Are We Islamophobic?

Dialectical Materialism

Sometime ago, Ms. Patton introduced the theory of dialectical materialism as an underlying theme of Marjane Satrapi’s Persepolis. My natural aversion to all things deeply philosophical swiftly stomped out any desire to further think about dialectical materialism—no less devote an entire post on it—but since watching a dozen YouTube videos on the subject I’ve experienced a change of heart. If there is one thing I now understand about dialectal materialism from the ridiculously absurd Illuminati world-domination conspiracy theories videos to the ridiculously convoluted lectures of dialectical materialism, is that no one else seems to understand it either.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines dialectical materialism as:

The Marxist theory that maintains the material basis of a reality constantly changing in a dialectical process and the priority of matter over mind.

Needless to say the brevity of Merriam-Webster’s definition doesn’t give the satisfaction I was searching for. Instead I flipped back to the few notes I jotted down in class for a far more gratifying explanation.

Dialectical materialism, as explained to us, is the theory of advancement through struggle. It emphasizes the human reaction to the material world, the world around us, over the intangible abstract world. The reaction to the world around us creates what is known as a thesis. Opposition to this thesis creates what is known as an antithesis. The solution to the dichotomy of the thesis and antithesis is a synthesis. The synthesis turns into the new thesis and the cycle repeats itself. Simply put, dialectical materialism can be stated as:

problem -> reaction -> unsatisfying solution

The theory of dialectical materialism is pertinent to better understand the themes not only of Persepolis and “Saboteur”, but also the rising Islamophobic tide we are seeing in the U.S.

The theory of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis can be seen on many levels within Persepolis from the history of Iran leading up the to Islamic Revolution to the internal conflicts Marji experiences while finding direction in her own life.

Marji’s father explains that the Islamic Revolution as the antithesis to the “2500 years of tyranny and submission”. In this context, the regime of the Shah can be seen as the synthesis, which creates a new thesis and opposing antithesis.

Marji also goes through several dialectical materialism cycles in Persepolis. Starting with her thesis at age 6 by declaring to become a prophet, she converts into the antithesis with a conviction to become a revolutionary. When Marji learns that the Islamic Revolution did not bring the promises she and her family hoped for, Marji develops a new synthesis to reject the changes brought by the Islamic Revolution. However Marji stops attending demonstrations against the Shah’s regme after they become violent and adopts her own way of resisting the Shah through disobedience. And so the cycle revolves as Marji struggles to find direction in her life and continues into Persepolis 2.

Dialectical materialism is not limited to only Persepolis: “Saboteur” eloquently uses undertones of dialectical materialism to enhance it’s themes as well. The setting of “Saboteur” itself is a distinct phase of dialectical materialism. The Chinese Cultural Revolution can be seen as an antithesis reaction to the problems plaguing China from The Great Leap Forward. The Great Leap Forward itself was an antithesis reaction to the agrarian economy prevalent at the time in China. From this perspective, the cyclic nature of China’s history during this era can be evenly aligned to the theory of dialectical materliasm.

The protagonist of “Saboteur”, Mr. Chiu, also experiences a dialectical materialism cycle. At the time of his arrest he believes a thesis of intellectual confidence in the idea that “all citizens were equal before the law” (Jin 6). By the end of his incarceration, “he would have razed the entire police station and eliminated all their families” (15). Mr. Chiu has become the antithesis of his earlier intellectual confidence in equality; he has transformed into a vehicle of primal revenge unto all those who wronged him by unleashing a hepatitis epidemic in the city, Muji.

Likewise, the Islamophobia metastasizing throughout America follows the theory dialectical materialism. After 9/11, fear of anything Muslim proliferated on our airwaves by the media, government officials, and religious leaders has made the many Americans feel threatened by Islam. Islamophobia can be seen as an antithesis reaction to 9/11 catalyzed by the fearmongers dominating our airwaves.

Where does this leave us?

If history is indeed cyclic, a synthesis will eventually emerge as a unsatisfying solution to Islamophobia. Dissenters will have yet another reason to create an antithesis, and the cycle will start again. While some may find this forecast bleak, it is important to keep in mind that the struggles between a thesis and antithesis are how we, as a civilization, grow. If we proceed with our existence absent of obstacles we will remain stagnant, crippled by our own inability to progress and evolve.

Hi Nicole,

Thanks so much for this. Having spent a few months living in London and frequently listening to London-based podcasts, I can sadly attest to the fact that many Londoners—at least the ones I’ve encountered—are xenophobic.

I don’t agree with the conviction of the man who tweeted he’d blow up the airport if his plane could not take off on-time. His only crime, in my opinion, is of terribly bad taste in humor. The tweet by the man suggesting the stoning of a Muslim woman who’s opinion column he did not agree with is also deeply offensive to me. However, I don’t think the proper response to poor taste in humor is to criminalize it.

Not only does the stifling of free speech go against the basic right I believe all people should have, but also I just don’t think its very effective in curbing behavior. Education is the best solution to ignorance in my opinion.

iriana100: Brilliant presentation Laela. You chose a very interesting topic and developed it in the best way. I am definitely going to write about it.

Yasaman gave a really illuminating presentation today on Iranian women. It is humbling to realize just how much of our basic freedoms we take for granted in America. Prior to her presentation I had little knowledge of how Iranian women are seen as only 1/2 a man under law, or how women are arrested for showing too much hair from under their hijab or too much ankle from under their clothing. 

Yasaman’s discussion on the hijab reminded me of the Islamophobia happening in France, home to Europe’s largest Muslim minority. France’s National Assembly has banned all religious symbols from schools. While this is a blanket ban on symbols of all religions, it is widely considered to be a ban directed towards any young women and children who wear Islamic headscarfs to school. The controversy is very complex: both sides believe they are on the side of the women who wear hijabs. One side believes they are liberating the women who are “forced” to wear the headscarf, the other side believes it is their right to wear the headscarf.

Admittedly, this was one of those many topics that my American education has failed me horribly on. Until recently I had erroneously assumed headscarfs were forced upon women as well. I had presumed that because I would not want to be forced to wear a veil suddenly, the women of Iran would feel the same much like Marjane in Persepolis:

It wasn’t until I heard a woman on the radio a few years ago express that her hijab was her right as a woman to wear that I began to see this issue from a different perspective. Truth of the matter is that many Muslim women believe it is their right, a symbol of their freedom, and an act of faith and piety to wear a hijab. It is a very Western attitude—in the land where we covet our freedoms above all—to believe the covering of the body is a sign of oppression.

Taking away a woman’s right to express herself, whether it be her beliefs on Western fashion trends or her beliefs about her faith, is not right. Neither is it right to use Islamophobia under the guise of “protection for women” to pass national legislation that furthers a xenophobic agenda. 

Unfortunately, since the ban in France, many Muslim females have sought their education elsewhere where their beliefs would be tolerated. Much like Marji of Persepolis who was sent to Europe to continue her education in a country that would accept her rebellious beliefs, many Muslim females in France are increasingly separating from their families to study abroad where there is more tolerance.

How do would you deal with all this hatred if it was directed at you?

Marjan gave a very informative presentation on the invasion of Iran described in Persepolis. Through her personal memories of living but a few miles from Tehran, I was able to visualize just how terrible it must have been to live in the area during that time. Not only did she share her personal experiences, but she also filled in a lot of the background history which made reading Persepolis much more enjoyable.

I followed up with Marjan about how she handles so much tragedy and Islamophobic hatred directed unfairly at her. With the same bright smile she wears everyday to class she told me she just doesn’t let it get to her. She explained that making light of the situation was a good way of dealing with it and suggested watching the comedian Maz Jobrani. 

The above video is an hilarious skit Maz Jobrani did about Islamophobia in airports. He takes a satirical look at Muslims constantly making headlines for failed airplane attacks and the irrational fear passengers displayed when seeing Muslims pray before boarding a flight. (For those of you more interested in Maz Jobrani’s comedy, search for his “Axis of Evil” tour on youtube, its brilliant!)

How does Marjane Satrapi of Persepolis handle cruelty?

As Marjane’s grandmother told her on the night before she left for Austria, “There is nothing worse than bitterness and vengeance… Always keep your dignity and be true to yourself”

These last words to Marjane have a timeless truth applicable not only to Marjane but for us as well. No matter what adversity we may encounter from others, whether in the form of xenophobia such as Islamophobia, or other prejudice, bitterness and vengeance is not the answer. Speaking up for your beliefs with dignity and remaining true to yourself will always be the better option.

"

They came first for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

"

—

First They Came… by Martin Niemöller (14 January 1892 – 6 March 1984)

This poem was shared by Madhu during her in-class presentation on torture with Won Ho Kim. Their stirring presentation called into question whether the means justifies the ends in regards to the incarceration of those who have broken society’s laws. While I do not favor the infliction of severe pain and suffering upon any living thing no matter what the crime, I understand how others find justification in torture when it comes to the fear of lawlessness in a society without punitive measures.

However, Niemöller’s poem poignantly illustrates the consequences of succumbing to such fear and not speaking out against injustices inflicted upon others. This inaction allows for the persistence of evil right infront of our very eyes: so long as we remain silent, evil is allowed to perpetuate.

Instead of sitting here on my digital soapbox drawing parallels between the political inactivity of German intellectuals which allowed for the perpetuation of concentration camps and the political inactivity of today’s intellectuals who idly stand aside as xenophobic fear grips the rest of us into giving up basic civil rights to protect against the “Islaminzation” of this country, I want to share with you my afternoon. It is far easier to sit and pass judgement on others than it is to initiate change yourself. While I’ve probably clearly demonstrated the first in my previous posts, I failed at the latter this afternoon…

This afternoon I failed to stand up for my own beliefs against racism for fear of damaging a friendship. While speaking to a friend over the phone, his sister walked into his house and began telling her brother—my friend—about her day. She was harassed at the store by some guys and grew upset. Because the men who gave her a hard time were African-American, she began to project her anger upon all African-Americans.

I was offended by her blanket accusations on an entire race because of the actions of a few individuals, but didn’t feel it was my place to interrupt her rant to her brother. Surely this conversation was private and I would only seem crazy if I suddenly began to yell over the phone how my friend’s sister was for projecting her anger onto the wrong people.

And then my friend said, “At least your not a nigger.” To which his sister replied, “I’d rather hang myself than be a nigger.”

I was speechless.

It’s one thing to hear celebrities get caught using the n-word, or politicians debate over use of the n-word, but to hear someone you consider a close friend actually use the n-word in a hateful racist remark left me at a loss for words. I have many African-American friends and many fond memories of spending time with them. I have also been the brunt of racist Japanese and “half-breed” remarks and know how painful it is to be discriminated against because of your race. I should have pointed out how the actions of a few people should not be used to incriminate an entire race of people. I should have reminded them just how hateful of a connotation the n-word carries with it. I should have told them just how deeply offended I was to hear them saying such racist remarks. Instead I was reminded of how upset my friend became the last time I told him how unacceptable I found racists and bit my tongue.

I should have spoken up for my beliefs and let it be know how incredibly offensive and disgusting words like that are. I should have been more like the people of the experiment in the video below who told the shopkeeper refusing to serve a woman wearing a hijab to “go fuck yourself”.

Never again will I bit my tongue because I am too fearful of the consequences of my actions. As Niemöller warns us in First They Came…, the consequences of inaction are far more devastating. 

“Saboteur” Reflection: Revenge Isn’t the Solution

Ha Jin’s “Saboteur” takes place in communist China where the protagonist, Mr. Chiu, is wrongfully arrested and made to confess for a crime he did not commit. We are made to emphasize with Mr. Chiu, who is honeymooning in the city of Muji while sick with hepatitis. Over the course of the story, Mr. Chiu, an intellectual professor, knowledgable in law, philosophy, and even dialectical materialism, transforms into the very thing he is originally arrested for: a saboteur. By unleashing an hepatitis outbreak onto 800 people in Muji killing six people—two of whom were children—Mr. Chiu has indeed become far worse than a simple saboteur, he has become a murderer.

“Saboteur” is a poignant example of how revenge is never the solution, no matter how righteous one may feel or how wrong one was treated. While it may seem very apparent in the context of a short story like “Saboteur”, when applied to real-life situations such as the Islamophobic sentiment currently sweeping our country, the distinction between the justified and righteous are not as easily identifiable.

Protestors of the mosque set to be built near Ground-Zero in New York City, like Barry Zelman, echo similar thoughts of righteous indignation for their anger:

“[The 9/11 terrorists] did this in the name of Islam. It’s a sacred ground where these people died, where my brother was murdered, and to be in the shadows of that religion, it’s just hypocritical and sacrilegious.”

Certainly those of us who have lost loved ones to soon in violent tragedies can understand the anger in Barry. But projecting the actions of a few people onto the rest of a population is not the solution. Holding hateful posters such as “Building a Mosque at Ground Zero is like building a memorial to Hitler at Auschwitz” is no more justifiable as releasing an hepatitis epidemic onto a city and killing 8 people.

A Student’s Perspective: Conversation with Marjan on Airport Security

For those of you in our class unfamiliar with Marjan by name, one word is all you would need to recognize her out of the rest of our 32 classmates: hijab (or Islamic head-scarf). As the only woman in our class who regularly wears her hijab, Marjan took a few minutes to describe to me the Islamophobia she’s personally experienced since moving to the U.S.:

The airport security is the worst. They say they do “random” searches but I get searched EVERY time… I usually meet averted eyes elsewhere, but airport security is the worst.

This was shocking to me, as a frequent traveler I can honestly say that I have never been pulled aside for a “random” search. And yet I, with my staple black sweaters and black eyeliner, probably look more menacing than Marjan who always wears modest clothing in cheerful patterns and colors. Even my 18 year-old self with a lip piercing, jet-black and hot-pink hair, and Goodwill wardrobe never was selected as part of the random search while going through airport security in the years immediately following 9/11— and that was when I was TRYING to look ominous.

Indeed, this blatant racial profiling is part of the TSA’s policy to conduct searches on “anyone wearing a head scarf”. What’s worse is that many fearful travelers believe this is necessary to maintain the safety of the public. Even Juan Williams, senior news analyst for predominantly liberal National Public Radio for over 10 years, spoke blatantly anti-muslim rhetoric on-air:

But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.

If a person such as Juan Williams, who himself is sensitive to the plight of the under-represented as an author of civil rights movement books, can be so consumed with fear that he’d be willing to give up his 4th amendment right to protection from unreasonable searches and seizures under the Bill of Rights—the very same document which guarantees our civil rights—then what chance does the average person have against the growing tide of bigotry fear?

Marjane Satrapi, author of Persepolis, experiences momentary lapse in judgement as well with bigotry attitudes. After being told that a classmate, Ramin, had a father who was a part of the secret police and responsible for killing a million people, Marji decides it is up to her to exact justice on behalf of the dead upon Ramin. Much like Juan Williams, Marji joins the popular tide of bigotry emotions without examining the consequences of such rhetoric and actions. It is only after being caught by her mother does Marji gain the wisdom of placing herself into Ramin’s shoes to understand just how wrong her intolerance was.

We could all use our mother’s wisdom of treating others how you want to be treated when it comes to fighting the Islamophobic outpour from those overcome with fear.

Oh-noes, They’re in Our Cheerios

Anti-Islam histeria has swept into our most important breakfast of the day: breakfast.

Kellogg’s UK offers their UK consumers halal-certified cereals, prompting the fear “are their U.S. products secretly halal?”. Met by cries to boycott Kellogg’s less we want to “submit to Islam”, this news brought out Islamaphobic sentiments from pages of readers.  

It is incredible to conceive how “secretly halal” products would be a legitimate concern over cereal if we took the time to understand what halal is. According to the Islamic Food and Nutrition Council of America:

All foods are considered halal except the following:

• Swine/Pork and its by-products
• Animals improperly slaughtered or dead before slaughtering
• Alcoholic drinks and intoxicants
• Carnivorous animals, birds of prey and certain other animals
• Foods contaminated with any of the above products

Although many of us eat meat with every meal, do we really want meat IN our cereal too? If anything, we should be suspicious of cereals that are NOT able to be halal-certified. I don’t know about you, but I like my cereal free of animal products.

Racism wrapped in fear isn’t M-m-good

Islamophobia isn’t contained to only cultural centers at Ground Zero. Right-wing bloggers are demanding the boycott of Campbell’s Soup for introducing an halal-certified line of soups. 

Pages of comments in response were posted such as:

This is the stuff Obamunist dream of every day

 and:

Well it’s quite simple then. No more Campbells for me.

It is unbelievable that we would link the movement of a multi-geo corporation who’s looking to appeal to people the world’s second largest religion as supporting Islamic extremists. And yet, in this time of fearful anti-muslim sentiment, here we are demanding the boycott of Campbell’s Soup as if al-Qaida’s plan is to take over the world with soup.

In my opinion, Stephen Colbert had the best response to this news:

Yes, even our supermarkets are not safe. How dare they construct a tower of Islamic soup so close to Ground-Beef!

You Mosque Be Kidding

A wave of anti-muslim fear has spread in reaction to plans to build an Islamic cultural center in lower Manhattan, aka “Ground Zero”. Led by right-wring blogger Pamella Geller, protestors like the one pictured above came out to express their Islamophobia to “stop the Islamization of America”.

But the hundreds of protestors who came out are not the only ones in opposition of the proposed Islamic cultural center. Time Magazine’s poll found 61% of a sampling of 1,000 people nationwide oppose the mosque near ground zero and a further 70% believe that proceeding with the plan would be an insult to the victims of the attacks on the World Trade Center.

Where is this Islamophobia coming from? Turn on the television and it won’t be long until you hear the bigotry remarks against Islam. The mid-term election brought about many anti-muslim issues to the forefront, including an inundation of bigotry advertisements from candidates running on anti-muslim platforms, and the banning of Sharia and international law in Oklahoma. Even the news-parody show “The Colbert Report” ran a segment “You Mosque Be Kidding” with a tongue-in-cheek parody of how the anti-muslim rancor in New York has built up to the abhorrent hate-crime stabbing of a taxi-cab driver.

Indeed, the anti-muslim rhetoric is all but too familiar to many of us now: most of the terrorist attacks are conducted by Muslims in the name of their faith, therefore Islam must be a violent religion. All too often are passages of the Koran take out of context and used as evidence that Islam demands believers to kill or convert all others. Islam, however, is one of the most misunderstood religions in the U.S. The very etymological root of the word Islam means “peace” and is followed by 23% of the world’s population: over 1.5 billion people.

By allowing the actions of a handful of extremists characterize all 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, we condem nearly a quarter of the people in this world from sharing the very ideals this country was founded on: religious freedom and tolerance. 

Truth Over Fear: Countering Islamophobia

Nicely done video on what Islamophobia is, how it affects us as a society, and the direction we are headed in if we allow ourselves to be consumed by our xenophobic fears.

On a Serious Note…

You may find this blog to be offensive.

I don’t blame you.

The reason I am writing this very blog is because I am offended.

But let me assert to you, in this time of stark polarization as proclaimed by our media where you are “either with us or with the enemy”, that I too am a patriot of America. I too bleed red, white and blue. I too cherish apple pie. But what makes our country so great is not the ability to join the loudest spokesperson who represents our beliefs, but the ability to speak up for those beliefs ourselves.

It is my hope that by reading this blog you are inspired to speak up for the beliefs you cherish the next time you see something that goes against your integrity. Without check fear can overcome even the strongest willed individuals.