Like a kid with a new toy, leftists are bringing their latest tool of oppression and discord everywhere. My latest in FrontPage:
The Agassiz-Harrison Observer out in British Columbia reported Thursday that at the University of the Fraser Valley (UFV), a vanguard academic institution if there ever was one, is striking a blow this week against one of the great evils of our time: “As part of the Peace and Reconciliation Centre’s (PARC) Peace Talks series, on June 23 the centre will host a webinar from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m., addressing Islamophobia.” What a relief! And even better, in a meeting of academic fads that one day will look as dated as Nehru jackets and bell-bottom trousers, they’re hauling out Critical Race Theory to fight “Islamophobia.”
As if that weren’t enough modern academic street cred, the university’s website explains that the university is “situated on the unceded traditional territory of the Stó:lō peoples. The Stó:lō have an intrinsic relationship with what they refer to as S’olhTemexw (Our Sacred Land); therefore, we express our gratitude and respect for the honour of living and working in this territory.”
Dr. Keith Carlson, director of UFV’s Peace and Reconciliation Centre, and his colleagues certainly would never dream of suggesting that the Stó:lō peoples practice “systemic Islamophobia” on their unceded traditional territory, but those evil white Canadians certainly do, apparently, and so the good Dr. Carlson is here to fix the problem. To do so, the upcomingwebinar offers a hodgepodge of the currently trendy academic shibboleths and superstitions.
The webinar will “draw on lived experience, post-colonial studies, and critical race theory to help understand the roots of Islamophobia and the structures that continue to sustain it.”
Islam is not a race, and Muslims are not all of one race. There are Muslims, and Islamic jihadis, of all races. To bring critical race theory into a discussion of “Islamophobia” is like a child who has a new toy and has to bring it everywhere, no matter how inappropriate the setting, and demonstrates the Left’s determination to racialize every issue and portray everyone who disagrees with their agenda as a “racist.”
“‘UFV College of Arts condemns the Islamophobic attack in London, Ontario on June 6 that resulted in the killing of Salman Afzaal and Madiha Salman, their 15-year-old daughter Yumna, Talat Afzaal, mother of Mr. Salman, and the bereavement of their son Fayaz. As educators, we assume a responsibility to act against systemic Islamophobia and we call on our students and community to act against these continued acts of violence,’ said Dr. Jacqueline Nolte, dean of the College of Arts.”
The murder of the Afzaal family was a heinous crime. Whether it resulted from “systemic Islamophobia” is, at best, unproven, and once again reminiscent of the little boy who has to take his new toy dump truck to grandmother’s funeral: “racism” is “systemic,” we’re told, and now “Islamophobia” is now “systemic” as well. What systems in Canada actually discriminate against Muslims or disadvantage them in some way? Why, none. None at all.
“Islamophobia is real. It is a toxic force in our society that must be overcome,” Carlson said. “In North America, where Muslim people and culture continue to be portrayed in most movies and TV programs as violent extremists, it is little wonder that non-Muslim people grow up learning to fear and even hate the followers of Islam.”
Carlson gives the impression that these movies and TV shows that supposedly depict Muslims as “violent extremists” (which ones? In movies I’ve seen that have jihad terrorists as characters, there is invariably featured a wise, benign Muslim who opposes this “hijacking” of his or her faith) do so gratuitously out of racism and hatred. He gives no hint of being aware of the global reality of jihad violence committed by Muslims in the name of their faith and explicitly in accord with its teachings. If onscreen portrayals of the real-life phenomenon of jihad violence make people fear and hate Muslims, do onscreen portrayals of Nazi violence during World War II make people fear and hate Germans? Do onscreen portrayals of white racism against black people make people fear and hate white people, and should be discontinued on that basis? Carlson would certainly reject the idea that Germans or whites are in any way victimized by negative portrayals of Nazis or racists, but he embraces and propagates the claim that depicting jihadis endangers Muslims. On what basis does he assert this?
“There are roughly 1.8 billion Muslims worldwide. They are ethnically, linguistically, and geographically diverse, and yet the media does little to portray this, Carlson says.”
So if the media depicted Muslims as “ethnically, linguistically, and geographically diverse,” this would make people stop hating and fearing Muslims? On what basis does Carlson assert this?
“He says what is not widely known, for example, is that the largest Muslim populations are located not in the Middle East or South Asia, but in the Asia Pacific region.”
Well, I’ve pointed that out hundreds of times. Will Carlson commend our efforts here to dispel “Islamophobia”?
“Muslim people and societies have made, and are continuing to make today, incredible contributions to the world, he says.”
Great. Now: what do you propose, Professor Carlson, that we do about jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women, gays and others?
The term “Islamophobia” is an illegitimate conflation of two distinct phenomena: crimes against innocent Muslims, as in the case of the Afzaal family, which are never justified, and honest analysis of the motivating ideology of jihad terror, which is always necessary. Islamic advocacy groups and their leftist allies have been insisting for years that such analysis, too, constituted “Islamophobia.” Such analyses are what Left-fascists want to stamp out.
If the Left succeeds in consolidating power, it will likely become illegal to enunciate publicly any opposition to jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women and others, for there is no example of any such opposition not being considered “Islamophobic.”
Diane Harvey says
“In the same way, any conservative criticism of the —whether of the paper’s astonishing descent into agitprop, or its last-minute changes of embarrassing headlines, or its ideological harassment of its own employees—the paper shrugs off as just another ideologically motivated attack.”
Ask Robert Spencer. Any objective criticism of Islam, based on Islam’s own holy texts, is deemed, ALWAYS, as evidence of the critics’ Islamophobia, as an attack on all Muslims; in sum, “you hate Muslims!” The same result occurs when Spencer and others give evidence that certain Muslims themselves, ISIS for example, point to express provisions in the Qur’an which justify their atrocious but which is nevertheless normative Muslim behavior according to their books.
Comment to the 06/20/21 article,
https://www.city-journal.org/on-the-new-york-times-blindness-to-what-it-has-become#comment-5427078044
mortimer says
Muslim clergy do not WANT you to know about the truth of Islamic supremacism nor the means used (jihadic violence) to achieve it.
Islam’s Sharia law blasphemy provisions are applied by the MULLAHS who interpret them.
The MULLAHS decide what one may ‘MENTION’ about Islam.
In effect, the mullahs do not care if comments about Islam are true or false, because what matters most to them is to defend the ‘HONOR’ of Islam. They defend Islam’s honor by destroying those who draw attention to Islam’s opportunism, misogyny and viciousness.
If a 100% TRUE COMMENT exposing the viciousness of jihad is expressed in public, then the MULLAHS are obliged to COMBAT and COVER UP the TRUTH that Islam is vicious so as to protect Islam’s ‘HONOR’.
The truth of a comment about Islam is no defense if the comment damages the IMAGE or the HONOR of Islam.
…………………………………………
Punishment of Blasphemers from Sharia manual ‘Reliance of the Traveller’:
“The (DHIMMI) agreement is also violated (A: with respect to the offender alone) if the state has stipulated that any of the following things break it, and one of the subjects does so anyway, though if the state has not stipulated that these break the agreement, then they do not; namely, if one of the subject people:
-5- mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), or Islam.” – Reliance of the Traveller’ Chapter ‘O’ 11.10.05.
Sharia permits anyone to kill those who verbally oppose Islam, since they are at war with Islam:
“There is no indemnity obligatory for killing a non-Muslim (harbi) at war with Muslims.” -Reliance of the Traveller, o4.17, p.593
“We have already discussed killing the person who, with intent, curses the Prophet, belittles him or slights him in any way. The judgement in this case is clear.” (i.e. death) – Qadhi Iyaadh in ash-Shifa, Volume No.2, Page No. 27
Aussie Infidel says
“It is little wonder that non-Muslim people grow up learning to fear and even hate the followers of Islam”.
But this article is attempting to address the issue of ‘Islamophobia’ – a so-called irrational fear of Islam – not Muslimophobia a fear of Muslims. As always, any criticism of Islam is twisted to portray a criticism of Muslims. But the inconvenient truth is that Islam is an ideology – albeit a very intolerant one – while Muslims are people. But while Muslims might follow this intolerant creed, they did not devise its tenets or beliefs. Those tenets were written down in their holy book the Quran some 1,400 years ago, by Muhammad who claimed that he had received them as revelations from Allah. But Muhammad was a psychopath, a narcissist and a warrior, and the tenets of his religion reflect his attitude to life – preaching hatred and violence against all who would not accept his religion, or believe he was a prophet.
Islamophobia is a term adopted by the Organisation of Islamic cooperation (OIC), to silence any criticism of Islam. And this pernicious term is in accord with Critical Race Theory which is so prevalent in today’s institutions of so-called ‘higher learning’ – which have become little more than Marxist indoctrination centers.
I don’t hate Muslims per se; I just hate the criminal ideology they follow. The Quran is one of the most hate-filled book ever written; and its continual calls for violence against non-Muslims is a threat to our national security – and the reason why Islam should be banned forthwith. And the universities and schools that propagate Critical Race Theory should be defunded.
mortimer says
Reply to Aussie re ‘Islamophobia’.
Brilliant Western thinkers have taken on the irrational slur of ‘Islamophobia’.
British philosopher Anthony Flew discussed the illogical errors in “Islamophobia’:
“I would never regard Islam with anything but horror and FEAR, because it is fundamentally committed to conquering the world for Islam… it is, I think, best described in a Marxian way as the uniting and justifying ideology of Arab imperialism.”
– Philosopher Anthony Flew was renowned for his work on the philosophy of religion
“Islamophobia is a word created by fascists, used by cowards, to manipulate morons.” — Christopher Hitchens (Western Atheist)
gravenimage says
Thanks for those apt quotes, Mortimer.
Aussie Infidel says
Mortimer, Yes, I remember Hitch’s comment. I didn’t always agree with everything he said, but he sure was right about Islam being the worst possible religion/political ideology one could ever imagine. Its political content is little more than incitement to hatred and violence against all other beliefs – and has no place in a civilized society.
gravenimage says
Agreed, Aussie Infidel.
mortimer says
Dr. Keith Carlson is paid to cover up the violent, supremacist, authoritarian, misogynistic, xenophobic Islamic ideology that is too shameful to discuss in public.
Dr. Keith Carlson is paid to hide the facts about Islamic supremacism.
No university should ever engage in propaganda to cover up such a violent, brutal history such as that of Islam.
Universities should EXPOSE and UNCOVER the horrible, hidden facts about Islam. That is what universities do for EVERY OTHER HISTORICAL FIGURE and HISTORICAL MOVEMENT.
Dr. Carlson, EXPOSE ISLAMIC SUPREMACISM AND MISOGYNY.
Do your job as an academic or resign.
gravenimage says
Canada: University Uses Critical Race Theory to Fight ‘Islamophobia’
………………
Does it matter that “Critical Race Theory” is a) racist bs, and b) that Islam is not a race, in any case?
Not to these tools…
tim gallagher says
Exactly, gravenimage. Criticising Islam, which seems to be what they call Islamophobia, has nothing to do with race. People have to be very muddle headed in their thinking not to be able to see this very obvious fact.
mortimer says
Indeed. Is Dr. Keith Carlson capable of distinguishing between an AUTHORITARIAN IDEOLOGY and a human person?
The first (ideology) is an intellectual concept, while the second (a human) is a living physical organism.
There is a difference to a person exercising critical thought.
The purpose of Dr. Keith Carlson appears to be to blur INTELLECTUAL DISTINCTIONS in order to produce PROPAGANDA for a political movement.
gravenimage says
Agree, Tim and Mortimer.
mortimer says
Dr. Keith Carlson, director of UFV’s Peace and Reconciliation Centre, hasn’t a clue about the hatred of kafirs taught by Islam.
Islam contains an authentic, CANONICAL TEACHING of hate directed from Muslims against non-Muslim KAFIRS. This teaching (Al Walaa wal Baraa) is a COMPULSORY TEACHING whose practice is REQUIRED for ISLAMIC SALVATION.
Here is the proof:
-Imam Abdul-Latif ibn Abdur-Rahman Rahimullah said, “It is not possible for someone to realize Tawheed (Islamic faith) and act upon it, and yet not be HOSTILE against the mushrikeen (i.e. wrong worshippers). So anyone who isn’t HOSTILE against the mushrikeen, then it cannot be said that he acts upon Tawheed nor that he realizes it.” [ad-Durar as-Saniyyah 8/167]
– “The Muslim should regard the Kuffaar as ENEMIES and HATE them because of their kufr (wrong belief), just as he hates their kufr (disbelief) itself.” – from Umar Sulayman ‘Abd-Allaah al-Ashqar, “Belief in Allah”
-“The doctrine of al Walaa wal Baraa is the REAL IMAGE for the actual practice of this faith.” – source “Al Walaa wal Baraa According to the Aqeedah of the Salaf”, by Sheikh Muhammad Saeed al Qatani, authoritative Saudi Sharia lawyer and imam at the Abu Bakr and Al Furqan Mosques in Mecca.
-Shaykh Ahmad ibn ‘Atiq said: “There isn’t in the Book of Allah the Exalted – after the issue concerning the obligation of tawheed and the forbiddance of its opposite (kufr=wrong belief)- any issue which has as so many proofs, nor so clearly explained, than the issue of al-walaa’ and al-baraa’.” (W-B is ‘Islamic apartheid’)
– Dr. Muhammad Saeed Al-Qahtaani said: “Thus, it is clear that Al-Wala’ Wal-Bara calls on Muslims to “love” their fellow Muslims and HATE the non-Muslim (or Kafir).”
– from Sufi scholar Ahmad Sirhindi (1564-1624): “The honour of Islam lies in INSULTING kufr and kafirs. One who respects the kafirs dishonours the Muslims… The real purpose of levying jiziya on them is to HUMILIATE them to such an extent that they may not be able to dress well and to live in grandeur. They should constantly remain TERRIFIED and TREMBLING. It is intended to hold them under CONTEMPT and to uphold the honour and might of Islam.”
– from ibn Taymiyya, “Book of Emaan”: “… true believers show ANIMOSITY and HATRED towards disbelievers and NEVER support them.”
– K. 28:86 says: “Lend not thou support in any way to those who reject Allah’s Message.”
– In the matter of relations with kafirs, a Muslim should “…act like you are his friend. THEN KILL HIM.” – Sheikh Muburak Gilani
– “The Muslim should regard the Kuffaar as ENEMIES and HATE THEM because of their kufr (wrong belief), just as he hates their kufr (disbelief) itself.” – from Umar Sulayman ‘Abd-Allaah al-Ashqar, “Belief in Allah”
– “… to SHOW ENMITY to those who show enmity to Allaah and His Messenger”. – from [Chap.iv] “The Islaamic Concept of al-Walaa’ wal-Baraa’” by Khalid El-Gharib
Ray Jarman says
“Carlson gives the impression that these movies and TV shows that supposedly depict Muslims as “violent extremists” (which ones? In movies I’ve seen that have jihad terrorists as characters, there is invariably featured a wise, benign Muslim who opposes this “hijacking” of his or her faith) do so gratuitously out of racism and hatred”
I do not remember a fuss about the New York crime bosses being portrayed as Italians, the crime families in Boston as Irish nor the crime families as Latinos and Caribbeans in Miami. It is not considered anti-Mexican to refer to the drug and child sex trafficking. Many movies and television programs have devoted a lot of time correctly depicting a situation accurately. If it is immoral to depict jihadis and simple terrorists such as those in Nigeria, Somali, The Philippines and other places as Muslim pieces of crap, then call me a racist or Islamophobic because I don’t care. If the truth hurts, change the actions of the guilty.
gravenimage says
So true, Ray.
mortimer says
Muslims (as adherents to a poltico-theological ideology) are from every race on earth, so the accusation that criticism of political Islam is ‘racist’ is absurd on its face.
James Lincoln says
For all “infidels”, there is no downside to having a fear of islamization.
All upside…
Ray Jarman says
Spot on.
mortimer says
Just wait till the Stó:lō peoples discover that Islam wants to subjugate and rule over S’olhTemexw (Our Sacred Land) and take the Stó:lō peoples as their slaves.
Then they will discover that Islam is ‘racist’ too.
Giacomo Latta says
”we express our gratitude and respect for the honour of living and working in this territory”
I smell an excellent chance in coming up with a little rent money, Sto:los. As a side benefit it would determine if these self-hating honkees, or however they deprecate themselves, really appreciate being able to operate on ”your” land.
Paul Fishman says
Critical Race Theory is the New Terrorist Ideology that began in the secret halls of academia in certain Colleges for these progressive ideas to stir up civil war acts of terrorism similar to the schools that created Dabiq for ISIS to use as propaganda.