The truth phobia

Mike

The problem with all the 'phobias' that have been invented by the liberal-left in recent years is that they attempt to win arguments by default by the trick of equating visceral hatred of individuals with reasoned opposition to particular political agendas. They do so, moreover, by means of adopting a pseudo-scientific grammatical form that parodies the way language is used in medicine and psychology to define real phobias.

It is exactly the same with 'homophobia'. If the term was used merely as a piece of hyperbole to describe violence against people who happen to be homosexual - something as noxious as any other form of unprovoked hostility - then it might be acceptable. But instead it is used as a catch-all label to discredit disagreement with any aspect of what are deemed by an activist minority to be 'gay rights'.

Ultimately this is a totalitarian use of language that seeks to define opposition to an orthodoxy as by definition irrational. Frankly the end-point of this way of thinking is locking people up in mental hospitals for holding 'unacceptable' opinions. Now where has that happened in living memory?

Dixon

There are SO many games waiting to be played with this feeble trend of thought. But lets just take one for a moment. Applying the logic of "Islamophobia" ....a supposedly visceral irrational fear of a set of beliefs...could not some enterprising civil rights lawyer argue that disapproval of neo-NAZIs is actually "NAZIphobia" and hence a form of prejudice? Even ( hur, hur ) a form of racism?

David

Sorry, but Islamophobia refers to the irrational fear and/or hatred of all Muslims, regardless. It's perfectly acceptable as a term for what it describes.

Much like anti-Semitism, the battle is to avoid it being applied to all negative references, no matter how justified as a legitimate opinion.

Shaun Pilkington

'Islamophobia' is a meaningless term designed to belittle those who criticise Islam by implying that their critique is motivated by fear.

As an atheist, I believe that to worry about unelected rule by a Muslim theocracy is perfectly rational. To worry about being blown up by their co-religionists is perfectly rational.

My parents are Irish although I was born here. I understand. I know that not all Muslims are terrorists. There are, and I have been friends with, many Muslims who are good, decent people. But all terrorists currently engaged in campaigns against the UK and her citizens are Muslim. Self-defined, but without a Caliph, isn't that true of *all* followers of Islam?

So its not a 'phobia'. At worst its a wariness. But then, there's an agenda here to promote the notion of victimhood which profits so handsomely in the post WW2 world.

David

"But instead it is used as a catch-all label to discredit disagreement with any aspect of what are deemed by an activist minority to be 'gay rights'"

You mean the right to live like anyone else unencumbered by the law? How very dare they....They should know their place......

Andre

Is islamophobia a fear of Islam, the religion, or the people who practice it? For myself I do not like the religion - it denies the divinity of Christ and leads to violence. I want no part of it. Christ himself warns of false prophets. However actual Muslims - I've worked with several and I am very fond of them, and i do not want to see them proscribed or discriminated against. I want the freedon to speak as i feel and insist on this freedom for them. I once had a discussion with M and said simply 'You're backing the wrong horse.'
'Ah yes you worship the horse don't you?' Turned out my friend had mixed up Caligula with the early Roman church. Was I offended? Was he? No we just laughed about it - over a pint...

Koestler

Anti Semitism is also commonly referred to as Judeophobia. I'm not sure applying the medical term "phobia" to any group helps political discussion very much (e.g. look a how the term "homophobia" is often used).

Dixon

David
December 9th, 2008 6:11pm
Sorry, but Islamophobia refers to the irrational fear and/or hatred of all Muslims, regardless. It's perfectly acceptable as a term for what it describes. "

But thats NOT how it is applied. The meaning of a word is determined by its usage.

Put that to the "NAZIphobia" test: Is it rational to hate an individual on the basis of their merely being a member of a NAZI organisation. For example, the Pope, who was for his sins, a member of the Hitler Youth and manned NAZI AA batteries during WW2? Is it not long accepted that there were such examples of a "Good NAZI", such as Albert Speer, or indeed, Werner Von Braun? I detest the NAZI party, but not individual NAZIs. Most of whom I regard as having been "taken for a ride".

By the same token, I detest Islam, not Muslims, who I regard as the victims of that belief system.

BiBiJon

"Iran openly threatening a second Jewish genocide"

Could anyone please refer me to a reliable source for above statement.

From Haaretz:

Iran Jews celebrate Persian roots, seek to maintain shrinking community

By The Associated Press

Tags: Susa, Prophet Daniel

Members of Iran's tiny Jewish minority gathered at the holy shrine of the Prophet Daniel in the southwest of the country Thursday to celebrate their Persian roots and keep alive a dwindling community.

More than 200 Iranian Jews embarked on the long journey to Susa from cities across Iran to celebrate their Jewishness in an event organized by a local Jewish youth group to support the community.

"This gathering helps promote unity, affection and friendship among Iranian Jews. We are determined to pay homage to Daniel once a year," said Bahador Michael, 26, of the Yaran organization that began organizing the trips five years ago. "It has been a great success and local authorities have been very cooperative."

Iran's 25,000 Jews, the largest community in the Middle East outside Israel, face no restriction on their religious practice, though they must follow Islamic dress codes such as head scarves for women.

Jewish population in Iran, however, has been shrinking from emigration to Israel, the United States and elsewhere. Before the 1979 Islamic Revolution, nearly 100,000 Jews lived in Iran.

Just in December, some 40 Jews secretly immigrated to Israel in a trip sponsored by the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews, a charity receiving millions of dollars from evangelical donors each year. Jewish leaders in Iran denied that it was an organized immigration.

"Prophet Daniel is the symbol of our proud Persian roots. The gathering in Susa is to highlight our presence in Iran since ancient times," said Farhad Aframian, the editor of the monthly Jewish magazine, who described the gathering as an opportunity for Jews from all over the country to socialize and keep in touch.

Inside the shrine, Jewish women sat reciting verses from the Torah, while nearby men in skull cups prayed loudly in Hebrew.

"I feel and peace when I pray here," said Parviz Minaei, a 50-year-old retiree.

In addition to the tomb of the Prophet Daniel, Iran is also home to another of Judaism's important sites, the shrine of Mordechai an Esther, who became a Persian queen and persuaded King Xerxes not to slaughter the Jews in an event subsequently celebrated by the festival of Purim.

Source:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/954647.html

For reality check on Iran, see
http://www.bibijon.org/iranimage/

J. Isaacs

"...there is no limit to the supply of useful idiots who can be relied upon to assist".

Here is a troublingly large selection of such useful Brits:
1) Terry Waite,
2) Sadaam's voluntary human shield coach party,
3) Norman Kember.

Charles MacDonald

Highly recommended:

Uriya Shavit, Old Fears, New Threats
http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110010859
(Reprinted from Azure magazine)

Andy Leeds

Andre is right. To a Christian Mohammed was not a prophet and in theological terms he was actually an Anti-Christ - he denied the divinity of Christ.

In the UK we have long taken a view that an individual may believe what they wish and you are free to practise your religion so long as you don't betray the State. Too many Muslims seem to have a belief that they can betray the State and their fellow citizens. Well it's time there was a realisation that you can't.

Brian Moshe

Sometimes I stop and ask myself "Am I guilty of being motivated by hatred of Muslims or am I justified in holding the opinions that I hold in relation to them?"

Since Islam is a religion and not a race it would be difficult to be a racist on religious grounds alone which my sole motivation, race is immaterial, although culture is not.

Basically, I have an opinion that there are two sorts of practising Muslims in Britain: 1) those who are a danger to everyone 2)those who are utterly different from non-Muslims but are not currently a danger 3)plus a tiny handful of apostate or semi-apostate Muslims whom people like Andre (above)say they have a pint with. These latter may revert to either of the previous categories.

When I meet a Muslim I don't recoil in the very obvious way that some Muslims do if they learn I am a Jew.

I went into hospital in England last year for an operation. I gave my religion on the in-patient form. Then I worried when obviously Muslim doctors and students came to examine me both before and after my operation and they peered at my end of bed clipboard details. I might sound paranoid but now that there are Muslim doctors who are happy to be terrorist bombers who is to say my passing fears were wholly unjustified.

One of my personal ways of not helping the Muslim danger to non-Muslim Britain is to try to withold my spending from any Muslim business including sub-post offices, restaurants, imported foods, etc.

Some years ago, following Polish communist purges against 'Zionists', the Polish Jewish Ex-Servicemen's Association used to place adverts in the 'Jewish Chronicle' that read:
'Remember the prejudice against Jews in Poland when buying Polish vodka, jam, pickles, etc.'

The clear message was boycott Polish goods because of Polish prejudice against Jews. This wasn't - I am sure - based on 'Pole-ophobia' in the meaning that some are trying to impose on 'Islamophobia'. It was a perfectly legitimate boycott campaign and the inspiration for my own boycott of Muslim businesses.

My operation appears to have been a success and I am extremely grateful to the surgeons and other staff involved. My fears were unnecessary this time, but if there is another time they will come back....

Jackie

David, a phobia is an irrational fear.

I see nothing irrational in being fearful of teachings such as: "Make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate."

That is because when this instruction - and others similar to it - are effected, as they were in Mumbai last week, it leads to mass slaughter.

hadrian

It's not just Jews who are at the butt end of Islamic self-righteous fury. Christians suffer daily at the hands of Moslems in authority.
Speaking of 'phobias' it amazes me we don't just ring fence our political allegiances and ideologies as well. The Tories could then get one of their opposite numbers arrested for 'Reacto-phobia'.
Why criticism of Islam should be off bounds puzzles me. It is surely the most politicised of the religions and unlike Christianity does not eschew the use of violence and threat to extend its political rule. There may indeed be aggressive Christian groups around but far from having any ideological engine or rationale for their behaviour they will meet with a huge brake to their ferocity in the central tenet of their faith- saved by grace alone NOT by works, lest any man should boast.

Raised Eyebrows

Islamophobia is not rational criticsim of Islamism, it's prejudice against Islam.

In the same way, anti-semitism is not rational criticism of Israel, it's racism.

I think the problem, Melanie, is that both terms are thrown around too loosely. Those criticizing Islamism are called Islamophobes, and those criticizing Israel are called anti-semites (by many on this blog incidentally). Both are ignorant diagnoses.

Eric Green

I use the term "miso-Islamist" to describe those advancing jihad to effect an international caliphate. Avoids the "Islamophobe" inexactitude.

Dixon

Just what is a minor implement for digging called these days?

Dixon

Another game with that word: An agoraphobic is generally not disapproved on account of their phobia. Does referring to a person as "islamophobic" by the same measure not indicate that a hatred of Islam, however "racial" it might be is also to be warmly accepted? Is not an "islamophobic" as worthy of tolerance as any other "phobic"?

Once we get drawn into silly debates over what it is supposed to mean we miss the obvious: the term "islamophobia" presupposes that those it is applied to are mentally ill. It exonerates the user of that term from any need to argue over the views if the person they apply it to. It is as cheap as any slander that might ever be levelled at a Muslim.

stanley Jerusalem

Etymologists,Deckchairs, Titanic.

James Murphy

Add to 'Etymologists,Deckchairs, Titanic.'

- Orchestra playing thereon....

John Thomas

The intentional misuse of language for purely political/idological ends (eg "homophobia", which really means "fear of likeness"), has a truly Orwellian chill to it.

Jasmine

This quite a good feature on so-called 'Islamophobia' from the great Daniel Pipes:

http://www.danielpipes.org/article/3075

Dixon

A third game with this word: If there is such a thing as an irrational fear of Islam, "Islamophobia", this implies the corollory, an irrational approval of Islam, "Islamophillia". I think we see that in the perverse spectacle of these young women "converts" ( Muslims actually call them "reverts" ) for some of whom, at least, there is surely a Sadomasochistic thrill in the absolute surrender, not merely to Big Daddy ( God ) but all male co-religionists.

Mike Woodman

I'm tempted to visit my doctor to ask for treatment for islamophobia. I wonder what reaction I would get...Probably arrest for a hate crime.

andy c

Will you be vigourously combatting yourself ?

After all, the prejudice against muslims you say must be guarded against so vigorously is your key note address, here, on air and especially in your hilarious Londonistan.

Jila D

I agree with Brian Moshe
Sometimes we have to becareful, not only Jewish people but everyone, yes, in Britian their are crazy doctors, Harold Shipman was one of them, and the other terrorist who was trying to blow-up people last summer I don't remember wich country they come from

Let's all becareful.

logdon

The day after the London bombings I went into a local kebab shop. Obviously the day before's events were on my mind and in a genuinely open way I broached the subject. I expected some sort of rapprochement and a rapport, after all Muslims were injured also. My attempt at a mini cross faith form of engagement fell on extremely stony ground and the man seemed more interested in how it would affect his business, then would 'rather not talk about it'. To me it seemed as if the matter was some kind of trifling incident in his mind and certainly not worth discussing with a kuffar. He wasn't hostile as such, merely detached from the enormity of what had gone on. Since then I've found similar reactions from Muslims who refuse to talk about the widening gulf between Islam and the rest of the world. It's as if they inhabit their own little world quite apart from the bulk of us in Britain. Now could we call that a Judeo-Christian phobia? Loyalty to the Ummah, rather than place of residence? This phenomena is documented right from the 'take not the unbeliever as your friend' days so in reality it is formalised within the religion. Channel Four's second Undercover Mosque pictured quite clearly that certain elements were absolutely against fraternising with westerners so who is creating the phobia there? Muslims create carnage in Mumbai but to get some form of acknowledgment from Pakistan is proving futile. Hamas sends rockets into Israel on a daily basis despite a 'truce' yet any retaliation is treated as if it came from nowhere. The list is endless. It's always denial. It's always 'the other' only this time that 'other' is us. I would therefore put it that if there are so called phobia's at large we in Britain and the West are not guilty. This is the age old ploy of inverting the argument. Playing the victim card when it's obvious to all what is going on. All except our corrupted, supine government that is.

Roland

Just as a point of interest - no-one has picked up Dixon's assertion that Albert Speer was 'good' Nazi - whatever that might mean?

Herbert Thornton

Roland - I don't see the point of debating whether Speer or Werner Von Braun were good or bad Nazis. What would the expressions mean to you?

I don't know what Albert Speer's talents may have been, but Von Braun,whom Dixon also mentioned, was certainly a very good rocket scientist, just as Hjalmaar Schacht was a very good economist.

Roland

The point behind my point is that Dixon appears to equate being a Muslim - having that particular faith - with being a Nazi in Hitler's Germany. Being a skilled economist - or in Speer's case a mediocre architect - doesn't , for me, exonerate someone willingly joining the Nazi Party, wether out of belief or a cynical atempt to further one's career. What is ythe point Dixon is trying to make? How can theer be any kind of moral equivalence, and if not, why does he drag Nazism into this thread?

Sarah

Roland, it wasn’t difficult to be a ‘good’ Nazi at all. That’s because the packaging was not hate and evil but pious platitudes of a better future for tomorrow and so on. Hitler reduced people to quivering wrecks of adulation such were the sweet-sounding promises he made.

Albert Speer was one of the most high-ranking Nazis and he put huge effort into creating the Utopia so many though Adolf was creating. The question of whether he was ’good’ relates to intention. Did he know what was going at the concentration camps? What Hitler’s real prospectus was? Nazism as we know it today was not what many people thought it was back then.

Speer says he didn’t know what was going on, even though he was so high up, and there is a lot of circumstantial evidence to support his claim, although not everyone believed him. In the end, history seems to have given him the benefit of the doubt that he didn‘t know what was going on.

It remains an object lesson, though, in how easily an electorate and even those near the nucleus of political power can be gulled. Adolf Hitler, sad to say, was a charmer who got the housewives sobbing and the movers and shakers nodding all on the hope for a better tomorrow. We’ve never seen such fawning at the feet of a politician in our lifetime - oh yes, until Barack Obama came along.

Graeme, Canterbury

I shall write this one more time on Melanie's blog and no more. There is no such thing as a moderate muslim woman with a hijab on her head; if they hijabs, they are fundamentalists.I t is the defining factor on who is moderate and who is not. Nine Muslims between September 1999 and August 2007 told me there was nothing in the Koran for women to wear them and I only discussed it with nine Muslims, so it is hard incontestable fact. The sole criteria for shahid is army verses army and not suicide bombers blowing up unarmed civilians on buses.Muslim men may be clean shaven if they so wish and not have beards. The fist length beard is a hygene instruction and NOT scripture. Muslims used contraception at the time of the medieval Arab Empire and therefore a Third World birthrate in western contries is for political reasons and for religious prohibitional reasons. Western secular dress is acceptable for both sexes. Finally, most imams can speak arabic words but NOT understand Arabic, which I think is self evedent that they can not judging by the extreme interpretations to islam.

Neuroskeptic

Someone give Graeme an Honorary Doctorate in Islamic Studies! He's spoken to 9 Muslims!

I've known several Muslim women who wore a hijab (note that's hijab not burqa or whatever) who weren't fundamentalists. At least I assume they weren't. They may have been secretly - but who's to say that Mr Canterbury isn't secretly a Communist? None!

This is so easy. Could someone with a brain pretend to be Islamophobic to give me something I can get to grips with? It's like shooting very stupid fish in a toilet.

Roland

Sarah - I suggest you read Gita Sereny's (sympathetic) treatment of Speer.

My point still stands - what are we to make of an implicit comparison between a faith and an ideaology which espoused genocide?

Your equation between Hitler and Obama is grotesque and obscene.

Anthony

Roland, your assertion that the "equation between Hitler and Obama is grotesque and obscene" is rubbish.

It is simply a plain fact. Both of these leaders produced hysterical, demented adoration from their supporters. When the public dumps its healthy skepticism of all political leaders for cult-like worship, it inevitably means disaster of one sort or another because their critical radar has been turned off.

roGER

"Certainly, there are people who are prejudiced against Muslims."

Yes, Melanie. You're absolutely right Melanie. In fact, you're an expert on this topic Melanie.

Prof Ethan

The term "Islamophobia" is itself a kind of ju-jitsu term, since it
implies a mental disease (because "phobia" is an irrational fear of something).

But is it a mental disease, or irrational, to fear and to be angry at radical
Islamists who fly airplanes filled with screaming innocent people into
skyscrapers filled with innocent people, or who shoot up hotels killing 200
people, specifically and explicitly for the glory of Allah? To use the term
"Islamophobia" even in "scare-quotes" is already to concede so much here/

Only academics could have come up with a terminology so pernicious. It
embodies an intentional conflation of reasonable fear of Radical Islamicist-
inspired terror with hostility to Islam per se, and then this allows the radical
islamicists to be sheltered under the general term Islam. It is those who use
this term seriously who are "lumping all of Islam under one roof" so that to
criticize one element in it (ruthless Islamist terrorism) is to criticize all the religion.
But that is precisely what critics of Islamicists are NOT doing--lumping it all
together.

Prof Ethan

The most outrageous event going on at the Berlin Center for the Study of
Antisemitism?

Matthias Kuentzel writes the following: "One of the authors in the latest Yearbook [of the
Berlin Center for the Study of Antisemitism], Jochen Müller, proposes a "revision
of politics and history teaching" in German schools. Because the Holocaust has
no "central meaning for migrants from the Arabic-Muslim world," one should
consider whether "the colonial period and its consequences" would not be a
better subject for "appropriate 'Holocaust education'" among Muslim
students in Germany.

How is it possible--HOW IS IT POSSIBLE--that a publication of the Berlin Center
for the Study of Antisemitism could publish an article recommending the
ELIMINATION OF THE STUDY OF THE HOLOCAUST?

And to advocate eliminating study of the Holocaust specifically for a population
one of whose major representative states--Iran--is calling for a SECOND
Holocaust?

I've heard of intellectual degradation. But this is truly disgraceful. Awful.

lahina

You know I met a good muslim woman the other day and she told me, there are two different kind of muslims one who are nice normal peaceful and get on with life, and the other one who are showing off, who don't understand the religion well, yes she says those people are letting us down because wherever they believe is not spiritual thing but political.

Prof Ethan

Iahina, your experience illustrates exactly why those who conflate a reasonable fear of radical Islamicist- inspired terror with hostility to Islam per se and in general thus allow the radical islamicists to be sheltered under the general term Islam (i.e., fear of Radical Islamicist violence and fascism = "Islamophobia"). This gives the radical Islamicists a cover--the religion as a whole-- they don't deserve, given the many Muslim moderates.

It is those who use the term 'Islamophobia" seriously who are "lumping all of Islam under one roof" so that to criticize one element in it (ruthless Islamist terrorism) is to criticize all the religion.
But that is precisely what critics of Islamicists are NOT doing--lumping all of Islam, and all Muslims, together. Those who criticize Islamicists are, precisely, seeking to separate them out from the other Muslims.
People ought to realize this. The use of the term "Islamophobia"--a dishonest, low term--is one way people are prevented from seeing this.

Ehif

If people move or immigrate to another country, and they don't respect the culture of the country they live because they thing it is horrible and they don't want to integrate, it could create misunderstanding and fear and that is where the phobia starts, I am not surprise when Europeans have a phobia or scare because they are moderate and they have to deal with people who live like ancient time at 21 century.