This is a copy of an article I published in a student newspaper at my university. It briefly examines the recent protests in the middle east, concerning a poorly-made, amateur film, 'The Innocence of Muslims', which has conjured up a mass amount of anger within the Muslim community. I have tried to take the view that there is more of this event than simply the protests themselves- in fact, a better analysis might involve a critical examination of western reactions, particularly in the context of human rights, free speech and value systems. Almost ironically, it is also occurring in the same week that Salman Rushdie, a british novelist, publishes his memoirs about the years he spent in hiding, whilst having a fatwa on his head ordained by the then Ayotollah Khomeini.
In light of recent protests by Muslims around the world, in reaction
to the Anti-Islamic amateur movie ‘Innocence of Muslims’, the responses
anticipated from western commentators were somewhat expected. Deemed as
‘anti-modern’, ‘barbaric’ and the ‘enemies of free speech’, the
consensus amongst most major news outlets in Europe and the United
States, seemed to be a unanimous confirmation that the post- ‘Arab
Spring’ Middle East had failed to change the Muslim mentality.
Though some were subtler than others, the observation of young
Muslims – once the principal drivers of the revolution – chanting angry
slogans and burning flags, illustrated nothing more than the ashes of
hopeful optimism, scorched by the flames of a volatile religious
ideology. Indeed, no better is such disappointment reflected, than in
the upcoming headline of Newsweek magazine, boldly entitled, “Muslim
Rage”.
Yet, it might be these types of perceptions that prove a greater
obstacle in our understanding of what we view as the ‘Muslim world’. It
is certainly true that more confident and vocal Salafi groups hold a
significant amount of responsibility in stirring up violence and hatred,
especially amongst an empowered, but still impressionable youth.
Nonetheless, far from being the root cause, these Salafists occupy
only a symptomatic position in relation to a much larger infection – one
in which even in it’s first contact with the East, the Western world
has failed to diagnose. ‘The Innocence of Muslims’ is more than just a
film criticising the Islamic faith. Its crude depictions are not only
directed at the Prophet Muhammad, but also extend to a revolting
characterisation of ‘Islamic civilization’ itself – one which is moulded
by barbarity, violence and overtly masculine sexual subjugation. In
doing this, the film has revived the same ghosts that have haunted both
prominent academics and Western policy makers in their approach to a
still mysterious and elusive ‘Islamic World’.
In 1990, the historian Bernard Lewis, published an essay, entitled
‘The Roots of Muslim Rage’ in the Atlantic Monthly. In the essay, Lewis
argued that ‘Muslim Civilization’ was stuck in a state of paralysis,
trapped by sense of victimhood that largely derived from a multitude of
successive military defeats and economic decline. The once great
civilization, in Lewis’ view, could only look back at a nostalgic
‘Golden Age’, while it found itself confined in a seemingly inescapable
inferiority complex – one in which dignity continually deteriorated
through direct imperialism, and eventually, Western supported despotic
rulers.
‘Muslim Rage’ in this sense, particularly in light of the Rushdie
affair, was ultimately portrayed as proof of an anti-modern, inferior,
and ultimately dangerous civilization it seemed justified for the wiser,
secular West to contain. It was of course, Lewis’ contemporary, Edward
Said, who had continually contested such claims. In the 1978 publication
of Orientalism, Said had argued that a position such as Lewis’ simply
assisted in cultivating images of a pathetic ‘Muslim peoples’, who
ultimately required the West for its own good. Although Said remains a
potent intellectual force in academia to this day, it was Lewis that was
brought in from obscurity to the office of Dick Cheney, and it was
Lewis’ view that played a fundamental role in developing America’s
Middle East strategy during the Bush years.
If the revolutions in North Africa and the Middle East have taught us
anything, it is the confirmation that perceptions of a backward,
anti-modern Middle East do little to reflect the obvious realities. Yet,
for all the openness and curiosity of its people, we should understand
that the role of the Islamic faith, and the Prophet Muhammad, remains a
central component in both practical organisation and communal
identification- particularly in a climate where such beliefs have
assisted significantly in dismantling heinous despotic regimes.
Yet, despite this early revival, it still seems too tempting for us
to revert back to a toxic narrative entrenched in outdated ideology,
where Muslims are rendered helpless by their own inadequacies and a
‘backward’ rejection of seemingly superior Western, democratic values.
The continuation of such condescending beliefs, whether through artistic
expression or public policy, will not just augment frustration and
anger. Ultimately, it will do little to heal our already fragile
relations with the post-Arab Spring region.
No comments:
Post a Comment