Opinion: Anti-Muslim rhetoric isn’t brave

[Rob L 3,811]

By Fareed Zakaria Opinion writer December 3, 2015

The most recent act of horrific violence in the United States — in San Bernardino, Calif. — was reportedly perpetrated by a Muslim man and woman. There are about 3 million Muslims in the United States, almost all of whom are law-abiding citizens. How should they react to the actions of the couple who killed 14 people on Wednesday?

The most commonly heard response is that Muslims must immediately and loudly condemn these acts of barbarity. But Dalia Mogahed, a Muslim American leader, argues eloquently that this is unfair. She made her case to NBC’s Chuck Todd.

Fareed Zakaria writes a foreign affairs column for The Post. He is also the host of CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS and a contributing editor for The Atlantic. View Archive

• Facebook
• RSS

“According to the FBI, the majority of domestic terrorist attacks are actually committed by white, male Christians. . . . When those things occur, we don’t suspect other people who share their faith and ethnicity of condoning them. We assume that these things outrage them just as much as they do anyone else. And we have to afford that same assumption of innocence to Muslims.”

Muslims face a double standard, but I understand why. Muslim terrorists don’t just happen to be Muslim. They claim to be motivated by religion, cite religious justifications for their actions and tell their fellow Muslims to follow in their bloody path. There are groups around the world spreading this religiously infused ideology and trying to seduce Muslims to become terrorists. In these circumstances, it is important for the majority of Muslims who profoundly disagree with jihad to speak up.

But it is also important to remember that there are 1.6 billion Muslims on the planet. If you took the total number of deaths from terrorism last year —about 30,000 — and assumed that 50 people were involved in planning each one (a vastly exaggerated estimate), it would still add up to less than 0.1 percent of the world’s Muslims.

The writer Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a tough critic of Islam. She divides the Muslim world into two groups: Mecca Muslims and Medina Muslims. (The Koranic revelations to Muhammad made in Mecca are mostly about brotherhood and love; the ones in Medina have the fire and brimstone.) She estimates that 3 percent of the worldwide community are radical Medina Muslims, the other 97 percent being mainstream Mecca Muslims. Now, 3 percent works out to a large number, 48 million, and that’s why we spend lots of time, money and effort dealing with the threats that might emanate from them. But that still leaves the other 97 percent — the more than 1.55 billion — who are not jihadists. They may be reactionary and backward in many ways. But that is not the same as being terrorists.

While I believe that Muslims do bear a responsibility to speak up, non-Muslims also have a responsibility not to make assumptions about them based on such a small minority. Individuals should be judged as individuals and not placed under suspicion for some “group characteristic.” It is dehumanizing and un-American to do otherwise.

It also misunderstands how religion works in people’s lives. Imagine a Bangladeshi taxi driver in New York. He has not, in any meaningful sense, chosen to be Muslim. He was born into a religion, grew up with it, and like hundreds of millions of people around the world in every religion, follows it out of a mixture of faith, respect for his parents and family, camaraderie with his community and inertia. His knowledge of the sacred texts is limited. He is trying to make a living and provide for his family. For him, Islam provides identity and psychological support in a hard life. This is what religion looks like for the vast majority of Muslims.

But increasingly, Americans seem to view Muslims as actively propagating a dangerous ideology, like communist activists. It’s not just Donald Trump. Republican candidates are vying with each other to make insinuations and declarations about Islam and all Muslims. And it’s not just on the right. The television personality and outspoken liberal Bill Maher made the expansive generalization recently that “If you are in this religion, you probably do have values that are at odds [with American values].”

What is most bizarre is to hear this anti-Muslim rhetoric described as brave truth-telling. Trump insists that he will not be silenced on this issue. Chris Christie says that he will not follow a “politically correct” national security policy. They are simply feeding a prejudice. The reality is that Muslims are today the most despised minority in America. Their faith is constantly criticized, and they face insults, discrimination and a dramatic rise in acts of violence against them, as Max Fisher of Vox has detailed superbly. And the leading Republican candidate has flirted with the idea of registering Muslims, a form of collective punishment that has not been seen since the internment of Japanese Americans in the 1940s.

This is the first time that I can recall watching politicians pander to mobs — and then congratulate themselves for their political courage.

[ExPatty 502]

According to the FBI, the majority of domestic terrorist attacks are actually committed by white, male Christians

This is why we need to teach statistics in school. The take home message is that muslims are disproportionately represented in acts of terrorism by their population.

In other words, more people are killed each year in car accidents than those who ride sport bikes. Does this mean cars are safer?

She estimates that 3 percent of the worldwide community are radical Medina Muslims

Also wrong. Even in the US where muslims are far, far better behaved than in nations like nigeria or syria the percent who support killing in the name of islam is 7%.

Edited February 7, 2016 by ExPatty

[Rob L 3,811]

This is why we need to teach statistics in school. The take home message is that muslims are disproportionately represented in acts of terrorism by their population.

In other words, more people are killed each year in car accidents than those who ride sport bikes. Does this mean cars are safer?

Also wrong. Even in the US where muslims are far, far better behaved than in nations like nigeria or syria the percent who support killing in the name of islam is 7%.

This is why we need to teach statistics in school. The take home message is that muslims are disproportionately represented in acts of terrorism by their population.

A: I agree we need to teach stats

B: This statement by you is further evidence that we need need to teach stats...

In other words, more people are killed each year in car accidents than those who ride sport bikes. Does this mean cars are safer?

Each year more Americans are killed by appliances in their house than terrorism, it means we should outlaw refrigerators because obviously islamic terrorism is an existential threat but refrigeration is a greater unchecked threat

Also wrong. Even in the US where muslims are far, far better behaved than in nations like nigeria or syria the percent who support killing in the name of islam is 7%.

I spent 15 minutes looking for a valid source of this claim, are you citing the Pew study or some other source?

Edited February 7, 2016 by Rob L

[ExPatty 502]

Each year more Americans are killed by appliances in their house than terrorism, it means we should outlaw refrigerators because obviously islamic terrorism is an existential threat but refrigeration is a greater unchecked threat

Like I said, we dearly need to start educating people on how to understand numbers.

I spent 15 minutes looking for a valid source of this claim, are you citing the Pew study or some other source?

Wow, 15 minutes must mean you really hated what I wrote. Does that mean if I find the link you might actually admit there is something wrong with islam?

Edited February 7, 2016 by ExPatty

[Rob L 3,811]

Like I said, we dearly need to start educating people on how to understand numbers.

>>the point of the death by appliances stat is to show how out of proportion our fear terrorism or Islamic terrorism is..do you agree or disagree?

Wow, 15 minutes must mean you really hated what I wrote. Does that mean if I find the link you might actually admit there is something wrong with islam?

>>No hate, just looking for a valid source, do you have one?

Edited February 7, 2016 by Rob L

[ExPatty 502]

Of course more people die from overeating than islamic terrorism. But I actually don't like islam for more reasons than just terrorism. I think it is inherently incompatible with the constitution, starting from the very first amendment. The fact that it also is responsible for the bulk of the world's terrorism is simply something easy to point to about what's wrong with it.

The reason you spent 15 minutes looking for my link is because you found the claim contradictory to your argument. So instead of asking me for it, you felt it was worth spending 15 minutes to try and find it yourself so that you could gleefully point out how I was making up my stat or had misinterpreted it.

I do wonder if you're honest enough to say why you find that 7% figure relevant enough to the topic that you're willing to spend so much time looking for it.

Edited February 7, 2016 by ExPatty

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Vast vast majority of Rattle Snakes have never bitten a human

[Rob L 3,811]

Of course more people die from overeating than islamic terrorism. But I actually don't like islam for more reasons than just terrorism. I think it is inherently incompatible with the constitution, starting from the very first amendment. The fact that it also is responsible for the bulk of the world's terrorism is simply something easy to point to about what's wrong with it.

The reason you spent 15 minutes looking for my link is because you found the claim contradictory to your argument. So instead of asking me for it, you felt it was worth spending 15 minutes to try and find it yourself so that you could gleefully point out how I was making up my stat or had misinterpreted it.

I do wonder if you're honest enough to say why you find that 7% figure relevant enough to the topic that you're willing to spend so much time looking for it.

Of course more people die from overeating than islamic terrorism. But I actually don't like islam for more reasons than just terrorism. I think it is inherently incompatible with the constitution, starting from the very first amendment. The fact that it also is responsible for the bulk of the world's terrorism is simply something easy to point to about what's wrong with it.

So is it Islam or terrorism that you find incompatible with the constitution?

The reason you spent 15 minutes looking for my link is because you found the claim contradictory to your argument. So instead of asking me for it, you felt it was worth spending 15 minutes to try and find it yourself so that you could gleefully point out how I was making up my stat or had misinterpreted it.

I do wonder if you're honest enough to say why you find that 7% figure relevant enough to the topic that you're willing to spend so much time looking for it.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt, even tried to do you job..and you still have no numbers to back up your claim. It sounds like even you do not believe the numbers. I am sure you are in a position to pass judgement on my reason or motives.

[smilesammich 10,727]

Of course more people die from overeating than islamic terrorism. But I actually don't like islam for more reasons than just terrorism. I think it is inherently incompatible with the constitution, starting from the very first amendment. The fact that it also is responsible for the bulk of the world's terrorism is simply something easy to point to about what's wrong with it.

hey! you want to know what else is inherently incompatible with the constitution?????????

[Expat1 971]

hey! you want to know what else is inherently incompatible with the constitution?????????

Campfires in national forests?

[lostinblue 1,989]

[-relo- 105]

... Edited February 8, 2016 by -relo-

[Rob L 3,811]

Of course more people die from overeating than islamic terrorism. But I actually don't like islam for more reasons than just terrorism. I think it is inherently incompatible with the constitution, starting from the very first amendment. The fact that it also is responsible for the bulk of the world's terrorism is simply something easy to point to about what's wrong with it.

The reason you spent 15 minutes looking for my link is because you found the claim contradictory to your argument. So instead of asking me for it, you felt it was worth spending 15 minutes to try and find it yourself so that you could gleefully point out how I was making up my stat or had misinterpreted it.

I do wonder if you're honest enough to say why you find that 7% figure relevant enough to the topic that you're willing to spend so much time looking for it.

Of course more people die from overeating than islamic terrorism. But I actually don't like islam for more reasons than just terrorism. I think it is inherently incompatible with the constitution, starting from the very first amendment. The fact that it also is responsible for the bulk of the world's terrorism is simply something easy to point to about what's wrong with it.

So is it Islam or terrorism that you find incompatible with the constitution?

The reason you spent 15 minutes looking for my link is because you found the claim contradictory to your argument. So instead of asking me for it, you felt it was worth spending 15 minutes to try and find it yourself so that you could gleefully point out how I was making up my stat or had misinterpreted it.

I do wonder if you're honest enough to say why you find that 7% figure relevant enough to the topic that you're willing to spend so much time looking for it.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt, even tried to do you job..and you still have no numbers to back up your claim. It sounds like even you do not believe the numbers. I am sure you are in a position to pass judgement on my reason or motives.

We are still waiting for the answers here

[smilesammich 10,727]

maybe expatty didn't see your post..i'll have trump point it out

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

But increasingly, Americans seem to view Muslims as actively propagating a dangerous ideology, like communist activists. It’s not just Donald Trump. Republican candidates are vying with each other to make insinuations and declarations about Islam and all Muslims. And it’s not just on the right. The television personality and outspoken liberal Bill Maher made the expansive generalization recently that “If you are in this religion, you probably do have values that are at odds [with American values].”

I do think Bill Maher is brave for taking on the issue and expressing his views - especially after Charlie Hebdo - Or is somebody going to make the claim that speaking critically of Islam is as safe as speaking out about any other religion? Maher also knows there will be endless leftist social justice warriors out there chomping at the bit who think they are making the world a better place one tweet at time by shutting down any opinion that doesn't match with their own.