El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz: Malcolm X

One of my ‘heroes’ is Malcolm X, former national minister of the Nation of Islam during the 1960’s. I make it a point to read his autobiography at least once a year to refreshen my memory of his story. Although I don’t agree with every single opinion he held, I find the narrarative of his life to be immensely inspiring. It gives me reason to believe that anyone can change and transform themselves, as long as they believe in something enough to let it happen. Remember, Malcolm only became a ‘traditional’ Muslim in April 1964 and was killed in February 1965; amounting to ten months. He was a stern follower of Elijah Muhammad for twelve years prior to that shift. Why am I making something out of this? It makes me think that it does not matter what one believes, as long as they actually believe. This doesn’t exclude the fact that there may be certain ideas that are more true than others.

Malcolm is too big as a symbol to be the poster-man for anyone’s ideology. Ossie Davis’s euology was quite telling when ending it with “who didn’t hesitate to die because he loved us so…” Out of context one could easily infer that he was talking about Jesus, which is ironic because Malcolm was not big on people seeing other people as divine (except W.D. Fard in his NOI days.) His autobiography can be enraging at times, especially when the reader is a ‘member’ of the ‘devil race’ (i.e. me). But in context, I don’t find it that offensive. I probably would have if I lived in that era, but since some time has passed it is easier to put things into perspective objectively. I am of the thought that the Nation of Islam had to happen. Fard had to come. Elijah Muhammad had to be his messenger. The status quo and the ‘we all knows’ had to be overturned violently. Something needed to happen to give black people a sort of arrogant confidence because they had been brainwashed to hate themselves by those in power. There were even books written on how to break the will of a black slave so as to insure against rebellion and unrest. The ideas therein are written in such a matter-of-fact style, which makes it all the more chilling.

After the ‘civil war’, black slaves were technically ‘freed’ but the system was still very much against them. Fast forward sixty years, and there are all types of products for black people to make their hair look like white people’s hair. Malcolm used to get his hair ‘conked’, which entailed the use of lye and other mixtures to be placed on his head to ’smooth’ out the kinks. This would burn and hurt. Unlike the movie ‘Malcolm X’, these sessions would take a lot longer to cause the seering pain the movie depicts; but pain nonetheless. In that context, it was needed for someone to show up and say ‘You know what. You’re better than them. They’re evil by nature, and you’re righteous by nature.’ That doesn’t mean I accept all the doctrines of the Nation of Islam. No sir. If you dig deep enough into it, it can get quite scary. But all the same, this was an evolutionary process.

Much of Malcolm’s autobiography describes his understanding of the NOI teachings and how it changed his life, and the lives of many other black people. He talks about how he would speak in small meetings at peoples houses (just like his father!) to tell them about the teachings of Elijah Muhammad. Sometimes he would get so worked up, his voice would be scathing (which has happened to me a few times, it’s a strange sensation). He speaks of how Elijah Muhammad had to chide him many times to slow down and to be patient, because the growth of the NOI will take time. On that note, Alex Haley can be said to have saved the autobiography so many love so dearly. At one point, Malcolm was so upset about something that he wanted to turn the book into a polemic against Elijah Muhammad. Haley said that this book was meant to be an autobiography, and that the people have to know what Malcolm was thinking at specific times, not what he thinks about those events now (except for small descriptions after the old thought is explained.)

To be continued

Muslim Children Gassed at Dayton Mosque

I was appalled when I read this article a little while ago. Muslim children were gassed at a Mosque in Dayton last Friday, one week after that ‘Obsession’ DVD was sent out to millions of Americans across the country through newspapers and U.S. Mail. Oh, but I’m sure the creators of the video will say that it’s just a ‘coincidence’ that this act correlates with the DVD’s distribution. But I see no coincidence. When you teach hate, hateful actions are the result.

‘True Muslims are Monsters…’

One of the most popular ideas that has become a creed among Muslim haters is the idea that true Muslims who are faithful to their tradition are just steps away from blowing themselves up at a market, or flying another plane into a building. This is because Islam itself is ‘evil’, ‘barbaric’, and ‘violent’, and the only ‘logical’ conclusion for a true practicing Muslim to end up is becoming the monster the Islamaphobes need him (or her) to be. When they found Muslims who didn’t live up to these foreigner-fearing stereotypes, they were stumped but shortly came up with a solution to their problem. These good Muslims aren’t ‘really’ Muslims. They have been touched by the grace of secularism or Christianity, and their goodness is not a reflection of their ‘Muslimness’, but of whatever non-Islam has inspired them to be. No matter how good Muslims may do, it does not matter to this philosophy. A Muslim could rescue an entire city on fire, and these people would still say that they were ‘non-practicing’ or ‘liberal.’ They think this is the perfect idea to stamp out ‘radical Islam’, but they are alienating all Muslims in the process and are pushing some of them who are on the fence into the camps of the radical themselves, thus providing new converts into the ideology they are attempting to defeat.  The creators of that ‘Obsession’ DVD I wrote about last week are still pushing it, and have now invaded the mailboxes this week. It wasn’t enough to send out 28 million copies with the Sunday Paper. Between my brother and myself, we have obtained five copies of the same DVD in less than two weeks and we didn’t even seek it out.

The most irritating thing about this mindset is that the people who believe it will actually get mad at a Muslim who is being nice to them. They are so convinced that the Muslim is supposed to hate and scorn him, that when the Muslim doesn’t, he (or she) doesn’t know what to do. I have witnessed an array of different responses, but all of them sad. It usually involves an insulting quip. For example, one man told me that he was sad that I was ‘disobeying’ my Prophet because I was being nice to him. If I were a ‘true’ Muslim, I would have been throwing insults at him and trying to find a way to kill him. But since I wasn’t doing any of those things, I was being a ‘bad’ Muslim. Subhan’allah, how can I have a real conversation with someone like that? This is why I think people who believe this have gotten stuck in their small box they call the world. They can’t even accept the kindness of another human being, without returning it with insults because they are expecting an insult in return, and when they don’t get it, they don’t know what to do with themselves. It is sad.

The only thing I think will work to defeat this immature philosophy is for Muslims to continue befriending others, serving their communities, and humanity. I don’t think it will win over the people who believe true Muslims are monsters, because they are so far along in their brainwashing that it might be impossible for them to change, but those of the future will be able to see how wrong they were.

I don’t follow the school of thought that says Muslims are always right. By that same token, I also don’t follow the school of thought that says Muslims are always wrong. In every human being, there is nuance, context, inconsistency, contradiction, firmness, vacilliation, strength, weakness, bravery, cowardliness, desire, numbness, charity, frugality, selfishness, selflessness, dreams, contentment, sadness, joy, and love.

Versus vs. Verses (finality)

This is part three of a debate between Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Tariq Ramadan. Ali is a self-described former Muslim-turned-atheist, author of the book of ‘Infidel’, while Ramadan is a Muslim intellectual and author of a number of books, such as ‘Western Muslims and the Future of Islam.’ Ali asserts in her writings and speeches that Islam is barbaric by its own nature, and that it is not by certain Muslims misinterpreting their faith that they do these things . They are merely practicing it as it should be. Ramadan emphasizes in his writings that Muslims in the West have to create their own Western Muslim identity, instead of seeing themselves as Muslims in the West. Thus, he argues for an indigenous Western Muslim community to take root in society.

Versus vs. Verses (continued)

This is part two of a debate between Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Tariq Ramadan. Ali is a self-described former Muslim-turned-atheist, author of the book of ‘Infidel’, while Ramadan is a Muslim intellectual and author of a number of books, such as ‘Western Muslims and the Future of Islam.’ Ali asserts in her writings and speeches that Islam is barbaric by its own nature, and that it is not by certain Muslims misinterpreting their faith that they do these things . They are merely practicing it as it should be. Ramadan emphasizes in his writings that Muslims in the West have to create their own Western Muslim identity, instead of seeing themselves as Muslims in the West. Thus, he argues for an indigenous Western Muslim community to take root in society.

Versus vs. Verses

This is part one of a debate between Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Tariq Ramadan. Ali is a self-described former Muslim-turned-atheist, author of the book of ‘Infidel’, while Ramadan is a Muslim intellectual and author of a number of books, such as ‘Western Muslims and the Future of Islam.’ Ali asserts in her writings and speeches that Islam is barbaric by its own nature, and that it is not by certain Muslims misinterpreting their faith that they do these things . They are merely practicing it as it should be. Ramadan emphasizes in his writings that Muslims in the West have to create their own Western Muslim identity, instead of seeing themselves as Muslims in the West. Thus, he argues for an indigenous Western Muslim community to take root in society.

Obsession…

So, I found an interesting thing attached to the Sunday newspaper of The Toledo Blade. A DVD titled “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against The West.” It appears that it was also attached to 50 other Newspapers throughout the country. What gave its agenda away to me was more than its “O” being replaced by a Star and Crescent, and it’s “N” converted into an AK-47. I have been following the work of most of the people interviewed in this documentary for a long time. Do Muslim extremists exist? Certainly. Should they be dealt with when they try to undermine the liberty of others? Most definitely. But the people involved in this documentary have a much sinister agenda in mind. Throughout their books and speeches, they present in a subtle manner, the idea that “true Muslims” are the terrorists, and “secular Muslims” are the ‘good ones.’

What this means is that they will regard any Muslim who actually believes in their faith as suspect, and will slander them as being extremists even if they’re not. But those Muslims who are not very connected with their faith are to be regarded as ‘good’, because their values are supposedly more aligned with ‘western values’. Again, what this means is that these Muslims’ belief in tolerance, freedom, and liberty isn’t really Islamic, but ‘western’, and this ‘proves’ that Western=Awesome, and Islam=Suck. They will never fully admit this because they are dishonest about what their agenda is.

They also set up a debating technique that doesn’t allow them to lose an argument. For example, one of the people interviewed in this film is Daniel Pipes. Pipes has accused Khaled Abou El Fadl, a Muslim well versed in Islamic thought, law, and ethics, of being a ’stealth Islamist.’ What he means by this is that El Fadl will say certain things to please his American audience, but says something entirely different to Muslims. He had no evidence to support this assertion, but he kept repeating it anyway. The reason why people like Khaled Abou El Fadl and Tariq Ramadan to a certain extent, bother Daniel Pipes and other supporters of this doctrine of ‘true Muslims=evil’, ’secular Muslims=good’, is because they give the lie to what they are saying and can dig deep into the history of Islamic civilization to prove them wrong. And Pipes and Co. can’t turn to their ‘go to’ mental construct of dismissing them as ’secular Muslims’, because they are deeply committed to their faith.

Therefore, Muslims like this break down the simplistic stereotypes that Pipes and others have concocted to satisfy their hatred of Muslims. But since they feel like they are going to be exposed for their dishonesty and telling half-truths, they accuse these Muslims as being insurgents who are merely playing the ‘western game’ to get ahead, but if they got their way all Americans would be reciting the Shahada before school starts, instead of the Pledge of Allegiance. Thus, they play to a fear of foreigners to cloud peoples judgment, instead of allowing them to make up their own mind.

I found it quite appropriate that this film was titled ‘Obsession’, because the people involved in it are certainly obsessed with trying to convince as many people they can that ‘true’ Muslims are potential terrorists, and non-practicing Muslims are an example of the superior ‘western values’ overcoming Islam. Films like these will always be made in political climates such as we have in this day, and they have the right to say what they’re going to say. But what bothers me is that if someone were to ask an organization like Fox News to run a film praising Islam, they would respond by saying that it’s not the media’s job to promote one faith/ideology over another. But when they show something that makes all Muslims look like potential terrorists, it’s lauded as a ‘free exchange of ideas.’ Got it…Message received. When it’s bashing a group of people, it’s ‘democracy in action’. But when it’s giving them a fair shot to present themselves in a good light, it’s ‘intrusion.’

What I found the most ironic with the description of the film on the card it was attached to, was its tracing ‘the parallels between the Nazi movement of World War II, the Radicals of today, and the Western world’s response to both threats’, when in fact it is tactics like these that parallel the Nazi movement! (I.E. repeating a lie enough times makes it true)

My real problem is not that movies like these are made. It’s that movies like these are made by people who have ‘ins’ in the government, and are giving their own personal views a political platform that will affect millions of people. It’s not just ‘radical Muslims’ that Daniel Pipes and his lot are against, but all Muslims who are practicing. They’re just not so upfront about that…yet. They claim their only desire is to see ‘radical Islam’ destroyed, but since they make no distinction between ‘radical Islam’ and ’simply Islam’, they are silently saying that Radical Islam is Islam, and it must be destroyed. Its adherents can either be converted to western ideas of secularism, or they can be condemned as extremists. Knowing that most Muslims won’t conform to this test they have created, this only further ‘proves’ that Muslims are ‘uncompromising fanatics’ that will always be a thorn in the proverbial ‘western’ side.

What I would like to say at the end of this is that I do believe there are Muslim extremists who have fantasies of world domination where their misinformed idea of ‘Islamic Law’ is enforced upon all nations, whether they like it or not. And people like that must always be opposed to protect the freedom of others. This is a given and there is no compromising. But I am entirely convinced that the people featured in this DVD and the many other forms of media they pursue don’t make a distinction between radicals and normal Muslims, thereby supporting a racist proposition that will only lead to discrimination and persecution in the long run if it is left unchecked. They will become like those they hate.