There’s prejudice, and then there’s ISIS

 

 

 

 

Comments.    Considerations.     Questions.

 

                                    

                         

                        by Kenneth Bagnell

 

    

     Never since the rise of fascism has a deepening fear entered the lives of almost everyone living in democratic countries. Since the seeds of this new cancer are set in Islamic states, mainly Iraq and Syria, it has, in addition to fear, fueled the confidence of the world’s growing secular movement, which sees all religions not as part of the answer but part of the problem. That has consequences. Professional secularists, who distain religious faith, can now use the horrors of Islamic terrorism, to foster their cause.  Some can and probably will draw upon it as increasing the decline of religion in general. (In Canada, a century ago only one percent were atheistic; today that’s 30 percent.) While the actual cause of this decline is naturally complex, the outrageous jihadist beheadings, inspired by dreadfully warped minds and performed by probable psychopaths, are a vivid example.

      In fact, the terrifying acts we are witness to on nightly newscasts have connection not to authentic Muslim theology but to today’s Islamic culture. They’re different. Sometimes, the two merge, out of history or pragmatism. For example, take as an elementary illustration, the recent fuss in Quebec. An Islamic woman, who had migrated from Kuwait to Quebec, was seeking to reclaim a car seized by police from her son caught driving with a suspended license. (She became a Canadian citizen in 2007 the usual way – before a citizenship court. She wore a head scarf.)

 

            In doing the latter the young woman, Rania El-Alloul, was acknowledging the spirit of an ancient verse in the Koran. In essence the verse (ostensibly spoken or penned by the Prophet) called upon “faithful women” to be modest in going about their day to day life, to “keep their gaze lowered” … “to not display their beauty” and “to extend their scarves to cover the bosom.” But Ms. El-Alloul, in any strict interpretation, didn’t do that. (Some Muslim women in Canada, a small minority veil the entire face with the Nigab, which permits a slit the eyes see through.)  So Ms. El-Alloul’s face was visible, thereby meeting the requirements of virtually all courts in Canada. (A major Toronto paper for reasons unknown to me ran a collection of letters, all angry at Ms. El -Alloul for wearing a face veil to court when she clearly didn’t. It makes you wonder. The paper even accompanied the letters with a large photo of women veiled save for the eye slit.)  Afterward, Ms. El-Alloul expressed justified sadness. “I felt like I’m not a Canadian anymore” she said, “because of the way she (the judge) dealt with me…”  In any case Quebec is Quebec. Its history has exhibited customs that are not encouraging toward “the others.”

      Events such as the one in the Quebec, will be seen by many Canadians as another manifestation of the province’s unfair treatment of “the others”. This in turn will raise honest, perhaps quite justified concern that her attitude is just another revelation of a prejudice with deep roots, long reflected in some of the leadership culture of the province. It is thereby more worrying when we are told that recently the leader of a party in the Quebec legislature said publically that newcomers who wish to build a mosque there should be investigated. He called for this investigation because, as he put it, there were too many newcomers to Quebec who “have consistently denigrated Quebec values.” Shortly after, the town of Outremont cancelled a Muslim graduation exercise after word got around that the ceremony would be led by two members of the Muslim clergy –- Imans.  Almost as if in turn, a bylaw was passed in another borough to prevent yet another Iman from giving lectures scheduled in a public community building. This burst of prejudice was made more worrying by the mayor of Montreal and the Premier of Quebec. Both are reported to have commended the local council for denying the permit to allow the Iman to speak at a community building. Some will call this Islamaphobia and I’m not about to argue with them

   But all is not dark. Beyond these petty reactions to Canada’s Muslim community, the world is slowly coming to a more sensible strategy regarding a major Islamic issue: to inquire just what created ISIS and what its goals are. This far we simply do not know what ISIS is truly all about. Here and there, if not in elected office but in intellectual inquiry, are scholars and insightful writers who are asking for a serious dialogue that will reveal the reasons for its creation and evidence of its goals. One person who has drawn appreciation for his insight on this matter is Graeme Wood, a contributing editor of the highly respected Atlantic.

     His recent essay, What ISIS Really Wants, was not simply one more denunciation of the movement but an inquiry as to its real, probably complex raison d’etre, and what philosophy sustains it and can actually accommodate the most dreadful act of our age, the beheadings. Whatever they aspire to project as their collective character, it certainly isn’t humanitarianism. Graham Wood’s article was surprisingly very well received inside ISIS so much so that it was widely distributed on line, a response Wood gratefully acknowledged, seeing it as positive value for his hope to open a door for discussion. His essay is not merely another denunciation (some expressed regret that it wasn’t) but a serious reflection and honest inquiry into the mystery of its origin and values. Wood’s point of view is somewhat revealed in his opening sentences: “What is the Islamic State? Where did it come from and what are its intentions?” The simplicity of these questions can be deceiving and few Western leaders seem to know the answers. In December, the New York Times published confidential comments by Major General Michael K. Nagata, the Special Operations Commander of the United States in the Middle East, admitting that he had hardly begun figuring out the Islamic State’s appeal.  “We have not yet defeated the idea,” he said, “We do not even understand the idea….” (Wood’s entire article may be read on line by googling, “What ISIS Really Wants,” in The Atlantic by Graeme Woods.)

      “What is really needed,” Wood is reported as saying after his essay received such praise, “is a delegation from an ‘Islamist’ background to visit Islamist State territory and engage with their leadership as well as their common fighters…. Until that happens, it’s hard to truly fathom what this movement is about and what it truly wants.” Of course. And surprising though his view on the matter may well be, it reflects wisdom contained in words spoken by history’s most renowned leader of our own past, Winston Churchill. “To jaw, jaw,’ he said as British Prime Minister, “is better than to war, war.”

                                  30

     

All my past blogs are archived on my website: your comments are welcome there: www.kennethbagnell.com.