09.05.08
The Only Good Muslim is the Anti-Muslim
RG mail
http://www.counterpunch.org/junaid08272008.html
CounterPunch August 27, 2008
The Only Good Muslim is the Anti-Muslim
Why Liberals Fear Islam
By M. Junaid Levesque-Alam
For some, Barack Obamas stature as a man of the left has fallen
precipitously, like late autumn leaves shed by branches bowing to the
will of winter.
Disappointment has often been self-inflicted. Supporters have dipped
their pens deeply into the inkwell of Obamas inspiring story and
written their own lines on Afghanistan, oil drilling, or the death
penalty – only to see these wishful words unceremoniously erased by
presidential politics or the senators own views.
But for American Muslims and progressive allies, both eager to see an
end to the vilification of Arabs and Muslims in the United States,
Obamas mantra of hope and change barely set in before it expired.
First we witnessed the embarrassing spectacle of micro-level ethnic
cleansing when two Arab women with headscarves were whisked offstage
ahead of a campaign photo-op in Detroit. Then we heard Obama call
false claims about his purportedly Muslim identity “smears” as if he
was accused not of belonging to an Abrahamic faith observed by more
than 1.2 billion people, but of slinking out of Congress to visit a
brothel. Soon after we saw the senator genuflect before AIPAC and call
for a permanently Israeli Jerusalem – a vision the Jewish state has
assiduously tried to realize by macro-level ethnic cleansing, purging
its Arab residents.
A more recent political maneuver also turned out to be a purge: the
Obama campaigns Muslim outreach coordinator, Mazen Asbahi, “resigned”
this month after a brief stint of several days. The event went almost
unnoticed.
But two sharply different responses to this episode – and the standing
afforded to the authors of these responses – reveal that the senator
is not alone in failing to stanch Americas anti-Islamic miasma.
Rather, the shortcoming is a collective one, shared by many liberals
whose prejudice against Muslims and Arab-Americans is surpassed only
by an apparent disinterest in correcting it.
One response to the resignation came from James Zogby. An
Arab-American Christian, Zogbys credentials as a man rooted in his
community are matchless. He helped found the American-Arab
Anti-Discrimination Committee. He led non-sectarian campaigns to
assist war victims in Palestine and Lebanon. And he serves as
president of the Arab American Institute, a Washington, D.C. think
tank.
Yet despite 30 years of community advocacy and experience, his views
on Arab and Muslim issues appear in just two popular non-ethnic
publications. One is The Huffington Post. The other is in Egypt.
Commenting on Asbahis short tenure, Zogby writes, “In the brief time
he held his position we spoke almost daily. He learned so much and did
so much to make Arab Americans and American Muslims feel included in
the campaign.”
“Then,” Zogby observes, “it happened.” One of the many websites
“monitoring” Muslims in America discovered that eight years ago Asbahi
served on a board which included a controversial imam. Asbahi resigned
from the board after two weeks.
Like vultures eyeing a wounded gazelle, the usual assortment of
right-wing bloggers descended on Asbahi. They vilified him as a closet
fundamentalist for once belonging to the Muslim Student Association, a
well-established mainstream group with branches on dozens of college
campuses across the U.S. and Canada.
Not to be outdone, the Wall Street Journal threatened to amplify the
echo chamber, the walls of which reverberate with the hysterics of its
associates in the right-wing “blogosphere. ”
Faced with mounting pressure and bereft of support from any quarter,
Asbahi and the campaign “agreed” he would relinquish his post.
This sequence of events comes as no surprise to anyone familiar with
neoconservative methods. It is but a reenactment of previous attacks:
the mendacious 2005 campaign to oust Columbia University professors
who used Israels own archives to dismantle pleasant fictions about its
history; the dissemination of e-mails containing crude anti-Semitic
nonsense sent out in professors names to destroy their credibility;
and the ongoing efforts to publicly intimidate universities into
denying academics employment or tenure.
But amid the past few years of attacks, outrages, and, yes, smears,
hurled at Muslims and Arabs in this country, one Muslim figure stands
curiously unsullied: Irshad Manji. She, too, wrote about Asbahis
dismissal, though we would do well to acquaint ourselves with the
author first.
Unlike most of her coreligionists, Manji has been lavished with
attention and awards by mainstream and liberal America. She garnered
Oprah Winfreys first “Chutzpah” award, Ms. Magazines “Feminist for the
21st Century” seal of approval, New York Universitys Wagner School
“Moral Courage Project,” a column in The Huffington Post, production
of a PBS documentary, and the list goes on.
In an era when Muslims find themselves boxed in by political attacks
here and military assaults abroad, one wonders: what is Manjis secret
to success?
She wrote a book – and not just any book. Titled The Trouble With
Islam Today, hers won applause not only from liberals but other, more
interesting quarters. The Wall Street Journal praised it as
“refreshingly provocative” and “deserv[ing] of the attention it is
receiving.” Daniel Pipes declared, “Manji – a practicing Muslim -
brings real insight to her subject.” Phyillis Chesler beamed, “Manji
has written a bold, sane, passionate, compelling book.” And Alan
Dershowitz announced, “Manji is a fresh, new and intriguing voice of
Islamic reform.”
A fine example of damning with loud praise.
What could a Muslim have written that would delight supporters of
bombing and torturing Muslims? What sweet words could have moved
Daniel Pipes – who specializes in hyping anti-Islamic hysteria on Fox
News and elsewhere – to welcome into his generous bosom the ideas of a
“practicing Muslim?” What might motivate Alan Dershowitz, better known
for backing the torture of Muslims than for reading their books, to
plug Manjis effort?
The answer lies in the content. The Trouble With Islam Today is an
unhinged polemic that derides Muslims and demeans their faith.
Examining a few of the books points should reveal what has caught the
fancy of neoconservatives and liberals alike.
The author devotes two pages to comparing Osama bin Laden to Prophet
Muhammad. “Is it mere happenstance,” Manji rhetorically asks, “that
bin Laden spends so much time in caves, like the meditating [Prophet]
did?” With penetrating and piercing logic – in the sense that one must
penetrate ones skull and pierce the cortex to succumb to it – she goes
on in this vein, declaring “camel saddles” and “online transactions”
twin evils. The “parallels” between Osama, the man who blesses the
murder of innocent people, and Muhammad, the man who forgave the
murderers of his closest companions, “continue to proliferate,” Manji
insists, much to the delight of the Muslim-haters behind the curtains.
A good portion of the book is also dedicated to attacking the Quran
(and the Quran alone), which the intrepid author does without any
background in religious studies or a single footnote. But no matter.
This book, Manji intones, is “profoundly at war with itself.”
Religious texts should apparently read like do-it-yourself plumbing
guides, bereft of subtlety or layers of meaning, particularly if you
are trying to flush the whole thing down the toilet to boost your
celebrity status among Islamophobes.
Manjis fans must especially enjoy her excoriation of Muslims as fake
victims. Muslims wallow in their “screaming self-pity,” she snickers,
as though one ought to see the fuselage of cruise missiles as
half-full rather than half-empty as they fly en route to the nearest
wedding celebration or apartment building.
Manjis attacks on Muslims appear almost kind next to the beating she
doles out to logic itself. She surmises that since Muslims have been
more harmed by Muslims than non-Muslims (based on what data or
criteria, we dare not guess), there is little reason to complain about
atrocities authored under the “war on terror.” She does not add
whether she also ordered families of Sept. 11th victims to get over
themselves when the casualties were surpassed by that years domestic
homicides – a case of “Americans having been more harmed by Americans
than non-Americans.”
Finally, Manji enjoys ridiculing dispossessed Palestinians. Ignoring
over two decades of work by Jewish scholars and human rights groups on
Israeli ethnic cleansing and massacres, she neatly eliminates the
Palestinians altogether by dubbing them Jordanians and hails Israel
for its “compassion.” It must have been precisely this “compassion”
that moved 23 ANC veterans, several of them Jewish, to compare the
Israeli occupation with South African apartheid during a recent visit.
Now well-acquainted with Americas favorite Muslim, let us turn to her
article on the departure of Obamas former coordinator, Mazen Asbahi.
In a Huffington Post piece, she demonstrates no concern about the
vilification enabled Asbahis dismissal. Indeed, she fails to mention
it even once. Is this because Manji is too busy contributing to the
problem to pause and reflect? Or is it because this would upset her
core base – the neoconservatives who mount these smear campaigns?
Whatever the case, Manji performs her predictable pre-programmed
attack routine, observing contemptuously, “Mazen Asbahi has just
resigned. I cant say Im disheartened. Hed been embraced by groups like
the Muslim Public Affairs Council and the Islamic Society of North
America, renowned for their conservative politics and moderate
double-speak.”
Writing a piece occasioned by attacks on one Muslim, Manji manages to
magnify the insult by attacking thousands of other Muslims.
According to her politics, anyone who does not dance to the detonation
of cluster bombs is already suspect. So her invective aimed at groups
representing thousands of American Muslims, which she never bothers to
back up with arguments, is understandable.
Not yet satisfied with herself, she goes on to pant about “most”
American Muslims being stuck in a 7th century – or perhaps 10th
century, depending on her mood – “time warp.” Serving as 21st century
Americas doctors, teachers, engineers, shopkeepers, and plant workers,
Muslims have been too busy to notice this worrisome defect.
Concluding with a few shopworn words about “moral courage” and
“revolutionary ethos,” Manji polishes off her attacks on the community
by invoking vague platitudes about Muslim “reform.” This is Manjis
sole gimmick: disingenuous calls for Muslims to move forward belied by
support for those pulling America backward.
What does the liberal adulation of a professional Islamophobe – one
openly adored by neoconservatives, no less – say about the state of
American liberalism? Will liberals come to respect and support genuine
Muslim and Arab voices, like Zogby and countless unrecognized figures?
Or will they continue to lazily rely on self-professed stand-ins like
Irshad Manji?
If liberalism persists on its present path, it will not only alienate
a targeted community in America but pave the way for further
persecution.
Perfectly illustrating this point is The New York Times fawning
characterization of Manji as “Osama bin Ladens worst nightmare.” This
is very far from the truth.
For years, many Muslim and non-Muslim voices have said bin Ladens
ideology is a freak phenomenon, fashioned in the ghoulish laboratory
of Cold War politics and fed on a steady diet of American-Israeli
assaults in the Middle East. At odds with more than 1,300 years of
Muslim thought and history, these voices have insisted, bin Laden is a
perversion of genuine Islam.
But Manji argues the opposite: bin Laden is a genuine product of
Islam, which is itself perverted. Osama, we will recall, is for Manji
the new Muhammad.
In showering attention and accolades on Manji, many liberals thus
validate and promote the idea that extremist Islam is Islam itself.
Could bin Laden dream of a greater gift? Could the neoconservatives?
Perhaps liberals find Manjis message appealing because ascribing
extremism to some innate feature of Islam “disappears” from view the
consequences of American foreign policy. Invasion and occupation
disappear. Torture and abuse disappear. Corpses of slaughtered
civilians and carrions of neutralized nations disappear.
The desire to own a clear conscience, even one obtained through the
muddiest logic, should never be underestimated.
There may be other answers: a fear of questioning the dominant
narrative; of criticizing Israel; of discovering Islamic perspectives;
of engaging the Other, who is often harangued but rarely heard.
Whatever the reason, American liberals would do well to stop
glorifying anti-Muslim celebrities and start building relationships
with honest Arab and Muslim voices.
We are waiting.
M. Junaid Levesque-Alam blogs about America and Islam at Crossing the
Crescent ( http://www.crossingthecrescent.com ) and writes about
American Muslim identity for WireTap magazine. Co-founder of Left
Hook, a youth journal that ran from Nov. 2003 to March 2006, he works
as a communications coordinator for an anti-domestic violence agency
in the NYC area. He can be reached at: junaidalam1@gmail.com
_______________________________________________