Customer Reviews

Islamophobia: Making Muslims the Enemy

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Ever since 9/11 I have been on the lookout for any book dealing with changed perceptions or heightened generalizations regarding Islam and Muslims. "Islamophobia" by Peter Gottschalk and Gabriel Greenberg is one of those books that must be read by Americans in this post-9/11 world.

This book starts off by reviewing the reaction of Muslims to the cartoon that appeared in the Danish news paper Jyllands-Posten, which portrayed the prophet Muhammad in a less than stellar light. From here the authors trace the depiction of Islam and Muslims throughout history and how this idea of the religion and its followers as backward, violent and primitive remains well-entrenched in the minds of many Western non-Muslim people. In the introduction, the authors make a statement that I think is right on target: That is they (views held by Americans) demonstrate how natural for so many Americans the image of Muslims as irrational aggressors and Americans as righteous innocents abroad and at home has become, so that any other perspective becomes not a counterargument but a challenge to an unquestionable world order." The authors skillfully present information to back up this statement.

From the history of Western perceptions of Islam, the authors go on to analyze political cartoons depicting Islams. Just before doing this they make a necessary distinction between caricature and stereotype. This is key, because I think for many people, caricatures and stereotypes are one and the same. Most people respond to visual stimuli and in the case of the cartoons, their lack of familiarity with Islam, coupled with a general post-9/11 resentment toward Muslim culture, allows them to formulate opinions based on the animations they read in the newspapers. For example, how many people know the difference between a Muslim and an Arab? The authors contend that too often people categorize all Muslims under the same category (violent, backward, oppressive, etc.)without any reference that may inhibit the formatin of inaccurate perceptions.

I could go on, but it is best for readers to read this book for themselves. I found it very interesting that in the 1950s cartoonists depicted Muslims as lazy and effeminate. Now, the depictions are much more savage in their portrayals. It seems that many cartoons follow the political winds blowing from Washington, DC.

The new book Islamophobia: Making Muslims the Enemy by Peter Gottschalk and Gabriel Greenberg, is an excellent addition to the growing literature, study, and analysis of Islamophobia in the West. The authors give a working definition of what Islamophobia consists of in relation to other phobias in their introduction.

The first chapter deals with a very good but brief overview of Western interaction and reaction to Islamic civilization and Muslims. What is important to note is that this all came about way before 9/11 and that because of this long history, people in the West have an ingrained and often warped image about what the religion of Islam represents.

In this book, the focus is primarily the role of political cartoons in mainstream media that help shape everyday peoples' image of Islam and Muslims. The proceeding chapters give excellent examples of the imagery and effectiveness of conveying stereotypical images of Muslims and Islam.

For those interested in learning about Islamophobia, I recommend this book along with Dr. Mohamed Nimer's Islamophobia and Anti-Americanism: Causes and Remedies. For good essay on the topic, I recommend Dr. Ibrahim Kalin's essay entitled "Roots of Misconception: Euro-American Perceptions of Islam Before and After 9/11" which can be found online.

i think one of the issue(i say its one of the issue) in islam is the the border drawn in 1947 which the palestine is asking nothing more.why not stick to that border rather than expansion into palestine territory

The term of this book is incorrect: in non-Muslim countries, we are not "phobic" toward Islam, or Muslims. We are "phobic" toward Islamic terrorists and "Islamo-fascists" (Taliban, Al Quida, etc.). Thus, the correct term should be "Islamofascism-phobia", not "Islamophobia (thanks to British novelist Ian McKwen for that distinction). In other words, we are "phobic" (in fear of) those who want us dead. The Taliban and Al Quida want me and you dead. Thus, this fear is not irrational, and thus not a phobia. Rather, it is totally rational, a completely rational fear and aversion against Taliban and Islamic fascists. (I personally also dislike the use of "phobia" - a psychiatric term, to depict a political stance or political opinion. It is a misnomer, and to me smacks of the Soviet tendency to label political opponents as "insane", or suffering from a mental condition. Unfortunately, in the U.S., we picked this bad habit up, and now use it against people who disagree with us politically).

The second problem I have is showing cartoons as if they were somehow indicative of public opinion. Everyone understands that political cartoons are an exagerrated, often comical depiction, and not indicative of real public opinion (I bet one could analyze cartoons about Europeans in the U.S. press to then show how "racist" we are toward the Europeans). The authors depict cartoons as if they somehow are indicative of western opinion of Muslims and Islam, when in fact, they are exagerrations, and everyone understands them as such.

Also, the authors tend to contradict themselves. For instance, at one point, they state that most Muslims live east of Saudi Arabia (true), and thus don't care about Mideast politics. And then, they later claim that Muslims are enraged due to "U.S. Foreign policy". Well, which is it ? Is the Palestinian issue central, or not ? They seem to want to have it both ways: Muslims are not concerned about the Mideast, and yet, U.S. actions there are totally central to their worldview. (I would also like to point out here what real U.S. foreign policy did: save the Muslim Bosnians, give Egypt and Saudi Arabia billions every year, try to help Muslim Somalis in 1993, freed the Iraqis from Saddam, freed Kuwait in 1991, sending an aircraft carrier to Indonesia with aid packages, after the tsunami, taking in millions of Muslim refugees and allowing them to live in the U.S., etc. The U.S. record on foreign policy is far more friendly to Muslims than most people think).

They also claim that the West has much in common with Islam due to a shared respect for "Greek rationalism". In reality, the Muslims gave up on Greek rationalism 800 years ago, and have forasaken it since then. Greek rationalism was thrown out the window by the Muslims 8 centuries ago. To state that Muslims are a force for rationalism in our modern world is an extreme stretch, to put it mildly.

By the way, they claim that the sword is not a "central" symbol to Muslims. That might be true, but I also think I saw a sword depicted in the Saudi Arabian flag.