Back to the Backlash
In response to our post, "Bracing for the Backlash," we were pleased to receive a thoughtful comment from a member of the Islamic Council of North America (ICNA). He highlights a number of themes that we have sought to address through our discussion of backlash arguments and the focus on minorities in the war on terror.
Our commenter takes us to task for criticizing the work of the Sikh Coalition, who he describes as "earnest and serious." We should clarify that our critique of minority advocacy groups on this blog is not a comment upon their sincerity of effort or aims; rather, we have focused a harsh light upon their work because we believe it undermines all of the goals that they hope to achieve: freedom, equality, and the ability to act, speak, and live as all Americans without being singled out for their minority status. This is because minority advocates are reinforcing the war on terror's radically overblown perception of threat as well as its construction of a divide between the West and the rest (which often gets translated into the West vs. Islam).
We are informed that the Sikh Coalition, “is not about hyping the fear” but about “reducing the threats to vulnerable minorities.” Yet, minority perception of vulnerability is very similar to the broader obsession with risk that makes all Americans feel "vulnerable" to a terrorist attack, when in fact, such a risk is so small that it would be crazy to worry about (much less plan for) it. Such fears play upon actual incidents (the powerful image of the 9/11 attacks, for example), but activity aimed at ‘threat reduction’ soon functions simply to keep alive the anxiety caused by the original incident.
Undoubtedly, there have been some violent crimes against minority groups in the aftermath of 9/11, and particularly against Sikhs, but even the most liberal estimates of such incidents verify that they occur infrequently. (For Muslim-Americans the number of "actual or potential hate crimes" collected by CAIR in its annual reports was 141 for 2004, and was less than 100 for each of the years since 9/11; the Muslim population in the US is estimated to be at least 5 million.) Certainly, these do not constitute a serious threat to minority groups. This is not to say that individuals who are targets of criminal behavior should not press charges and stand up for themselves in the face of prejudice or crime, but to recharacterize sporadic criminal behavior as a widespread phenomenon rooted in some sort of ideological clash is to be guilty of the same "clash of civilizations" mentality as sections of the right. The idea that we need to be "managing diversity" plays into the notion that our interests as diverse individuals are at odds, and that diversity is somehow new (which of course is historical foolishness) and dangerous.
Still more similarities with the Bushies' war on terror can be seen when minority advocates lump totally disparate events and circumstances into one amorphous mass, as our commentor did by explaining that the perception of danger in the Muslim, Arab, and South Asian communities "is at a very high level for a number of reasons--smears in the tabloids and on talk radio, fallout from the violence in Iraq, etc." Of course--tabloids, talk radio, violence in Iraq--these things are so tightly related, that we do not even need to spell it out; a simple "etc." will suffice. The Sikh Coalition and ICNA are not alone in this undisciplined amassing of various, unconnected concerns. Other keen partners are the current administration, as we all know (for example its Ready campaign), while less familiar is the participation of other religious groups. New York Disaster Interfaith Services casts its net so wide that its home page scrolls through pictures of such utterly unrelated events as 9/11, an "anthrax attack 10/01", "blackout 7/03", "AA Flight 587 11/01", "Staten Island Ferry 10/03", and blizzards from the past two winters. In a recent newsletter they inform us that Lutheran Disaster Response of New York is offering "Ready-2-Go Bags" with more than 50 items to help a person survive in the first 24 hours following a disaster. Items include the ever-important DNA/fingerprint kit.
Thus the Sikh Coalition has joined Arab, Muslim, Lutheran, and Jewish advocates (and the list could go on) in America's collective risk/security hysteria. DHS' color coded threat advisory system has rightfully been criticized from all quarters. It is no less misguided when minority or religious groups join the disaster planning fray. In fact, by pushing for legislation like the Backlash Mitigation Bill they actually create a new front in the war on terror--widening the scope and reach of the security regime far beyond even the government's imagination.
Our commenter takes us to task for criticizing the work of the Sikh Coalition, who he describes as "earnest and serious." We should clarify that our critique of minority advocacy groups on this blog is not a comment upon their sincerity of effort or aims; rather, we have focused a harsh light upon their work because we believe it undermines all of the goals that they hope to achieve: freedom, equality, and the ability to act, speak, and live as all Americans without being singled out for their minority status. This is because minority advocates are reinforcing the war on terror's radically overblown perception of threat as well as its construction of a divide between the West and the rest (which often gets translated into the West vs. Islam).
We are informed that the Sikh Coalition, “is not about hyping the fear” but about “reducing the threats to vulnerable minorities.” Yet, minority perception of vulnerability is very similar to the broader obsession with risk that makes all Americans feel "vulnerable" to a terrorist attack, when in fact, such a risk is so small that it would be crazy to worry about (much less plan for) it. Such fears play upon actual incidents (the powerful image of the 9/11 attacks, for example), but activity aimed at ‘threat reduction’ soon functions simply to keep alive the anxiety caused by the original incident.
Undoubtedly, there have been some violent crimes against minority groups in the aftermath of 9/11, and particularly against Sikhs, but even the most liberal estimates of such incidents verify that they occur infrequently. (For Muslim-Americans the number of "actual or potential hate crimes" collected by CAIR in its annual reports was 141 for 2004, and was less than 100 for each of the years since 9/11; the Muslim population in the US is estimated to be at least 5 million.) Certainly, these do not constitute a serious threat to minority groups. This is not to say that individuals who are targets of criminal behavior should not press charges and stand up for themselves in the face of prejudice or crime, but to recharacterize sporadic criminal behavior as a widespread phenomenon rooted in some sort of ideological clash is to be guilty of the same "clash of civilizations" mentality as sections of the right. The idea that we need to be "managing diversity" plays into the notion that our interests as diverse individuals are at odds, and that diversity is somehow new (which of course is historical foolishness) and dangerous.
Still more similarities with the Bushies' war on terror can be seen when minority advocates lump totally disparate events and circumstances into one amorphous mass, as our commentor did by explaining that the perception of danger in the Muslim, Arab, and South Asian communities "is at a very high level for a number of reasons--smears in the tabloids and on talk radio, fallout from the violence in Iraq, etc." Of course--tabloids, talk radio, violence in Iraq--these things are so tightly related, that we do not even need to spell it out; a simple "etc." will suffice. The Sikh Coalition and ICNA are not alone in this undisciplined amassing of various, unconnected concerns. Other keen partners are the current administration, as we all know (for example its Ready campaign), while less familiar is the participation of other religious groups. New York Disaster Interfaith Services casts its net so wide that its home page scrolls through pictures of such utterly unrelated events as 9/11, an "anthrax attack 10/01", "blackout 7/03", "AA Flight 587 11/01", "Staten Island Ferry 10/03", and blizzards from the past two winters. In a recent newsletter they inform us that Lutheran Disaster Response of New York is offering "Ready-2-Go Bags" with more than 50 items to help a person survive in the first 24 hours following a disaster. Items include the ever-important DNA/fingerprint kit.
Thus the Sikh Coalition has joined Arab, Muslim, Lutheran, and Jewish advocates (and the list could go on) in America's collective risk/security hysteria. DHS' color coded threat advisory system has rightfully been criticized from all quarters. It is no less misguided when minority or religious groups join the disaster planning fray. In fact, by pushing for legislation like the Backlash Mitigation Bill they actually create a new front in the war on terror--widening the scope and reach of the security regime far beyond even the government's imagination.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home