IN THE years since the towers fell in New York City, a new villain has emerged in the story of America. These bearded, belligerent monsters, or what our presidential candidates call “Islamic Extremists” now haunt the political scene. For the two men who wish to lead our country, terrorism constitutes the greatest threat to our way of life. But like all the other anniversaries of September 11th, this year’s remembrance largely ignores an enduring problem: the way we think and speak about Muslims.
Two Muslim Congressman now act for the American people in the House of Representatives. During the summer I was able to interview Representatives Keith Ellison, (D-Minn.), and Andre Carson, (D-Ind.), and the conversation helped to illuminate the problem we face. As the only two Muslims ever to be elected to Congress they maintain a rare perspective.
As the more reserved of the two, Carson was not quick to point fingers. Citing “President Bush’s distinction,” Carson referred to the initial solidarity Bush tried to preserve with the Muslim world immediately following 9/11. Extremists on the fringe should not represent Islam, and for Carson, Bush was brave and noble to maintain this distinction. The issue, according to Carson, is that the line between violent action and peaceful faith has been blurred. For the representative from Indiana, the fact that we now associate a religion with terror is not an explicit political construction, but a misfortunate media issue. He believes that years of reporting and political debate has tainted the way the public views Islam.
Ellison was much more accusatory. Referring to specific congressmen by name, he connected the way we think about Islam with the way certain people speak about it. Although he implicitly agreed with Carson — that the media is partly responsible — Congressman Ellison wanted, passionately, to affix the faces of politicians to political rhetoric. Speaking about these Congressmen, Ellison said, “They let vile people represent the faith ... and the public assumes certain ideas if you say them long enough.” For Ellison, the negative connotation of Islam is attributed less to thematic media coverage and more to the Republican political agenda. The prejudice we have against Islam, he believes, has a specific agency.
Although the congressmen did not share the same views on who or what is responsible for this problem, both representatives agreed that it does exist. If we consider that notorious New Yorker cartoon — the one that could have been called “Stephen Colbert’s Portrait of the Obamas” — we can sense the uncomfortable relationship this country has with Islam. Think how that word is almost always uttered with certain other words, like extremism, terror and violence. And consider also how precious little Senators Obama and McCain have said to defend the faith.
Carson was concerned less with identifying troublemakers and more with how to implement reform. Supported by research done by Georgetown University and the Muslim American Society, he argued for more American Muslims to become politically active — in order to strengthen our political dialogue.
According to Zahid H. Bukhari, director of Georgetown University’s Project MAPS, a long-term research project on American Muslims, there are between one and a half and two million registered Muslim voters in America. Bukhari says “more Muslims are running for office,” and “Islamic centers are becoming more of community centers.” This mirrors the way American churches are used for political mobilization.
But even with Bukhari’s optimistic data, Ellison’s worry still goes unchallenged. For how can an increase in Muslim civic participation combat an entire party’s political apparatus? If you agree with Ellison — that the Republican Party is largely responsible for our distaste for Islam — than it must be the Democratic Party, the party of opposition, that shifts the national narrative.
Muslims standing up and speaking for themselves is the first step, but it will have to be the millions more non-Muslims, the other 433 Representatives who must defend against ignorance. Unless the tiny population of American Muslims can galvanize the rest of us, the effort to distinguish Islam and terror must extend beyond the Mosque.
Instead of asking ourselves certain dead ended questions like “Is Islam compatible with the West?” we should ask instead, “How can we better integrate 21st century Muslims into the global economy?” And rather than just asking “How can we design weaponry to destroy all terrorists?” we should ask also, “What political conditions foster such hopelessness in men and women of the modern Middle East?”
Because if we allow Islam and its followers to be trampled, if we become afraid of a religion we are not quite familiar with, we dishonor the fallen of September. It is like we are agreeing with those extremists — the ones who say “All can be persuaded with fear.”
Hamza Shaban’s column usually appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at h.shaban@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 4 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
