Islam's selective outrage

[minge tightly]

Much has been been written about the Gaza conflict and several pieces concern the impact that events are having on British Muslims – whether it's alienating them from the political process or driving them to radicalisation.

More than a few commenters, such as Johnton, have claimed that the UK's Muslim communities have largely remained silent on the other catastrophes and atrocities to have affected their brethren in recent times. Two years ago, at a press conference, I asked Fareena Alam of the Muslim magazine Q News why Muslims were so quick to condemn western governments for their involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, yet appeared to show little heartbreak or anger over suffering in Darfur.

She replied that it was "shameful" the way British Muslims had responded to the humanitarian crisis in Sudan: "We can get hot and bothered about Iraq. There is a lot of information about Darfur. There is no doubt this is Muslim-on-Muslim violence. In this situation where are these values we talk about, that killing one life is about killing humanity? It is a huge embarrassment to us. We need to have a very big conversation about this."

...Besides, if you believe in the ummah then be consistent – not just when you believe there to be a western enemy. Here's another thought, instead of crying foul when it's just Muslims who are suffering, why not react this way when anyone is affected, regardless of what they believe? When there's a hurricane, a cyclone or civil unrest that leaves people dead, homeless or in the grip of oppression? It is your duty to protest and react, not because you're Muslim, but because you're human. Looking after your own – and only your own – gives the lie to the idea that Islam is a religion of compassion. In fact, it says Islam is a religion of self-interest.

[glow=red,2,300]http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/13/islam-gaza-israel[/glow]

Pretty much spot I reckon

[VikingHumpingWitch]

Not just Muslims though, I've read plenty more outrage about this from non-Muslim Westerners than I have about Darfur, or any other of the many conflicts and suffering that is going on elsewhere in the world.

I think I would exclude Iraq and Afghanistan from the discussion though. For UK Muslims to get particularly annoyed about a conflict that their government is involved in seems logical.

[vania]

I think this is a fair point. I have no problem with 'having a cause' so to speak, but it does tend to look dodgy if all of your causes centre around perceived and actual abuse of the faith you belong to.

Likewise with Islamic Aid charities which centre around problems disproportionately affecting muslim populations.

[minge tightly]

Of course, there is always the mirror image in our own, '300 dead, no Britons hurt' mentality.

Still, would be nice if Israel/Palestine wasn't plastered all over the media everyday stoking the fires

[mids]

Good article. Spot on etc. About time too etc. There's something just not right about people become outraged to the point of violence at something that is happening to other people halfway round the world just because they happen to belong to the same religion, yet ignoring much much bigger problems because the victims are not in the ummah.

[omnipleasant]

Isn't selective outrage just a fact of life? It's not just "muslims".

[bertrus2]

The article is very confused. Protests about British government policy towards Iraq, Palestine and Afghanistan are justified. British government views about conflicts in Congo, Darfur, Zimbabwe, about natural disasters are not the subject of outrage because there is no disagreement with them, broadly speaking. This is a question of humanitarian principles, not religion.

[VikingHumpingWitch]

The point, I think, is the outrage about Israeli actions in Gaza, not UK policy on the matter.

It's the pernicious nature of religion, innit. Much the same as how the majority of Jews tend to back Israel. Powerful and scary stuff.

[ricklinc]

You're all missing the point. Iraq, Afghanistan, Gaza are all messes that British muslims can use to demand that the British government do some appeasing. Like the open letter to Brown declaring that Britain must act to ensure that Israel settles down or muslims in Britain are going to feel very insecure and angry. There's nothing humanitarian involved as far as they're concerned. It's all gimme.

[vania]

Omni i think you've missed one of the points the author is making. If you apply selective outrage and feel to protest when muslims are victims shouldn't this be applied consistently?

Meaning that I would expect outrage at muslims killed at the hands of Iraqi terrorists, in Darfur, at the hands of the Taliban, suffering under Hamas etc...

The way it is played out is that it is only wrong for Westeners to mistreat muslims which surely can't be right.

[flatandy]

I agree with everyone, I think. Firstly, it's basically a good article; secondly that it does confuse complaining about something which your government is engaged in, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, with a fight in which you have no dog - Gaza or Darfur; which therefore are very different things in terms of ther engagement of protest.
Thirdly, of course, westerners do it, too - Train crash in India/Bombing in Bali/Nightclub fire in Bangkok, etc. No Brits were aboard, but 3 Italians, 2 Canadis and 5 Americans were. Etc.

[vania]

Oi! This Westener most certainly does not do that thank you very much.

Also I think it's to do wiht scale. For example I could ask a million Westeners their opinions on Iraq/Indian hotel attacks/Bali and get a variety of responses. However I could probably guess what the muslim/Jewish response would be to the current renewed bout of fighting between The Israelis and the Palestinians.

I think articles like this will pick up on muslims doing it and not noting Westeners doing it is because of the scale of protests we witness when something is deemed to be detrimental to Islam/Muslims.

That said I think that's true. There is bizarre expectation that people should have blind support for others of their nationality but not of their faith group.

[flatandy]

Well, yeah. And some muslims don't too, innit?

[bertrus2]

As far as the attack on Gaza is concerned, the argument is between those whose humanitarian instincts take second place to ethno-religious loyalties and the rest of us.

[VikingHumpingWitch]

Jan 13, 2009 16:38:50 GMT bertrus2 said:

As far as the attack on Gaza is concerned, the argument is between those whose humanitarian instincts take second place to ethno-religious loyalties and the rest of us.

Yeah - Hamas and rightwingers on one side, normals on the other.

[bertrus2]

I said the 'argument'.
between a) humanitarians and b) ideological supporters of the combatants
The Palestinian resistance and Israel are on the same side in this equation.

[cobblers]

I don't think a humanitarian would call Hamas launching rockets and suicide bombers 'resistance'

[cobblers]

I should add, 'from within civilian areas and buildings in the knowledge that they were endangering their civilian populations'

[tarrant]

Let's face it, neither Fascist Hamas nor the Nazi Zionists care a jot about civilians, Israeli, Palestinian or anwhere else.

We are just pawns in their games. The fools are those that think one side or the other is in any way acceptable or justified.

Nazis Zionists and Fasicists Islamists are encouraged by those that refuse to condem them or repeat their porpaganda.

[radge]

bit severe there tarrant but yes i agree, both sides are w*nkers