I grew up in three Muslim-majority countries - Libya, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan - and reached North America in my mid-20s. After settling in Canada two years ago, the events of September 11 took place. Nineteen kidnappers of my father's religion - 15 of them from a country where they grew up - flew fuel planes to penetrate the World Trade Center, killing thousands of people.
Two conflicting narratives of ash began to emerge, as with most issues in the United States: one from the right-wing, and the other from the left.
Today, in a nation that is more divided than ever after an election season full of hatred, the differences have reached a sharp edge.
Right-wing vision is clear: We are at war with Islamic terrorists. They are the ones who launched it, and we have to respond. We know the common denominator in this equation, enough political fitness, we have to keep our country safe, and if this means the typical security screening of Muslims, restrictions on Muslim immigration, or even "full and complete prohibition of Muslim entry into the United States" Donald Trump last year, so be it!
The left says: No. We need to carefully differentiate things, and read our entire history. Islamists simply respond to the atrocities committed by America around the world. We imperialists, who colonized our country and supported them with military-industrial shoes and built our civilization at their expense. We must look at the inner grievances and the underlying reasons behind these actions. The "biggest terrorist operations" in the opinion of left-wing hero Noam Chomsky are those of Obama.
Both of these narratives are mistaken. One assumes that Muslims are inherently violent because Islam is inherently violent. While the other portrayed the act of criticizing Islam as a fanaticism against all Muslims.
The main difference overlooked by both sides is that Islam is an idea, while Muslims are people.
Humans have rights and they deserve respect, while ideas, books and beliefs have no rights, and these things do not deserve respect. There is no sacred belief, but our right to believe in what we desire is holy.
The lack of differentiation between the above and the extreme right to demonize all Muslims because of the problems in Islam, and the extreme left to ignore the full legitimate problems with Islam in an effort to defend the Muslims. What is the result? One party calls for Muslims to be banned, and the other claims that Islamic terrorism does not exist.
I am a liberal atheist who grew up in a Muslim family. I am not the only one, as recent polls reveal millions of atheists and secular non-adherents in the Muslim world, although you will probably hear about them only if they are whipped in prison, executed by the state, or killed by some mobs. A survey conducted by WIN and Gallup found that 19% of people in Saudi Arabia - the cradle of Islam and Muhammad - identify themselves as "non-religious". To illustrate, in Italy, this is 15%. The same poll shows that 5 percent of Saudis - more than a million people - define themselves as "sure atheists" - the same percentage in the United States.
The number of secularists in the Muslim world is increasing and they are being aggressively targeted within their societies. Without a doubt, these free-thinking rebels - who fight for universal values such as freedom of expression, freedom and equality for their people - are not ashamed to criticize Islam. But put their lives at risk for doing so, and many have died because of it. Understand your allies most sincerely.
But when you fail to distinguish between the ideology we fight and the people who make up our families, friends and loved ones, you are resisting us.
After Trump announced the ban on Muslims, Farid Zakaria, one of the most respected American journalists in the world, felt that he had to adopt and cherish his Muslim identity. "I am not a committed Muslim, my wife is a Christian, and we did not raise our children to Islam. My views on religion are complex, so I stand in the middle between the godhead and the agnostic. My perspective is completely secular. "
Why does he adopt the title "Muslim"?
"As I watch the way Republican candidates divide Americans, I realize it's important to recognize the religion on which I was born. Donald Trump's fanaticism and charisma frighten me, not because I am a Muslim, but because I am an American. "
Do we really want to force the national American Muslims who are integrated into society like Zakaria to be confined to tribal classifications under Trump's presidency?
The greatest thing in America is that it enables people to sublimate over their identities. This certainly applies to American Muslims. Let's look at Mohamed Ali, or Ahmed Ertigon, the founder of Atlantic Records, who has identified us with the voices of Ray Charles, Aritha Franklin and Walid Zeppelin. Or comedian Dave Chapel. Or Aziz Azizi, who is openly secular, but was angry at Trump for targeting Muslims like his parents Jura.
The reduction of successful American Muslims in their work in the "Muslims" only does not help them sublimation over them. But to the taxonomy, ghettos and tribalism, and the exclusion of those who were to become allies to him.
We should be able to criticize any dogmatic idea frankly with our defense of people's right to believe in it. The failure of the left to address the political problem of Islam has left a position of moral strength a vacuum exploited by the Trumpi right-and successfully-in all possible controversial ways, by the reformist rebels in the Muslim world who feel betrayed by liberals and conservatives alike. Those who fight for freedom today - more than ever - need to support those who love freedom here.
The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world's problems.
- Mahatma Gandhi
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit