A Guide on how to deal with Islamophobic stereotypes
Do you know that you can deal with Islamophobic stereotypes using some of the existing methods? A handful of similarities can be picked upon comparing Islamophobia and the much-loathed racism. The great thing about that is that somewhat, there exists a framework on how to counter racism.
Primarily in racism, prejudice and discrimination are unleashed to people who have a different national origin, ethnicity, or skin color. Going by the ancient racialization theories, all Muslims are seen as one race. Amazingly, this has been despite their differences in ethnicity, cultures, traditions, and even originality.
Having this in mind, don’t you think that Islamophobia is indeed racism? If not, they must be of the same strain!
Islamophobia has continually spread in Asia, America, Europe, and Africa like bushfire. The spreading of negative stereotypes regarding Muslims has been one of the notable factors encouraging Islamophobia. Watch out for a guide on how to deal with Islamophobia in this article.
More often than not, Muslims are stereotyped to be a feeble race. One that is culturally rigid and with little regard to the rights of women. They have also been seen to be viciously hostile and portrayed to praise violence. Well, just like in any other religion, a few may have fallen prey to misleading teachings and maybe strayed. However, this is not a good base when criminalizing a whole religion. It can happen in any denomination.
If you want to make a change and deal with Islamophobia and its stereotypes for good, the right time is now! Here are five ideal ways on how to deal with anti-Muslim stereotypes.
Change the Islamophobic stereotype !
As you well know, this is the surest way to slay this fierce monster of Islamophobia. You must have heard the whispers; a Muslim is this or that, right? Knowing the narrative is a step towards changing it.
Sounds easy, right?
The only challenge could be changing people’s perceptions, opinions, or even beliefs.
That will take time. Unfortunately, it is not one of the luxuries we have. The more the time we mince, the more Islamophobia blends in and normalizes.
Do we want to get to a point where Muslim hating is accepted to be healthy? I bet not.
Then lets us start with the little steps that will see us overcome and overshadow Islamophobia.
Use a Positive Role model to buffer negativity of the anti-Muslim narratives.
This is the other way in which we can flash the Islamophobic stereotypes out of the world.
It is just a matter of identifying Positive Muslim Role Models and using them to portray the Muslim religion in a different yet positive way.
The younger Muslim generation will have heroes and heroines to emulate. In addition to that, the positive Muslim role models will shift the media’s responsiveness from the roaming negativity about Muslims.
You must be wondering how this will work. Do you remember the perception of blacks in America before Obama became president? The Obama effect is one such study that shows the impact of positive role models on a stereotype.
Before Obama’s presidency, African Americans faced much discrimination, which is close to that faced by Muslims today. After he ran for office and won, he has been one of the most successful role models of African American origin.
Studies show that after Obama drew the attention of the media positively, the Black Americans stereotype threat reduced significantly.
It is possible to experience a similar effect too! It is just a matter of positively celebrated Muslims taking up the task to role model. In the same view, we can also encourage peers to give an individualistic look while judging people’s character to avoid group-mentality biases.
Reorient the negative Islamophobic typecast
You would be amazed to learn that some of the stereotypes came as a result of rumors or even studies whose inferences cannot be generalized.
For instance, Isn’t it ridiculous to conclude that a given community is made up of thieves if two or three of its members are part of a significant heist?
See, similar mistakes must have been made when stereotyping Muslims.
The first step towards Retraining a stereotype is challenging the stereotype! After that, dig in and study the stereotype. Here, focus on testing the hypothesis provided by the stereotype.
The steady process of dealing with Islamophobic stereotypes requires the communities to be open and be ready to accept new results from the study. Again, when the scholars complete the survey, they should disseminate information to the members of the community, respectively.
Sanctify and celebrate inclusivity of Muslims
Just like it happens with other minority groups, in countries with a low Muslim population, it is only fair to categorize Muslims as part of the minority groups.
In such a case, the government can set up an oversight committee to ensure these groups do not face discrimination. To add on that, they can ensure they champion the rights of those small groups in society. Moreover, it would be prudent for them to advise policymakers and implementers on how to ensure inclusivity. The same should happen even at the organization level.
Maneuver the current culture of stereotyping Muslims
In the world today, this may seem not very easy to pull. The good news is that Islamophobia is not genetic. It is indeed a socially and politically populated propaganda. So this is doable!
The same way we socialize children to learn their culture or language at a tender age, we can also inculcate new values. Among these could be geared towards dealing with Islamophobia. For example, they can learn how to treat people with respect regardless of their race or religion.
That’s not all!
This Ramadan, purpose to vouch for a desist of Islamophobic stereotypes. You can also support them by ensuring they feel safe. Join in and stand in arms to face out antimuslim hatred. Again, promote honor to every member of the community regardless of their nation of origin, culture, religion, or socialization.
Let’s not just sit and watch as stereotypes consume the love and unity in our societies. It is time to act!
Rasmus Baludan is racist, Ignoramus, provocateur, and liar
Seeking to become a publicity hound before contesting elections in Sweden, scheduled for September, the right-wing Danish-Swedish politician Rasmus Baludan has apparently decided to recruit supporters and fans by resorting to an unlikely and un-classical method: Setting copies of the Holy Quran on fire.
Rasmus Baludan, the racist hoodlum, hoped and probably still hopes that by showing off his Islamophobia by provoking Muslims and offending their religious sensibilities, he would woo supporters and potential voters in Sweden. To his chagrin, the vast majority of people in Denmark and Sweden ignored him. In the Swedish city of Jonkoping, A priest named Reverend Fredrik Hol drowned out an inflammatory anti-Islam rally by Baludan by ringing his church bells.
The feat succeeded in shutting up the racist harangue for some time. On behalf of nearly 1800 million adherents of Islam, I would like to salute Reverend Hol and thank him for his sublime gesture and noble behaviour.
Moreover, a special expression of gratitude goes to our Christian brothers and sisters in Sweden and Denmark who refused to allow the good name of Jesus Christ to be besmirched by the germ of bigotry, racism, and fanaticism. Jesus wouldn’t stir up fitna ( tumult and turmoil) to attract voters and get elected.
Baludan reportedly intends to run in the upcoming Swedish elections, scheduled for next September. However, he seems to have failed to secure enough signatures to run for office, prompting observers to suggest that he may have taken the provocative act of burning copies of the Holy Quran, in order to woo Swedish voters.
In the 2018 elections in Denmark, Rasmus Baludan’s party “Straam Cox”,failed to win a single seat in Parliament, He was imprisoned in 2020 in Denmark for one month reportedly after being convicted of racism.
Also Read: Combating Racism – Lived Experiences
I believe setting the religious scripture of Islam on fire, besides being an uncivilized and outrageous act, is an expression of extreme ignorance and intolerance.
After all, there is absolutely nothing in the Quran that denigrates Jesus and his immaculate chaste mother, Mary.” The opposite is true, Jesus is celebrated in the Quran as one of the five greatest messengers of God, who include beside him, Noah, Abraham Moses and Muhammed.
Interestingly, the fool of Copenhagen or Stockholm invoked the mantra of freedom of expression to justify his repulsive misdeed.
Well, what about the right to be free from being insulted and offended?
Doesn’t one’s freedom end, when another person’s freedom begins? In Matthew 5:29 we read “If thy right eye offends thee, pluck it out and cast it away from you.”
Thus, freedom of speech and expression is not absolute, otherwise, words soon morph into bullets and bombs, and bloodshed is the inevitable outcome of this folly.
Furthermore, life is not a straightforward mathematical equation. Besides the proscribed rights and privileges, there are other paramount values in life that are not recorded in a law book, such as respect, humility, kindness, tolerance, love, and wisdom.
Rasmus Baludan, instead of behaving like Peter the hermit who incited Europe against the Muslim near East, about a thousand years ago, causing the death of millions of people in the infamous Crusades, should behave like a messenger of love and peace. The Prophet Muhammed (may the peace and blessing of God be upon him) said in the authentic Hadith: You will not be able to win the hearts of people with your money, so win them with your love, kindness, and sound morality.
Finally, a few words to my Muslim brothers and sisters
Don’t be provoked by fools like Rasmus Baludan. Don’t lose your calm and composure, for this is his exact aim. This is because once you lose your mental equanimity, you let Satan take over you.
Remember this Aya “And do not insult those who invoke other than Allah, lest they insult Allah in enmity without knowledge. Thus We have made pleasing every community their deeds. Then to their Lord is their return, and He will inform them about what they used to do.” [6:108]
I am not suggesting that we should succumb to apathy and passivity and do nothing. But we should do much more than just vent our frustration and indignation. For the sake of Islam, and in order to triumph over such fanatic ignoramuses, we often need to suppress our frustration.
More to the point, we must exhaust all efforts to cooperate with people of goodwill regardless of creed and ethnicity. Needless to say, this is undoubtedly a vital and crucial dimension for our
Moreover, remember that every people under the sun has their own bran, and Rasmus Baludan should be viewed as the bran of his people. And yes, we are not perfect ourselves as we do have people like him or even worse!
In fact, it is absolutely unwise and immensely damaging for Muslims, especially Muslim expatriates in the West, to erupt in fury every time an anti-Islam villain provokes Muslims by making a stupid, offensive slur, or desecrating Islamic symbols, or even burning a copy of Islam’s Holy Book. The Quran is preserved in our hearts, and no idiot or little man can extricate the word of Allah from a believer’s heart. Indeed, instead of displaying convulsive rage, and shouting meaningless and pugnacious slogans, we should behave with serenity, calm, and dignity lest we inadvertently convey to the world a damaging message about ourselves and about our great religion. And if we don’t behave, we will have only ourselves to blame, since the vast majority of non-Muslims don’t distinguish between what Islam says and what some Muslims do.
Also Read: Islam in 2075: World’s Largest Religion!?
So, let the dogs keep barking, and the caravan keep going. For if stones are thrown at the barking dogs, they will only bark more loudly and become more aggressive and ferocious.
Remember, nothing, absolutely nothing would hurt and disappoint these hoodlums more than your self-composure and non-violent reactions, and nothing would please them more than your screams and indulgence in violence, verbal and otherwise.
Display Islam’s glorious message, and never act on your primitive impulses and defensive reflexes for revenge.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine: Will more states seek to acquire Nuclear weapons?
The Russian invasion of Ukraine is prompting many states around the world to reconsider their national defence strategies. Governments have privately and openly voiced their apprehension about the growing fragility of the post-WWII international order, especially the utter inability of the UN and its Security Council to prevent powerful hegemonic nations, such as Russia, from attacking and occupying and annexing large territories of less powerful neighbours, such as Ukraine.
Some leaders and diplomats have warned that, in light of the clear impotence of the UN in tackling the Ukrainian crisis, and in the absence of a nuclear deterrent of their own, some vulnerable non-nuclear states will be forced to either acquire Nuclear weapons to achieve a semblance of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) vis-à-vis potential predators or seek a military alliance with some established nuclear powers for the same purpose.
Zelensky: “Ukraine will be like a Big Israel”
Speaking to reporters a few days ago, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told reporters that post-war Ukraine would be like “a big Israel.”
He didn’t clarify what he exactly meant by drawing the Israeli analogy.
However, it was amply clear that he was alluding to the contemplated acquisition of a sizeable Nuclear weapon, like that of Israel, in order to deter a future possible Russian invasion. Ukraine had given up its Nuclear weapons to Russia following the downfall of the former Soviet Union.
However, experts argue that Ukraine could fairly quickly renew its Nuclear weapon since the country already possesses the technical and scientific infrastructure which it inherited from the Soviet era.
Hence, Ukraine wouldn’t have to begin from scratch in case it decided to renew its nuclear weapon program. Moreover, Ukraine could start producing enriched uranium for military purposes in a few days, depending on the decision of the political leadership. Shortly after the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine 11 months ago, Ukraine’s defence officials voiced their deep remorse for having given up their former nuclear arsenal. In light, it is almost certain that the current leadership in Kyiv will decide to revive the nuclear option as soon as an opportune time arises.
Medvedev: Russian defeat in Ukraine would trigger a nuclear war
This weak, former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev warned NATO of nuclear war if Russia was defeated in Ukraine.
Medvedev, an ally of Kremlin chief Vladimir Putin, warned that a Russian defeat in Ukraine could trigger a nuclear war. “The defeat of a nuclear power in a conventional war may trigger a nuclear war,” Medvedev, who serves as deputy chairman of Putin’s powerful security council, reportedly said in a post on the Telegraph.
“Nuclear powers have never lost major conflicts on which their fate depends,”.
Warning should be taken seriously
Undoubtedly, Medvedev’s warnings contain an important element of rhetorical sabre-rattling and psychological warfare. However, this writer believes the West ought to take the warnings quite seriously.
There are sufficient reasons that should make us think twice before dismissing the above doomsday warnings as hot air. Indeed, a Russian defeat in Ukraine would have far-reaching global consequences and ramifications.
Indeed, a decisive and humiliating Russian defeat in Ukraine would very likely be the most important strategic international game-changer not only since the collapse of the former Soviet Union in 1989 but also since the 1917 Bolshevik revolution in Russia. Russia would morph into a boiling cauldron of anger and furious indignation.
Thus, the demand for the use of nuclear weapons to avert a possible Russian defeat in Ukraine would gain massive popularity throughout Russia. The galvanization of Russia’s 145 million population would be the penultimate step leading to the kremlin’s decision to press the nuclear button.
Nuclear is futile if not used when needed
After the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Advocates for the nuclear option would convincingly argue that nuclear weapons would lose their raison detre if they failed to protect the possessor country, the motherland, when needed most, e.g., when the country faces the prospect of defeat and humiliation in war. The question of who is the aggressor and who is the victim would be almost irrelevant in such an atmosphere. Moreover, the US, which used the first ever and last nuclear weapon against Japan in 1945, would not be in a moral position to lecture Russia on the evils of using nuclear weapons.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine: Gigantic Dilemma
A Russian victory or defeat in Ukraine would cause the current international order, instated after WWII, to collapse. A decisive Russian defeat in Ukraine, which seems unlikely at least now, would likely irreversibly paralyze or effectively terminate the UN and its Security Council. The UN would virtually become completely at the US beck and call.
On the other hand, a decisive Russian victory, which is also unlikely, would turn the international order upside down and transform the world into a real jungle.
A Russian victory would probably encourage certain states to emulate Russia and carry out naked aggressions of their own against militarily weaker foes or neighbouring states. Certain possible scenarios come to the mind in this regard.
China might be emboldened to invade and occupy Taiwan if Russia emerged as winner.
Israel might well decide to seize the opportunity and wage an all-out war on Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip for the purpose of liquidating the Palestinian issue once and for all. In the process, Israel might carry out huge massacres of Palestinians and embark on the demolition of Islamic holy places in Jerusalem especially the Aqsa Mosque and Dome of the Rock. Moreover, Israel might also decide to carry out massive airstrikes on Iranian cities or even drop nuclear bombs under the rubric of destroying the Iranian nuclear program and preventing the recurrence of the Holocaust!
Other possible scenarios would probably include a possible all-out war by North Korea against South Korea, and a naked aggression by Russian-backed Serbia against Bosnia and Kosovo.
I am not a prophet of doom and gloom, but it is always safer to assume that the worse could happen. There is no doubt that a new world order would appear after the end of the Russian invasion of Ukraine regardless of the outcome of the war . There is also little doubt that the post-Ukraine war will witness more military and strategic polarization than ever. However, the gravest problem facing the post-war world order would, almost certainly, take the form of many states seeking actively to acquire nuclear weapons for their own national defence. Therefore, the nuclear proliferation issue would be the number-1 problem facing the world, with the chances of a nuclear accident or miscalculation reaching terrifying levels. (end)
BBC’s Modi Documentary Rattles Modi Government
BCC recently released a documentary on India’s controversial right-wing Prime Minister Narendra Modi rattling Modi and his ruling party Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The documentary’s first episode titled “India: The Modi Question” which was released in the UK on 17th January drew a sharp reaction from the Modi government.
Modi Government Blocks the Documentary in India
The Modi government moved swiftly to block the documentary in India. Proving right the critics of IT Rules, 2021, the Modi government’s Ministry of Information & Broadcasting invoked emergency powers under the IT Rules, 2021 to order YouTube to take down all the videos that had published the first episode of the documentary. Orders were also issued to Twitter to take down all the tweets that had posted the link to the documentary. Both YouTube and Twitter complied with the orders, removing all the posts and videos flagged by the government.
The government alleged that the documentary was found to be “undermining sovereignty and integrity of India, and having the potential to adversely impact India’s friendly relations with foreign states”, which allowed for the invocation of the emergency powers under the IT Rules, 2021. The government also alleged that the documentary questions the credibility of the Supreme Court of India and attempts to sow divisions among different communities while also making unsubstantiated allegations regarding the activities of foreign governments in India.
Earlier India’s External Affairs Ministry spokesperson dismissed the documentary as a “propaganda piece that lacks objectivity and reflects colonial mindset”. The spokesperson also questioned the timings of the release of the documentary.
The documentary’s first episode produced by the BBC tracks Modi’s “first steps into politics”- his association with the right-wing Hindu extremist organisation Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), his rise through the ranks of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and further his appointment as Chief Minister of the state of Gujarat in 2001 till 2014. As the Chief Minister of Gujarat, Modi’s involvement in and his response to a series of communal riots in 2002 remains a source of controversy.
The documentary highlights a previously unpublished report, obtained by the BBC from the British Foreign Office, which raises questions about Modi’s actions during the religious riots. The report claims that Modi was “directly responsible” for the “climate of impunity” that enabled the violence.
The report cited by the BCC was part of an inquiry ordered by the then foreign secretary Jack Straw. The reports say that “the extent of violence was much greater than reported” and “the aim of the riots was to purge Muslims from Hindu areas”.
Jack Straw is heard in the documentary saying, “these were very serious claims that Mr Modi had played a proactive part in pulling back police and in tacitly encouraging the Hindu extremists. That was a particularly egregious example of political involvement to prevent police from doing their job to protect the Hindus and the Muslims.”
Modi’s Role in Gujarat Riots of 2002
It is the documentary’s highlight of the Gujarat riots of 2002 that has rattled the Modi government.
The Gujarat riots of 2002 claimed the lives of more than 1,000 people. Most of those killed were Muslims. Modi is alleged to have instigated the riots and further prevented the police and the army from taking any action to stop the riots. Most of the reports published on the Gujarat riots by the Indian media as well as the international media point out Modi’s direct role in facilitating the riots. It has been claimed that Modi gave a free hand to Hindu extremists to kill Muslims and the aim was to purge Hindu localities of Muslims.
Modi has rejected these accusations. Further, in 2013 an investigation approved by the Indian Supreme Court absolved Mr. Modi of complicity in the rioting. Based on that finding, a court in the state of Gujarat found that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute him.
Action Taken by Foreign Countries against Modi
Like the above-cited British Foreign Office report, there were many countries that were convinced of Modi’s role in the killing of Muslims during the riots. Concerned countries acted against Modi at different levels.
Modi was banned entry into the U.S. for more than a decade for his role in the riots. In 2005, Modi became the only person ever to be denied a U.S. visa under the 1998 law on violations of religious freedom. The U.S. State Department invoked a little-known U.S. law passed in 1998 that makes foreign officials responsible for “severe violations of religious freedom” ineligible for visas. The ban on Modi’s travel to the U.S. was revoked by the Obama administration in 2014 after he became the prime minister of India.
A Permanent Stain on Modi’s Career
Modi may have achieved great things in his political career, but the stain of the Gujarat riots is permanent on his career.
Modi loves the camera. He loves advertising and branding himself. Modi puts his picture on everything. He loves hearing his voice. However, ever since he became the prime minister of India, he has never given an unscripted interview to the media. He has also never held a press conference in India or abroad. It has been claimed that Modi does not want difficult questions about his attitude towards the Muslim minority of India thrown at him.
When Modi became the prime minister of India, Indian liberals were hopeful that Modi had changed. They were wrong in their assessment that Modi as a prime minister would be inclusive. However, after Modi’s eight years as a prime minister now, he has not changed his attitude towards Muslims. As of now, Muslims are increasingly persecuted by his government.
This author highly recommends that you watch the BBC documentary on Modi. Its first episode has been released here (if you are outside the UK watch it here or use VPN). The next episode will be available on Tuesday, January 24, 2023, at 21:00.
Featured2 months ago
Israel is Hiding Crucial Demographic Facts About Palestinians
Featured3 years ago
The Unfortunate Correlation between Race and Covid 19
Featured3 years ago
Practical Ways to Fight Depression in Islam
Featured2 years ago
“Do Not Waste Water Even If You Were at a Running Stream” Prophet Muhammad
Featured1 month ago
Argentina wins the World Cup; are there any other winners?
Featured2 years ago
The Connection Between Muslim Prayers (Namaz/Salah) and Yoga Poses
Featured2 years ago
Forget About Terrorism, Have You Met Cybercrime?
Featured6 months ago
World Leaders Remain Silent Over Human Rights Violations in the UAE