Wednesday 11 March 2015

Accuracy of terms – lamenting the currency of the term “Islamophobia”

The following is definitely a case of trying to close the stable door after the horse has bolted, but I think there are real dangers inherent in one particular term that has wide currency: “Islamophobia”.

Given the misunderstandings that arise whenever I discuss this, let me lay out a few things first.

Although I am myself an atheist, I think it an important tenet that we strive to uphold both freedom of religion and freedom from religion. People should not be persecuted for their religious beliefs (or for their lack of religious belief).

We should also recognise that racism exists in our society, and across the world.  Muslims suffer racist oppression in a number of guises in the UK and across the world.  This is real, and we must deplore it and fight it.

Further to that, we should also recognise that “race” is a social and political construct, not a biological or genetic fact.  Muslims can and do therefore face racism.

But let’s look at the term Islamophobia.  It means fear or hatred of Islam.  Islam is a philosophy, a religion, a set of views and ideas.  It is perfectly possible to dislike Islam or aspects of Islam without hating Muslims.  Dispute and disagreement are part and parcel of having ideas.  Indeed, they are part and parcel of a healthy society.

The trouble with the term Islamophobia is that its net is too wide.  It is too easy for people to say that disagreeing with some aspect of Islam is akin to racism; too easy for them to say “you mustn’t say that: it’s Islamophobic”.

Questioning and challenging beliefs is not the same as hating the people who hold them.  I don't think there's anything wrong with hating or being afraid of a philosophy, a set of ideas. As an atheist, there is much I dislike about Islam. Just as there is much I dislike about Judaism.

But anti-Semitism is the term used for racism towards Jews; we don’t call it Judaismophobia.  Having disputes and disagreements with Judaism is not in itself racist.

If we need a term analogous to anti-Semitism to refer to racism towards Muslims (and I’d argue that we do), then a better term would be Muslimophobia.

If religious lobbies are permitted to suggest that criticising religion, criticising ideas, is akin to racism because of flabby terms like Islamophobia, then we’re storing up future problems for all of society. 

This fudging of terms is being widened out by the neoliberals in power to include not just religious ideas, but also political ideas. Disliking political ideas can now be hate speech.
The various pieces of legislation which add up to the "hate speech" laws have allowed, for example, Harry Taylor to be fined and given community service because an airport chaplain was "insulted, deeply offended and . . . alarmed" by cartoons he left in an airport prayer room. And allowed Stuart Rodger to be arrested and convicted for shouting "No ifs, not buts, no public sector cuts" at David Cameron.

Those in political power are using these sort of notions to limit what we're allowed to challenge. That's a problem for us all, from progressives within minority communities, to wider movements for defence against austerity attacks, and those advocating social change. 

It’s true that sometimes racists, like Pegida, like the BNP, try to obfuscate and say that they aren’t criticising Muslims, they’re criticising Islam. But that is obfuscation, and it’s made possible because terms like Islamophobia leave room for confusion.  Racist sophistry is one more reason that we need greater accuracy in our terminology.

I concede that this is a contentious issue.  And some would argue that there is already a perfectly good term for Muslimophobia – “racism”.  I disagree.  I think there is, sadly, enough particular anti-Muslim hatred to require a specific word.  I just don’t think that the term that currently has currency - “Islamophobia” - is at all helpful.



No comments:

Post a Comment