Loading ...Neo-Nationalism Rhetoric Impacts Perceptions of Arabs and Muslims #HummusHaters
With all the anti-Arab bashing we see in the news every week, Arab America is determined to expose those who discriminate against our community. We will recognize those who vilify the positive influence and contributions Arabs have made to the fabric of American society. And we will use hummus as our weapon. By naming those who vilify the Arab American community as #HummusHaters, we can address our culture positively while showing intolerance to bigotry.
By Daniel Gil and Colby Cyrus/ Contributing Writers
“The enemy of America is not our many Muslim friends, it is not our many Arab friends, our enemy is a radical network of terrorists and every government that supports them…”
Those were words uttered by then Republican President George W. Bush in the wake of the September 11th attacks. His iconic speech on the floor of the Senate was broadcasted around the world and served as an important assurance to the Muslim community that the war on terror, which had just begun, was not, in fact, a conflict between the West and the world of Islam.
The rhetoric heard from politicians in the United States 16 years later has undoubtedly changed within the context of confronting radical extremism. After years of conflict in the Middle East between terrorist organizations, regimes, and western nations, the notion of an ideological dichotomy between the West and the Middle East has found strong footing within a surge of neo-nationalism. This has unfortunately led to more rhetoric which has increasingly pitted cultures against each other.
In an attempt to identify and eradicate the causes of violent extremism, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs heard testimony from three experts on June 14th. The panelists all offered different solutions on how to identify the causes of terrorism and ultimately stop them.
The panelists emphasized the idea that there is a growing threat in the United States of Islam becoming politically entrenched in the west. In a response to this accusation, they advocated for the cutback of civil liberties as a trade off for more heightened security in confronting “Islamism,” the political manifestation of Islam, according to the panelists.
“Islamists are implementing an explicit strategy to exploit Western civil liberties and values to promote their agenda and objectives,” said Asra Nomani, panelist, and co-founder of the Muslim Reform Movement.
“We must investigate, expose and blacklist all state and non-state sponsors of this dawah, including mosques, nonprofits, schools, think tanks, academic institutions, and thought leaders,” she continued.
John Lenczowski, Founder, and President of The Institute of World Politics and panelist called for a number of policy changes within President Trump’s administration to bolster the US’s effect in a “war of ideas,” between the United States and radical extremism. Among them was the implementation of a “Bureau of Education, Culture, and Ideas,” which Lenczowski said, “should reside in an office of religious and ideological affairs charged with strategic policy making and implementation in ideological warfare.”
The hearing faced sharp criticism from civil rights groups, such as Defending Rights and Dissent. The national civil liberties organization slammed the hearing, claiming it legitimized stereotypes and fear of Muslims at a time when Islamophobic sentiments are at a high. In a statement released post-hearing, Defending Rights and Dissent charged that the committee “should call as witnesses experts on terrorism, not purveyors of half-truths and innuendo.”
According to a report by the Council on American-Islamic Relations published in May, hate crimes against Muslims increased by 56 percent from 2015 to 2016 and a 65 percent increase in the prior year.
The briefing ran on the assumption and conclusion that the hearing unjustly targeted “law-abiding Muslims in our society” while also suggesting that the witnesses focus their attention on activities that Muslims are taking which are inherently legal, and framing it as though they were breaking the law or acting in a threatening manner.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, claimed in her testimony that she was pleased with President Trump’s labeling of radical Islam as the real threat, rather than just general terror which was scapegoated under President Bush. This perhaps raises the issue of the impact on Islamophobia if only one religion is targeted as a threat.
Monday, more headlines were made after a non-Muslim man plowed his car into a group of Muslims leaving their mosque, killing one and injuring 10. The man was reportedly yelling anti-Muslim slurs after striking the crowd.
British Police stand guard after closing off area where incident occurred
This was followed by the death of a Muslim teenager in Fairfax County, VA when a group of girls leaving their mosque were attacked by a man allegedly wielding a baseball bat, though the death of the girl wasn’t ruled a hate crime by authorities.
Photograph of Nabra Hassanen the Muslim teen found dead by police Monday night in Virginia
“It’s gonna get worse and worse. You’re gonna’ have more world trade centers…. Yes, we have to look at mosques. Yes, we should respect mosques, but we have to look at them to see what’s happening because something is happening in there. Man, there’s anger… don’t worry about profiling I promise I’ll defend you.”
That was Donald Trump on the campaign trail last year during his campaign office’s announcement of the now infamous Muslim ban. In the same speech, he posited the question of where “this hatred comes from” to a crowd of his supporters. Comparing this statement to President Bush’s ideas on Islam directly following the 9/11 attacks, the shift in political rhetoric has undoubtedly influenced perceptions of Islam and followers of its faith in the west contributing to more unfounded xenophobia.