iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Asma Uddin

Asma Uddin

Posted: June 13, 2010 08:32 PM

Writers, philosophers, professors, and politicians have referred to the United States of America as "a nation founded by immigrants." This fact can hardly be refuted -- especially considering the existence of the term "Native American." America has dealt with the question and issues resulting from immigration since its birth in the 18th century. The most cancerous aspects of America's response to immigration are bigotry and racism, and they are flaring up again, this time in reference to Muslims.

America's unofficial "open-door" attitude during the colonies' infancy worked to bring the new nation out of economic obscurity. Yet the American legacy, built on the backs of immigrants, has not been historically favorable to its creators. Quakers in colonial Massachusetts were subjected to auto-de-fé ("act of faith"), a ritual associated with the Spanish Inquisition that involved public penance of condemned heretics and apostates. The Blaine Amendments, whose adoption in many states was made an explicit condition for entering the Union, were motivated by anti-Catholic animus and remain on the books in several states today. Anti-Irish sentiment permeated the U.S. during the Industrial Revolution; the Catholic Irish who immigrated to America in the late 1850s faced "No Irish Need Apply" (NINA) notices in New York City shop windows, factory gates, and workshop doors for years.

Mormons, too, faced discrimination. The Missouri Executive Order 44, or "extermination order," was issued by Missouri governor Lilburn Boggs to ensure that "the Mormons ... be treated as enemies, and ... be exterminated or driven from the State if necessary for the public peace. The Chinese immigrants in the late 19th century faced anti-Chinese riots, lynching, murders, and the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882 -- even after helping the nation complete the Transcontinental Railroad. Jewish Americans also faced bigotry and discrimination. And perhaps the most devastating case of racism: the Japanese internment camps starting in 1941, which targeted all Japanese, regardless of citizenship. In each case, the anti-immigrant backlash was fueled by paranoia -- a deep-seated fear of those who are different.

The latest outbreak of this paranoia is the anti-Muslim sentiment that is becoming increasingly common and increasingly pernicious. While by no means at the level of interment camps or extermination orders, the anti-Muslim rhetoric nonetheless raises serious concerns. A Houston radio host feels comfortable advocating that a mosque be bombed if built near the site of Ground Zero. A few weeks ago, a mosque in Jacksonville, Florida actually was bombed -- the most recent of several mosque bombings that have occurred over the past few year.

Richard Bernstein's recent New York Times piece, "The Danger of Demonizing Adherents of Islam," focuses on another egregious incident of anti-Muslim paranoia. He describes a bus ad campaign created by Pamela Geller, the executive director of Stop the Islamization of America and the editor and publisher of AtlasShrugs.com. The Geller bus ads ask questions like "Leaving Islam?" "Fatwa on your head?" and "Is your family or community threatening you?" Geller started her campaign in response to a bus ad campaign in San Francisco intended to inform and educate the general public about the Islamic faith. According to Geller, these informational ads put out by Muslim groups were mere bait to first convert people to Islam and then to violently punish anyone who decided to thereafter leave the religion.

How Geller came up with this bizarre interpretation of the ads is a mystery. As Bernstein rightly notes in his article, there is scant evidence that Muslim Americans hold such a belief, much less actively go out and ensnare innocent Americans into a deathtrap. While in some Muslim countries apostasy is a crime punishable by death, such absurdities do not make the faith.

Geller and others are welcome to pose sincere theological or ideological questions to Muslims, as theological debate about any religion, including Islam, helps keep it vibrant and relevant to changing times. But generalized stereotypes rooted in hate and suspicion simply perpetuate what Bernstein calls a "vicious cycle." Well-meaning initiatives like the San Francisco bus campaign, a vehicle of a counter-narrative to radicalism, are denounced by Geller-ites as symbols of precisely that radicalism. In turn, "if there are more terrorist attempts by Muslims on American soil, there will be more Americans paying for bus ads and other things to express their rage at Islam itself as well as at Muslims in America, and to encourage the idea that America is, or ought to be, its and their enemy." Creating that dichotomy then just serves to create more enemy Muslims. Endlessly spiraling downward, such a cycle may lead to the death of "the live-and-let-live civility of American life."

Undoubtedly correct in his analysis, Bernstein overlooks one point: Americans, generally living in peace with one another, nonetheless created that peaceful coexistence after years of strife suffered by minority groups at the hands of the majority. Geller and her supporters are, in that sense, traditional Americans. What complicates their position, though, is the fact that while roughly half of the Muslim American community consists of first-, second-, or third-generation immigrants, the other half are African-American Muslims who have been here since this country's inception. The Islam of the Black American had, however, constituted "Black Religion" -- what Dr. Sherman Jackson describes in Islam and the Blackamerican as a "holy protest against anti-black racism." Only with the influx of immigrant Muslims has Islam become a religion to be contended with by the broader culture.

Geller's relegation of Islam to enemy status creates an Islam to be feared and abhorred. It is a conception that is not grounded in reality, but it is nonetheless propelling American society down the same road it has traveled many times before, to its own detriment. Reflecting upon this historical trajectory should help us see past the present environment, fraught with fear, and move to the next stage of coexistence, where we learn to look past two-dimensional stereotypes and generalizations and see the newcomer not as "other" but as "American."

 

Follow Asma Uddin on Twitter: www.twitter.com/altmuslimah

Writers, philosophers, professors, and politicians have referred to the United States of America as "a nation founded by immigrants." This fact can hardly be refuted -- especially considering the exis...
Writers, philosophers, professors, and politicians have referred to the United States of America as "a nation founded by immigrants." This fact can hardly be refuted -- especially considering the exis...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,084
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (11 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Faiza Waseem
03:50 PM on 06/30/2010
http://www.muslimsforpeace.org/
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paula Ann
08:58 PM on 06/22/2010
islam will not be accepted in the usa for basic reasons:

- islam forbids alcohol - bad for the beer, wine, and hard liquor industry

- islam forbids the consumption of swine - bad for the pork industry

- islam forbids intimacy outside of marriage - bad for the sex industry

- islam demands modest clothing - bad for the "fashion" industry

- islam forbids usery - DISASTER for the financial industry

since the majority of musims don't purchase those goods and services they present an economic challenge to those industries
03:17 PM on 06/22/2010
Furthermore, muslims will never been seen as anything but a threatening "Other" until they stop breeding terrorists, or at least slow down to the level of Christian and Jewish terrorists.
11:39 AM on 06/21/2010
Islam... it's a blast
04:08 PM on 06/21/2010
The great Voltaire did not share your convictions about Christianity.
“Christianity is the most ridiculous, the most absurd and bloody religion that has ever infected the world".
Voltaire French Philosopher and Writer. One of the greatest of all French authors, 1694-1778

BORN-AGAIN BUSH

GOD TOLD ME TO INVADE - THE INDEPENDENT
President George Bush has claimed he was told by God to invade Iraq and attack Osama bin... Another telling sign of Mr Bush's religion was his answer to Mr ...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bush-god-told-me-to-invade-iraq-509925.html

TOTAL IRAQI CASUALTIES
Estimates of the total number of Iraqi war-related deaths are highly disputed. National Public Radio has a bar chart with various estimates.[1] Project Censored has named the "corporate media blackout" of the number of Iraqi deaths caused by US occupation (which it estimates at over one million) as the number one censored story for 2009.[2]

IN DECEMBER 2007, THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT REPORTED THAT THERE WERE 5 MILLION ORPHANS IN IRAQ - ALMOST HALF OF THE COUNTRY'S CHILDREN.[68]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War
11:32 AM on 06/21/2010
You should fear all religious groups. Their reasons are not objective, so you can't argue logic with them. They live only to expand their power, so don't try to stand in their way. They are only happy when they have achieved their objective: A one party theocracy.
03:56 PM on 06/21/2010
Thanks, SuperBenFranklin.
08:29 PM on 06/17/2010
"To its own detriment", I say America is better off because of our ability to force the issue (historically through violence and dialogue), and eventually come to understand and acceptance of “others” as American. I think the issue lies in allegiance. I know it is lame and petty but if one American doesn’t think that the "other" will fight with them against anything "un-American" (whatever that means, liberal or conservative) then there will be a conflict, unlike Europe where they will give the "others" their own territory and not facilitate true integration.
been2there
Facts have a liberal bias.
03:29 PM on 06/17/2010
I have been conduction an experiment in religious tolerance this year by wearing a hijab (head scarf). I look like the white Anglo-Saxon Protestant I am, so my hope was to tease apart religious and racial intolerance. While one person's experience cannot ever be definitive, I have run into no overt bigotry with my hijab. I do know some women who have, so I am afraid that "Islamophobia" has more to do with skin than worship.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:05 PM on 06/17/2010
hijab is not religous, it is actually a relic of the arab slave trade. subjecting women to a life inferior to family pets.
been2there
Facts have a liberal bias.
12:59 AM on 06/18/2010
I know that. It is, however, a widely recognized symbol of Islam, and therefore useful as a lightning rod. This experiment is not about hijab, it is about us.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:13 PM on 06/21/2010
Since you experienced no intolerance with your experiment you have decided that the experiment was at fault and the absence of intolerance does not prove religious tolerance but must prove racial intolerance? A bit of a leap.

Before making such a statement you would need further experiments. At the minimum you would need two woman one white and one of middle eastern appearance. Both acting the same in manner and temperament. Both dressed the same. Going to the same places. Doing the same things and interacting with the same people. Oh, and those people your test subjects interact with, would have to be in the same frame of mind when dealing with both woman. There are more things that would need to be controlled but I think you get the idea. Your experiment may have been a bit of personal fun but it has no scientific basis what so ever.
been2there
Facts have a liberal bias.
05:12 PM on 06/30/2010
I did point out that one person's experience could never be definitive, remember? I am fully aware of the deficiencies of one person wearing hijab and I said that I was "afraid" that it meant racism more than religious intolerance. Neither is acceptable.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jjdrma
12:02 PM on 06/16/2010
1979 change, you are a funny dude indeed. I lived in Iran in 1990s. You compare Iran with USA? Even Brits dont dare to do that sir, I lived there as well......deluded living and in denial...you cannot dream of a blog like this in your nation..
I agree with you that wahabi sauds are the real enemies of peace, you are right there....but Irans oppressive regime is not helping the nation, people must become free...work on it
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:23 PM on 06/16/2010
The funny thing is.... 1979 change is an American!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jjdrma
11:25 AM on 06/16/2010
an Iranian muslim runs this blog- www.faithfreedom.org
a bangladeshi muslim runs this- www.islam-facts.com
please forward this info.and let the muslim apologists debate them
yes , as someone said below we are islam ignorant and and we will get the enlightenment from the above sites.Hope those guys running the sites will not be killed.
09:18 AM on 06/16/2010
Why do all Muslim countries support Pakistan? How come there is not even one Islamic country that is against Pakistan?

Why is that?

think about it! MusIims have to support other MusIims no matter how eviI they are.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jjdrma
11:29 AM on 06/16/2010
good point
120 ahmedis were massacred in Pakistan last month in an explicitly religious violence. The Ahmedis were declared nonmuslims by the sunni Pak govt. Not a whimper from Saudi, Turkey or Malaysia etc, why so? 9 were killed off Israel coast everyone started to complain.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Victoria Winslett
10:27 AM on 06/18/2010
Pakistan has the capacity to defend itself to a degree which other countries, that you might call "Muslim", do not. That is what I was trying to say, Pakistan has allies because of its capabilities and not because of religious calls for allegiance among Muslims despite the atrocious acts of some.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Victoria Winslett
10:19 AM on 06/18/2010
I think the issue here might be more about the fact that it is public knowledge that Pakistan has nukes and not that "Muslims have to support other Muslims no matter how evil they are."
10:00 PM on 06/15/2010
We're not islamophobic, we're islamo-realistic.
photo
truthupontruth
Grateful for every atom, photon and second
11:33 PM on 06/15/2010
No, you're Islamo-ignorant.
photo
santafesam
smart&snarky
06:36 PM on 06/16/2010
How about Islamo-experienced.
11:54 PM on 06/15/2010
Oleg1: "We're not islamophobic, we're islamo-realistic"

That statement is worth repeating.

If anyone is interested in "Islamophobia" and the origins of the word you'll get alot out of this video:

http://fora.tv/2007/10/30/Islamophobia
photo
Wozzeck
Pearl Bay, Australia
12:23 AM on 06/16/2010
From a bigot who regularly writes for Kristol's Weekly Standard and the National Review.
12:29 AM on 06/16/2010
The problem with your argument and video is that US is on its way to wage war on one of the most moderate branches of Islam in Iran and is very friendly with one of most extremist cults Wahabis practiced by Saudi Arabia!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AntigoneRisen
07:44 PM on 06/15/2010
A phobia is an irrational fear. Please tell me how any woman's fear of Islam is irrational given:

IThe fact that woman's testimony is worth half that of a man's. Men are allowed multiple spouses, while women are not. The terms under which men and women can seek divorce are unequal. The amount they inherit is unequal. Men are given the authority to chastise their wives. Women are given NO such authority to chastise their husbands. The debate over the type of chastisement overlooks this serious flaw. Men can take women as sex slaves - for repeated, at-will rape - under the Koran, and are referred to as "right hand possessions". Men are never subject to this. Men can have a limitless number of right hand possessions.

Discriminating against individual Muslims based upon their religion is a problem; however, my - and many, many others' - problem with Islam is with the content of the Koran.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jjdrma
08:32 PM on 06/15/2010
" problem with Islam is with the content of the Koran"- more importantly how it is followed literally word to word by most adherents...
08:54 PM on 06/15/2010
jjdrma, this is what we define as 'fundamentalism.'
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AntigoneRisen
11:21 PM on 06/16/2010
No, more importantly the contents. If the horrid passages weren't there, no one would have to worry about interpreting them. The fact that they are there in a book that is claimed to be divinely revealed truth is extraordinarily significant.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MatthewRobertson
I'm 26. I'm gay. I like film. I care about shit.
09:24 PM on 06/15/2010
First, Men are allowed multiple wives according to the Mormon faith. Why isn't there a campaign against them? Second, do we forget that it was only relatively recent (within 100 years) that women weren't allowed to vote or have many rights. The Christian faith teaches that women are supposed to be submissive to their husbands. Sex slavery isn't a religious issue, its a social one.

Also the ten commandments refer to women as property and yet millions of Christians want them posted on our courthouses. The problem is with interpretation and fundamentalism, as it is with every religion, not the religion or the adherents of such religion.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:00 AM on 06/16/2010
"First, Men are allowed multiple wives according to the Mormon faith. Why isn't there a campaign against them? "

Lol, there was a pretty nice one;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_War

They were kicked out of several states and had to give up polygamy by order of the Federal government....at gun point
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AntigoneRisen
11:18 PM on 06/16/2010
The mainstream LDS disavowed polygyny over a century ago. Secondly, I have problems with Christianity (all forms, including Mormonism), Judaism, Islam, etc. Religion is a social institution, and the Abrahamic religions ALL validate sexual slavery (read about the Midianites).

What we are talking about is current, prevalent practice. In that there is a SIGNIFICANT difference.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Michael Valentine
Retired SEIU Member
07:23 PM on 06/15/2010
Christian to the core I am here to tell you all that we are all neighbors.

And should you think one people or another an enemy consider that Jesus rejoins us to "Love your enemies."

As I ride the church bus on Sundays we pass a lot of Muslims in their colorful dress and that brings me joy at the sight. When I get to church I go to the Saigon Deli for Vietnamese coffee and leave the change in the Buddha dish.

No wonder Jesus said His burden was easy and His yoke light. When you bury your prejudice and embrace love .... the world will love you back.

Embrace hate and reap injustice.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ujwala Samant
09:10 PM on 06/15/2010
I believe that all religions say that... and I wish we all would enact that!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Michael Valentine
Retired SEIU Member
10:06 PM on 06/15/2010
It is or should be the aim of all believers.
12:03 AM on 06/16/2010
Thank you, I hope there were more Christians like you and together we could expose warmongers who under the name of Jesus Christ are in business of filling their pockets and killing people in ME!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Michael Valentine
Retired SEIU Member
12:34 PM on 06/16/2010
Ya warmongering Christians. Warms your heart to know that Jesus warned us about them. "Many will come and call in My name. By their fruits you will know them."