Islamists And Their Leftist Enablers
By Aidan Maconachy
Sometimes I think the wrong people are fighting the so-called "war on terror". I say so-called because to call it a "war" is a bit misleading. The war in Iraq may include elements that identify with Al Qaeda, but much of it is internecine conflict between Iraqi factions, most of whom couldn't care less about a global caliphate or any other visionary schemes hatched by bin Laden and al Zawahiri.
But sticking with the "war on terror" angle for a minute. It's odd in a way that Christian fundamentalists are leading the charge - led by preachers like Pat Robertson, Michael Evans and Franklin Graham.
Fact is, Christian fundamentalists have a good deal in common with their Islamist counterparts. Both Islamists and Christian fundies are people of "the book", have a fondness for scriptural laws and moral prohibitions, male leaders, outsize places of worship, bombastic rhetoric and prophetic utterances. The males among them generally prefer the women to be at home with the kids and have dinner ready at the appointed hour.
Christian fundamentalists are frequently a subject of ridicule dished out by leftists, feminists and other progressive types. However the same crew of detractors is much less willing to raise even a murmur of complaint about the behavior of Muslim radicals.
Ironically enough, a possibly more significant struggle with Islamism is going on in the cities of Europe - not on the streets of Baghdad. The values the Islamists are keen to import, for example sharia law, are inimical to everything Western society stands for and yet you have people like George Galloway making common cause with Islamists, along with other left wing groups. The rationale behind this bizarre alliance-of-convenience in the UK is anti-Blair and anti-establishment thinking at root and it is legitimizing a trend toward Muslim extremism that is on the rise.
According to a recent British survey, 40% of Muslims between the ages of 16 and 24 claim they would rather live under sharia law. This is a more extreme opinion than that of their parents. Among Muslims over the age of 55 the figure is just 17%.
Of the young British Muslims surveyed 36% said that Muslims who convert to another religion should be killed and 75% said they would prefer it if Muslim women chose to wear a veil.
The culture war that is shaping up shouldn't be interpreted as an attack on Islam, so much as a defense of secular values and the vital importance of minimizing the role of religion - all religion - in civil society. The reason it should not be viewed as anti-Islamic is because there are a significant number of Western Muslims who have no sympathy whatever for the veiling of women, let alone the introduction of sharia law. Moreover nowhere in the Quran does it stipulate that women must wear a niqab, the full face veil at the center of a row in UK schools.
Religious women, in Turkey as an example, live perfectly devout lives without resorting to Saudi veiling habits. In many instances the insistence on wearing the niqab in UK schools and work places, is more of a political statement than a religious one. It's a way of expressing militant disapproval about everything from the war in Iraq to the values of Western society.
From a different perspective, the veil is a symbol of separation. It is bound to have a psychological effect on the young woman wearing it - an effect that certainly won't help her to integrate with the school community. The veil announces her religion before she can even introduce herself. It objectifies her as "the Muslim" and serves as a visual reminder that she is "other".
A lot of effort has been expended in the West over the past few decades to break down sexist barriers. Girls are taught to be assertive. They are taught to view themselves as an equal to any boy. They are encouraged to take responsibility for their sexuality and life choices. Significant strides have been made to break down the barriers that traditionally kept females at one remove from their male peers.
It's not unreasonable to require Muslim immigrants to adapt. After all they chose to move to a culture that is for the most part secular. There should be no prohibition on the practice of their religion - simply the entirely reasonable expectation that they don't make the public practice of a religious lifestyle an obstacle to integration.
Aidan Maconachy resides in Ontario, Canada. He has a BA Hons and a BEd. He taught in the UK and Canada, and has been a contributor to a variety of magazines and newspapers over the years. You can visit his blog at http://aidanmaconachyblog.blogspot.com/
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Aidan_Maconachy
http://EzineArticles.com/?Islamists-And-Their-Leftist-Enablers&id=499837
Sometimes I think the wrong people are fighting the so-called "war on terror". I say so-called because to call it a "war" is a bit misleading. The war in Iraq may include elements that identify with Al Qaeda, but much of it is internecine conflict between Iraqi factions, most of whom couldn't care less about a global caliphate or any other visionary schemes hatched by bin Laden and al Zawahiri.
But sticking with the "war on terror" angle for a minute. It's odd in a way that Christian fundamentalists are leading the charge - led by preachers like Pat Robertson, Michael Evans and Franklin Graham.
Fact is, Christian fundamentalists have a good deal in common with their Islamist counterparts. Both Islamists and Christian fundies are people of "the book", have a fondness for scriptural laws and moral prohibitions, male leaders, outsize places of worship, bombastic rhetoric and prophetic utterances. The males among them generally prefer the women to be at home with the kids and have dinner ready at the appointed hour.
Christian fundamentalists are frequently a subject of ridicule dished out by leftists, feminists and other progressive types. However the same crew of detractors is much less willing to raise even a murmur of complaint about the behavior of Muslim radicals.
Ironically enough, a possibly more significant struggle with Islamism is going on in the cities of Europe - not on the streets of Baghdad. The values the Islamists are keen to import, for example sharia law, are inimical to everything Western society stands for and yet you have people like George Galloway making common cause with Islamists, along with other left wing groups. The rationale behind this bizarre alliance-of-convenience in the UK is anti-Blair and anti-establishment thinking at root and it is legitimizing a trend toward Muslim extremism that is on the rise.
According to a recent British survey, 40% of Muslims between the ages of 16 and 24 claim they would rather live under sharia law. This is a more extreme opinion than that of their parents. Among Muslims over the age of 55 the figure is just 17%.
Of the young British Muslims surveyed 36% said that Muslims who convert to another religion should be killed and 75% said they would prefer it if Muslim women chose to wear a veil.
The culture war that is shaping up shouldn't be interpreted as an attack on Islam, so much as a defense of secular values and the vital importance of minimizing the role of religion - all religion - in civil society. The reason it should not be viewed as anti-Islamic is because there are a significant number of Western Muslims who have no sympathy whatever for the veiling of women, let alone the introduction of sharia law. Moreover nowhere in the Quran does it stipulate that women must wear a niqab, the full face veil at the center of a row in UK schools.
Religious women, in Turkey as an example, live perfectly devout lives without resorting to Saudi veiling habits. In many instances the insistence on wearing the niqab in UK schools and work places, is more of a political statement than a religious one. It's a way of expressing militant disapproval about everything from the war in Iraq to the values of Western society.
From a different perspective, the veil is a symbol of separation. It is bound to have a psychological effect on the young woman wearing it - an effect that certainly won't help her to integrate with the school community. The veil announces her religion before she can even introduce herself. It objectifies her as "the Muslim" and serves as a visual reminder that she is "other".
A lot of effort has been expended in the West over the past few decades to break down sexist barriers. Girls are taught to be assertive. They are taught to view themselves as an equal to any boy. They are encouraged to take responsibility for their sexuality and life choices. Significant strides have been made to break down the barriers that traditionally kept females at one remove from their male peers.
It's not unreasonable to require Muslim immigrants to adapt. After all they chose to move to a culture that is for the most part secular. There should be no prohibition on the practice of their religion - simply the entirely reasonable expectation that they don't make the public practice of a religious lifestyle an obstacle to integration.
Aidan Maconachy resides in Ontario, Canada. He has a BA Hons and a BEd. He taught in the UK and Canada, and has been a contributor to a variety of magazines and newspapers over the years. You can visit his blog at http://aidanmaconachyblog.blogspot.com/
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Aidan_Maconachy
http://EzineArticles.com/?Islamists-And-Their-Leftist-Enablers&id=499837
posted by Gordon at
Thursday, April 05, 2007
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home