasks is derived from the social culture and not from Islam. Personally, I think that no woman would be obliged to bring her social life to a standstill just because she is being occupied with her children.”

What this shows is that it is NOT Islam per se that is to blame for the many negative characteristics selectively reported in the US press, but the surrounding cultural conditions and level of societal development. It is analogous to not blaming the democratic process because Huckabee won in some states.

GA Fadlallah is also politically advanced. He is opposed to US imperialism and at the same time to Islamic extremism. “I think,” he said, “the current Iranian president lacks diplomatic skills, and I think he creates problems for Iran.” Very diplomatically put.

As far as the notion of a worldwide Shia anti-Western movement is concerned, the GA says: “I don’t see there is a unity in the situation of Shiites in the world.” Marxists would agree since they see religious views as tempered by the economic and productive forces at work in a society.

He also has progressive views with respect to women’s rights to education stating that “Knowledge is a merit for man and woman equally, and the importance of acquiring it is identical to both of them.” The GA Fadlallah is an example of a relatively progressive voice within Islam. We in the West should be reporting on and becoming more aware of such voices.

The policies of the Bush administration and its military adventures and diplomatic fiascos in the Middle East and elsewhere only strengthens the hand of Islamic reaction. It is US policy that is responsible for the so-called “threat” of militant Islam and that makes the views of clerics such as GA Fadlallah and other liberal minded clerics more difficult to spread in the Islamic world.

Thomas Riggins is currently the associate editor of Political Affairs online. Read other articles by Thomas.

10 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. Seven said on February 11th, 2008 at 8:48am #

    I agree with you. Until we, not only as an American society but as a global society, can acknowledge racism as an archaic throw-back to the days of yore, then we will never progress.

    Racism destroys culture, civilizations, and starts wars.

    I feel one-hundred percent confident in making the blanket statement that any racist is an ignorant wart on the face of society.

  2. Sean said on February 12th, 2008 at 10:51pm #

    One GA has progressive views and that offsets all the negative aspects of Islam and its implementation by its followers around the world? Wow…I am so not shocked the world hasn’t heard more of him.

    The entire notion that Islam is a religion of peace when it was founded by a bandit who advocated racist and inhumane policies is pretty much the low-point of educated thinking and completely ignores history. Even the pagan Mongols, the scourge of Christendom—called barbaric by other nations and peoples—fought against the murder and rape, the brutality, looting and constant invasion by Muslims into Mongol territory for two centuries before deciding the only way to stop Muslim violence was to invade and punish those responsible. Muslims were more barbaric than the barbarian horsemen of the steppes themselves.

    In fact, before Muslim aggression, there isn’t any historical record of the Mongols invading other peoples. Feel free to correct me if there is a passage hidden in some obscure historical text somewhere that I have not read.

    Recall that from the moment of its birth, Islam and its followers have been waging war against all other peoples. Before the Mongol invasions, recall that for four centuries (from 650 AD-1050 AD) the Turks had been fighting against Muslim expansion. Islam has never been and will never be a religion of peace.

    In any case, one GA who is merely preaching basic human rights and common sense certainly does not imply some liberal enlightenment. The problem with Sharia law, the backward and worse than barbaric treatment of women—such as gang raping women found with a men not their husband while in public, stoning a rape victim to death, etc—and perhaps with the entire religion is that it’s followers refuse to accept or simply don’t have the ability to adapt to any other culture. Instead, they attempt to take their brutal and backward culture with them wherever they go and expect others to tolerate it.

    Would you suggest that a single TV evangelist in America who suggested that Christians should act a certain way means that all Christians are like him? That is just plain ridiculous. There is a reason Western civilization does not give religious leaders and their words the weight of law.

    You speak of hysterical reactions by Western societies in regards to Islam, yet you ignore the entire history of the faith, which has been one of constant warfare, brutality, rape, forced conversion, looting and pillaging. How convenient. In the 21st century, the only nations going to war in the name of some god are Muslim nations. The violence in Iraq is a good example of this. Who are insurgents (Muslims) killing? They have killed far more fellow Muslims than coalition soldiers.

    Are they murdering innocent women and children because they are so peaceful, these insurgents? Are the blowing up civilians in market places because of their benevolent nature? Are they beheading journalists and other prisoners because of the overwhelming love for their fellow humans they have in their hearts?

    There is no Islamic stereotype, just the reality of what Islam is and nearly 1400 years of violent conflict, murder, rape, forced conversion, and worse than barbaric treatment of others to back that reality up. Perhaps Muslim apologists think it is fine to mutilate the genitalia of young girls, though, and think we ought to spread the kind of censorship and religious police that Islam has so wonderfully contributed to the world?

    I’m all for peace. But that doesn’t mean you bow down to those who seek to oppress you and destroy your way of life. Those who suggest the USA and coalition forces are on some Crusade in the Middle East are wrong, and are ignoring history. The notion that America created Islamic radicalism ignores history. Remember the Assassins? Long before America, I’m afraid.

    Or how about the irony that Persians were forced to convert to Islam? Their descendants have forgotten this apparently. Look at the ignorant leader of Iran ranting about Islam and Allah and the destruction of Israel and blah, blah, blah. Poor guy doesn’t even know the history of his own people.

    Entire nations have been brainwashed and forcibly converted to Islam. The Turks are the first people to realize this and begin a process to reclaim their pre-Islamic heritage. Which of course is under threat by Islamo-fascists who are crying about how it isn’t fair that you can’t wear head-scarfs and so forth. Hey, was it fair that you brutalized an entire civilization and forced them to tolerate your religion at sword-point in the first place?

    Islam created its own violent radicalism. It has been there since day one. The proper context is that Western nations are back in the Middle East doing what the Mongols did after putting up with Muslim aggression for far too long—punishing Muslims for their violent attacks outside their homeland (and there have been more around the world before and after 9/11).

    The list of peoples brutalized my Islamic aggression includes Turks, Huns, Kazaks, Tajiks, Uzbeks, Jews, Americans, Irish, British, Sottish, Australian, Phillipino, Indian, Native American, Paraguayan, Brazilian, Spanish, Portuguese, Ethiopian, Russian, Georgian….oh, why bother? The list is far shorter if you simply list those who have not suffered the brutalization of Islam.

    I doubt you would need more than one hand to count the number.

    Cry for Islam if you like. The sooner this threat to civilization disappears (like it says will happen in the Quran itself), the sooner the world will be a more peaceful place.

  3. heike said on February 13th, 2008 at 6:58am #

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,330333,00.html

    Happy Valentine’s Day!

  4. Seven said on February 13th, 2008 at 8:35am #

    Sean, you are one of those warts on society trying to use some sort of half-baked rhetoric to defend being a racist.

    The people you listed as being “brutalized” by Islam (Turks, Huns, Kazaks, Tajiks, Uzbeks, Jews, Americans, Irish, British, Sottish, Australian, Phillipino, Indian, Native American, Paraguayan, Brazilian, Spanish, Portuguese, Ethiopian, Russian, Georgian)

    Lets take a look at some of their track-records, shall we?

    Americans – Native American genocide, only country to use strategic nuclear bombs, centuries old exploitation of Latin America, Imperalistic wars for resources, Imperalisitc wars for land (how do you think the US got so large , do you think they GAVE us the land?)

    Britain – the most ruthless empire the world has known, African genocides, subjugation of South-East Asia and Pacific Islands, Severe exploitation of children working 16 hour days in the 18oos, highly dangerous weapons tests on prisoners in Australia

    Spanish – Systematic destruction of the entire Aztec civilization so as to loot them of their gold and other resources in the name of Spain. Nearly complete take over of South America from native peoples. The inquisition, the premier terrorist organization.

    Russian – Massacring of millions of their very own Russian civilians. Imperalisitc wars that subjugated Eastern Europe in extreme poverty for over fifty-years. Mass development of nuclear weapons.

    And that is just four. You ignorant bastard, when will people like you realize that NO ONE is innocent in this world. Every victim has been a victimizer, or vice-versa.

    “Entire nations have been brainwashed and forcibly converted to Islam”

    Gee, sounds kind of like Christianity in Europe, now doesn’t it? Why don’t you take a hike up to Scandanavia and see how much they loved to “adpot” Christianity. Or rather, the ones who wanted to keep their heads on their shoulders.

    “Hey, was it fair that you brutalized an entire civilization and forced them to tolerate your religion at sword-point in the first place?”

    Gee, I bet that was the same thing that the Muslims were saying as Christian cursaders raped their wives and killed their children.

    “Are they murdering innocent women and children because they are so peaceful, these insurgents? Are the blowing up civilians in market places because of their benevolent nature?”

    This question might better be directed at the invaders and occupying forces, the Americans. It’s weird, you act as if this never happened in the West, a civil war. Let’s see – Britain, France, Germany, Spain, Poland, Russia, Hungary, Austria, Yugoslavia – just to name a few.

    Oh wait, and America.

    “They have killed far more fellow Muslims than coalition soldiers.”

    refer to the above

    “perhaps with the entire religion is that it’s followers refuse to accept or simply don’t have the ability to adapt to any other culture. Instead, they attempt to take their brutal and backward culture with them wherever they go and expect others to tolerate it.”

    Oh man, all of a sudden I understand now why all the rest of the world now speaks Arabic as a second-language. . . oh wait, I’m sorry, they speak American English, now don’t they?

    _ _ _ _

    You are an ignorant racist that adopts the facts that he likes all while ignoring the incomparable damage that Western imperialism has unleashed on this earth.

    I sincerely hope you fall of a cliff, we don’t need people with as little as tolerance as you around.

  5. Sean said on February 13th, 2008 at 5:59pm #

    Ignorant bastard? Now I’m laughing uncontrollably.

    Your “defense” of Islam is the rhetoric of those nations you apparently abhor. “Since they did it, we get to do it.”

    How very childish of you.

    Now, most of the things you point out that other nations have done–and yes, every nation has wronged some other people, it is how nations are generally formed–are nothing that the people you claim were brutalized have themselves done. As you yourself pointed out.

    The Aztecs? Perhaps you should pay attention to history a bit more. They were as brutal and bloodthirsty as any people. Is that the entirety of your argument? That others have been brutal and oppressive, and that because of that, Islam is justified in doing the same?

    That is the most pathetic argument I have ever heard. But perhaps it is the best you can do in defense of Islam. You and others like you typically do refuse to sidestep the question:

    “Are they murdering innocent women and children because they are so peaceful, these insurgents? Are the blowing up civilians in market places because of their benevolent nature?”

    You point the finger elsewhere. Why? Because you know the truth is that Islam isn’t any more peaceful than any other religion and is in fact more brutal than most. Sure, even Christianity was quite brutal…I know of the edicts of Childeric III, Charlemagne. I know the devastation wrought by the Northern Crusades; but I also know of the destruction wrought by those following many other faiths and political ideologies as well.

    However, I don’t see modern day Christians stoning rape victims, mutilating the genitalia of young girls, severing heads and using mentally impaired people as suicide bombers. No, that is exclusively part of the doctrine of Muslim society and of the followers of Islam. Even those brutal things you speak of by other nations are things that the civilized world is making efforts to leave behind. Not so with Islam and Muslims.

    If anyone is ignorant, it is you. How can I possibly be racist for calling Islam what it is? Muslims aren’t a race, you imbecile.

    See? I can call you names too. The difference between you and I is that you are like those Muslims you defend–always wishing death on other people.

    I merely pointed out that Islam is not a peaceful religion at all. It has never been and never will be–it is not my fault if you choose to wear blinders and ignore reality and history. For the record, did I once mention Christianity or any other religion was peaceful or non-aggressive? I did not.

    Unlike you, I am not misrepresenting the facts here. I know well the history of violence of pretty much every religion. It is why I despise religion and have no love of it. Spirituality is fine–but no one needs a grandiose, self-important intermediary between them and the divine. Religion is the bane of freedom and the largest example of collective madness on the face of the Earth, as I see it.

    However, as you have shown yourself to be yet another ravening Islamic apologist who can’t seem to ask someone their stance or seek clarification rather than resort to petty name calling, you did what is in your nature. I’m not racist at all, I have no hate for any race. I’m sure you could care less.

    You and the Muslims you defend have no argument against the fact that prior to persecution by Muslims the Mongols weren’t conquering other peoples. They responded to brutality and invasion by the followers of the faith you want so desperately to label as peaceful but can’t.

    After all, you’re one of those warts on society using half-baked rhetoric to defend a brutal religion of violence that keeps a significant portion of the world’s population poor, oppressed, intolerant, uneducated, and wrapped in violence.

    Resorting to a personal attack on me and calling into question the conduct of other nations is the resort of one who cannot defend their position in the face of historical facts that show Islam and its adherents have always been aggressive, violent, bent on conquest and the same sort of radical evangelism as the Catholic church and communists which you apparently seem to despise.

    You don’t have the first clue about my views and don’t care to learn. I merely pointed out historical context that refutes any claim that Islam is or ever was a religion of peace. You can ignore the facts and attack me all you want, but it won’t change the truth. I am quite a tolerant person, what I am not is someone who accepts the lies of others.

    And never fear–if I ever had to meet someone so ignorant as yourself, I would probably be looking for a cliff to jump off to spare me listening to your drivel.

  6. Sean said on February 13th, 2008 at 7:33pm #

    Two brief corrections:

    “…are nothing that the people you claim were brutalized have themselves done.”

    Should read: “are things that the people you claim were brutalized have themselves done.”

    “You and others like you typically do refuse to sidestep the question:”

    Should have read “You and others like you typically do refuse to address the question:

    My apologies for the typos. Hard to stay focused when laughing.

  7. 7. said on February 13th, 2008 at 8:11pm #

    I am not defending Muslims at all, in fact, I was just pointing that every collection of people on earth with any sort of political power and military prowess has just as much blood on their hands.

    Islam IS NOT any more peaceful than other group on earth. I whole-heartedly understand this, and would never try to refute it. But, we can infer, that the world’s two-billion Muslims are not all blood-thirsty savages raving for the blood of Western infidels.

    My point was, if put on a scale – with Islam on one side and nearly any other society on the other – it would almost certainly equal out in the middle.

  8. 7. said on February 13th, 2008 at 8:13pm #

    pointing out*

    have*

  9. heike said on February 14th, 2008 at 3:24pm #

    http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSCOL278772

    I’m waiting to hear from GA Fadlallah.

  10. sk said on February 15th, 2008 at 9:49am #

    FYI, some interesting thoughts on Islam. Also, worth keeping in mind what breed of ideologue is interested in “digging an unbridgeable trench around our minds and hearts”.