- David Rand - https://blog.davidrand.ca -
Anti-Muslim Incidents in the USA
Posted By David Rand On 2016-11-30 @ 18:04 In | No Comments
2016-12-01
Recent reports of an increase in anti-Muslim “hate”[1] [1] crimes in the USA are exaggerated. Blacks, gays and Jews remain much more frequent targets of such crimes than Muslims. Furthermore, any reporting which does not distinguish Islamists from more modern Muslims is flawed. Harassment of women who wear the Islamist veil is of course unacceptable. But accusations of “Islamophobia” are similarly unacceptable. Denial of service to fully-veiled individuals (covering the face) is often justified.
Sommaire en français Des rapports récents faisant état d’une augmentation du nombre de crimes « haineux » contre les musulmans aux États-Unis sont exagérés. Au fait, les noirs, les gais et les juifs demeurent des cibles de tels crimes beaucoup plus fréquemment que les musulmans. En outre, les rapports qui ne tiennent pas compte de la distinction entre islamistes et musulmans modernes sont contestables. Le harcèlement des femmes portant le voile islamiste est évidemment inacceptable. Mais les accusations d’« islamophobie » le sont autant. Le déni de service à des personnes portant le voile intégral (qui couvre le visage) est souvent justifié.
Recent news reports from the USA have suggested that so-called “hate” crimes against Muslims have become a serious problem in that country, especially since the election campaign of Donald Trump for the presidency. For example, using FBI Hate Crime Statistics for 2015 [2], the Pew Research Center [3] concludes that Anti-Muslim assaults reach 9/11-era levels, FBI data show [4], stating that:
There were 91 reported aggravated or simple assaults motivated by anti-Muslim bias in 2015, just two shy of the 93 reported in 2001. Separately, the number of anti-Muslim intimidation crimes – defined as threatening bodily harm — also rose in 2015, with 120 reported to the FBI. Again, this was the most anti-Muslim intimidation crimes reported in any year since 2001, when there were 296. Overall, the FBI reported 257 incidents of anti-Muslim hate crimes in 2015, a 67% increase from the previous year. […]
Reporting on the FBI data, the New York Times declared recently (2016-11-14) that U.S. Hate Crimes Surge 6%, Fueled by Attacks on Muslims [5].
However, a closer look at the FBI data for 2015 [6] reveals that offenses motivated by anti-Black bias (2125), anti-Jewish bias (695) and anti-Gay bias (758) continue to outnumber greatly the number of offenses motivated by anti-Muslim bias (301).
Similarly, an International Business Times article about such crimes in NYC in 2016 reports Hate Crime Rising In New York: NYC Muslims And Jews Targeted As Election Violence Spreads Across The Nation [7], implying that the election campaign is responsible for the increase.
“As of Nov. 13, 2016 there have been 328 hate crimes year-to-date compared to 250 during the same time period in 2015,” an NYPD spokesperson told International Business Times. Muslims were targeted over 100 percent more compared with the previous year, from 12 incidents in 2015 to 25 so far this year. Anti-Semitic hate crimes rose slightly from 102 to 111. New York City is home to somewhere between 600,000 and 1 million Muslims and over 1 million Jews.
But once again, we note that Muslims are still targeted much less often than Jews.
Certainly the election campaign generated a great deal of emotivity as Trump proposed various ridiculous measures. His proposal for a total ban on Muslims entering the country, in addition to being a human rights disaster and unfairly lumping all Muslims together, would be totally unworkable. What criteria could be used to identify Muslims objectively? In particular, given that apostasy (i.e. leaving Islam) is utterly taboo according to a strict interpretation of Islam—indeed apostasy is criminal offense, sometimes even punishable by death, in many Muslim-majority countries—there are undoubtedly large numbers of non-believers raised as Muslims who continue to self-identify falsely as Muslims mainly out of fear of ostracism or violent retaliation by their co-religionists.
[…] two groups which continue to be targeted more than Muslims—gays and Jews—are themselves condemned by those who adhere strictly to Islamic doctrine.
Regardless of Trump’s bigotry, the numbers show that anti-Muslim behaviour is being exaggerated by media reports. We should also keep in mind that two groups which continue to be targeted more than Muslims—gays and Jews—are themselves condemned by those who adhere strictly to Islamic doctrine. In countries where Islam itself is as dominant as Christianity is in the USA, prejudices against gays and Jews are far worse than in the USA. In other words, Islam is itself a prime generator of hatred and bigotry.
By touting statistics which lump all Muslims together, the media are committing the same error as Trump and his supporters whom they so roundly denounce. Furthermore, using such crimes statistics to generate sympathy for Muslims considered as a monolithic block is worse than unfair; in fact it is reprehensible when Islamists are included in that block. Indeed, it is the Islamist fanatics who benefit the most, because they are, by choice, the most visible. A secular Muslim who has adapted to modern values does not wear her/his religion on her/his sleeve—or head. Referring to the hijab as “Muslim” clothing is grossly misleading as a modern Muslim woman would not wear such an antiquated, misogynist costume. Furthermore, it is an insult to the many women who in Muslim countries have fought so hard, risking their freedom and sometimes their lives, for the right to move about, outside the home, without hiding under a tent.
This raises the question of what attitude to adopt towards women who wear the Islamist veil in one of its several variants—hijab, tchador, niqab, burqa, burkini, etc. (I am not referring here to non-Islamist veils such as that worn by, say, Christian nuns or head-coverings worn for purely functional reasons. Islamist veils are easily recognized. There is rarely, if ever, any ambiguity.) In Muslim-majority countries, women are generally forced to wear this type of clothing; they rarely do so by choice.
Any woman who willingly wears an Islamist veil is a religious fanatic; if she wears the full veil, such as a niqab, then she is an extreme religious fanatic […]
First of all, it must be kept in mind that political Islam is current waging a campaign to impose its symbols, clothing standards and values wherever it can find a opening to do so. The promotion of the various forms of the Islamist veil is part of this Islamization campaign. Any woman who willingly wears an article of clothing of this type participates in some small way in this campaign of provocation and identity exhibitionism and thus associates herself with the most backward, fanatical and politicized currents of Islamism. Thus, a certain antipathy towards veiled women is completely legitimate. Any woman who willingly wears an Islamist veil is a religious fanatic; if she wears the full veil, such as a niqab, then she is an extreme religious fanatic (such as Zunera Ishaq, infamous for winning the “right” to wear her niqab during her Canadian citizenship ceremony).
Furthermore, given that many political leaders utterly fail to confront this major threat appropriately and reasonably—J. Trudeau and T. Mulcair in Canada and B. Obama and H. Clinton in the USA all respond with total complacency, whereas American President-elect Trump fails to distinguish Islamists and foolishly stigmatizes all Muslims—this can only make the citizenzy even more anxious, thus increasing hostility.
However, this of course does not in any way justify harassing or haranguing an individual woman wearing an Islamist veil going about her business as a private person in a public place. I am considering here the specific case of a veil which is clearly Islamist, or at least is perceived as such by the harassing person, and where that veil is clearly the motive for the harassment.
Such harassing behaviour is clearly unacceptable, and for at least three reasons:
Having said that, some provisos must be added:
To summarize:
Finally, non-Muslim women who foolishly adopt the Islamist veil temporarily as an act of “solidarity” are behaving irresponsibly. Such gestures are inexcusable as they simply facilitate the advancement of political Islam.
Next blog: Carl Sagan’s Achilles’ Heel [9]
Article printed from David Rand: https://blog.davidrand.ca
URL to article: https://blog.davidrand.ca/anti-muslim-incidents-usa/
URLs in this post:
[1] [1]: #1
[2] FBI Hate Crime Statistics for 2015: https://ucr.fbi.gov/hate-crime/2015
[3] Pew Research Center: http://www.pewresearch.org/
[4] Anti-Muslim assaults reach 9/11-era levels, FBI data show: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/21/anti-muslim-assaults-reach-911-era-levels-fbi-data-show/
[5] U.S. Hate Crimes Surge 6%, Fueled by Attacks on Muslims: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/us/politics/fbi-hate-crimes-muslims.html
[6] FBI data for 2015: https://ucr.fbi.gov/hate-crime/2015/tables-and-data-declarations/1tabledatadecpdf
[7] Hate Crime Rising In New York: NYC Muslims And Jews Targeted As Election Violence Spreads Across The Nation: http://www.ibtimes.com/hate-crime-rising-new-york-nyc-muslims-jews-targeted-election-violence-spreads-across-2447468
[8] Dubious Words: https://blog.davidrand.ca/dubious-words/
[9] Carl Sagan’s Achilles’ Heel: https://blog.davidrand.ca/carl-sagans-achilles-heel/
[10] : https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.davidrand.ca%2Fanti-muslim-incidents-usa%2F
[11] : https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Anti-Muslim%20Incidents%20in%20the%20USA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.davidrand.ca%2Fanti-muslim-incidents-usa%2F
Click here to print.
Copyright © 2018 David Rand. All rights reserved.