(Top) A crying Eiffel Tower in remembrance of those victims who lost their lives in the shootings at Paris on 13 November 2015
(Bottom) Protestor's sign at March for Our Lives, Washington DC (2018)
The phrase "thoughts and prayers" is often used by officials and celebrities in the United States as a condolence after a tragic event, such as a deadly natural disaster. The phrase has received criticism for its repeated usage in the context of gun violence or terrorism, with critics claiming "thoughts and prayers" are offered as substitutes for action such as gun control or counter-terrorism.
Following the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in February 2018, Slate noted that several Republican politicians who had previously used the idiom (including Trump and senators Marco Rubio and Pat Toomey) avoided using the specific phrase "thoughts and prayers" in response to the shooting. Trump, for example, instead offered "prayers and condolences" via Twitter.
Scott Morrison, the Prime Minister of Australia, offered his thoughts and prayers to the victims of the 2019 Australian bushfires in November 2019,
for which Morrison was criticized and compared to American politicians
who repeated similar phrases in lieu of gun ownership reforms.
Views
After a
natural or human-caused disaster, people may be urged to "go beyond
thoughts and prayers", by donating blood or sending aid or money to help
the victims. After the Las Vegas shooting, authorities said that
although thoughts and prayers are appreciated, the most effective way to
help was to give blood. Academic studies have been performed on whether an act of token support leads to sustained contributions; the concept of moral self-licensing, in which prior good deeds can empower individuals to subsequently behave badly, or conversely, whether prior immoral actions can lead to compensatory moral actions has also been cited as a factor in the use of "thoughts and prayers" in lieu of action.
Criticism
As "thoughts and prayers" became associated with post-tragedy condolences, many have criticized the phrase as a form of slacktivism. Jonathan Foiles, writing in Psychology Today, compared the phrase to an infantile response and explained that "'Thoughts
and prayers' is the linguistic equivalent of yelling for something to
be different when you have the ability to effect that change yourself".
After the 2007 Virginia Tech shooting, Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of The Nation, called on politicians to "move beyond thoughts and prayers". In her post, vanden Heuvel referred to a press release by Paul Helmke, then-president of the Brady Campaign,
who offered his thoughts and prayers but also stated "it is long
overdue for us to take some common-sense actions to prevent tragedies
like this from continuing to occur."
Video of President Obama delivering a statement on a 2015 shooting and criticizing "thoughts and prayers" (1:22-1:58)
In October 2015, following the Umpqua Community College shooting,
President Obama said that "thoughts and prayers [do] not capture the
heartache and grief and anger that we should feel, and it does nothing
to prevent this carnage from being inflicted some place else in America
next week or a couple months from now." The White House subsequently announced that Obama would continue to take more executive action on the subject of gun control.
On December 2, 2015, in the wake of the San Bernardino mass shooting, Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) tweeted his frustration with the phrase "thoughts and prayers", a sentiment echoed by the December 3 cover of the New York Daily News, which included tweets from senators and representatives the newspaper characterized as "meaningless platitudes".
After the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in February 2018,
demands for "policy and change" were used as a pithy rejoinder to the
typical "thoughts and prayers" offered by politicians. Student survivors of the shooting were joined by religious leaders in calling for concrete legislative actions.
[Prayers] are something we do when we feel our survival depends so much upon sheer luck that no one can help us but God.
These
people, these congressmen and legislators who are praying, are not
powerless. There is so much they could do, if only they chose to. When
they offer their prayers, they attempt to make it seem as though they
are in the same boat as us, their hands sadly tied.
By August 2019, as reported by the Gun Violence Archive, there were 251 mass shootings in the United States only 216 days into the year. Robin Lloyd, managing director of the nonprofit Giffords,
stated "The days when politicians can get away with offering thoughts
and prayers are over. The public knows thoughts and prayers won't
prevent the next tragedy." Lloyd called upon Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to take action on gun control legislation passed by the House but not heard in the Senate.
Religious criticism
Some critics of the phrase "thoughts and prayers" point to the Christian New Testament to argue that action is needed in addition to expressions of faith. Some verses cited to back up this argument include James 2:14–16:
"What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does
not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is
poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them,
"Go in peace, be warmed and filled," without giving them the things
needed for the body, what good is that?" and Matthew 6:5:
"And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love
to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they
may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their
reward."
Others have taken issue with the public declaration of prayer,
calling it an "obligatory public lament" instead of an expression of
genuine concern.
Defense
Laura Coward, a writer for The Huffington Post,
defended the use of the phrase "thoughts and prayers", acknowledging
the inadequacy of not taking actions, but arguing that prayer "jolts us
and disrupts us, removing us from our comfort zones[...
it] takes us to uncomfortable places – spiritually, physically and
emotionally – and asks us to do the hard work of accepting more than one
perspective." Kimberly Ross, a writer for RedState,
asks that victims should "not [be] used as pawns in another political
debate about guns" since "[w]e shouldn't blame anyone but the
perpetrator for crimes committed,... that means we can do nothing on our own – in that moment – apart from submitting thoughts and prayers."
The criticism of the phrase "thoughts and prayers" has itself
received criticism as insensitive to those who sincerely pray for
victims.
Katelyn Beaty argued that prayer "is perhaps the most powerful form of
action you can engage in during a crisis", citing studies which showed
that regular meditation and prayer improved focus and reduced anxiety,
touting the potential beneficial effects for "better policy solutions
than would an urgent, fretful, ill-considered response"..
In 2019, following a weekend in which mass shootings occurred in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee
suggested that, of the continued occurrence of mass shootings, "the
lack of thought and prayers is probably the single biggest factor in
what is behind them".
Distraction using "now is not the time"
The
ineffectiveness of "thoughts and prayers" can be a deliberate choice.
President Obama stated in October 2015 that "to actively do nothing is a
[political] decision as well."
In many instances, the same people who offer "thoughts and
prayers" also criticize proposed reforms as being too quick to
politicize a tragedy. Like the propaganda technique of whataboutism,
criticizing potential reforms as being too political can distract
politicians from taking direct action by effectively pointing towards
unlikely or fringe reasons for the tragedy; for example, advocating for
mental health reform or Islamic terrorism prevention in lieu of passing
gun control laws.
Gun politics in the United States
The momentum for gun control legislation in the United States has
been blunted repeatedly by the use of the phrase "now is not the time",
offered as a defense against what could potentially be hastily-drafted
laws. David Weigel pointed out that repeated calls to wait for an "appropriate time" to discuss gun control is the strategy used by the National Rifle Association (NRA) to avoid meaningful legislative action.
The BBC called "the enthusiasm gap" the "single biggest obstacle to new
gun-control laws" in the United States: "Pro-gun politicians offer
their thoughts and prayers, observe moments of silence and order flags
flown half-staff. Then, in the quiet, legislative efforts are deferred
and ultimately derailed."
Following the December 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, several politicians used the phrase "thoughts and prayers" in place of taking immediate legislative action. President Barack Obama called for "meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this regardless of the politics", and New York mayor Michael Bloomberg
challenged him to go further: "the country needs [Obama] to send a bill
to Congress to fix this problem – and take immediate executive action.
Calling for 'meaningful action' is not enough. We have heard that
rhetoric before. What we have not seen is leadership – not from the
President and not from Congress. That must end today. This is a national
tragedy and it demands a national response." The resulting proposed federal legislation to control guns,
including universal background checks, failed to pass Congress; after
the bipartisan Manchin-Toomey amendment failed on April 17, 2013, Obama
called it "a pretty shameful day for Washington".
Following the Orlando nightclub shooting in June 2016, astronomer and skeptic Phil Plait wrote that while it was "natural and very human" to "send their thoughts and express their grief... it's cynically hypocritical when politicians do it and nothing else", later noting it was "particularly galling" to see "all the NRA-funded lawmakers tweeting their 'thoughts and prayers'". An accompanying Slate
post provided a selected list of members of Congress who had tweeted
"thoughts and prayers" along with the amount of campaign contributions
they had received from gun rights groups, based on research provided by
Igor Volsky of the Center for American Progress.
NRA donations to politicians who expressed "thoughts and prayers" in
lieu of meaningful gun control legislation were again publicized after
the Las Vegas shootings in October 2017 and the Stoneman Douglas shooting in February 2018.
Protest sign decrying the phrase "thoughts and prayers" at March for Our Lives (2018)
After the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, Florida state
senators held a contentious debate on SB 7026, which included funding
for mental health programs and authorized teachers and school officials
to carry concealed firearms;
among the amendments that failed were a ban on assault weapons,
large-capacity magazines, a gun registry, and requiring background
checks for guns purchased out-of-state. Opponents of the ban on assault weapons included Sen. David H. Simmons, who drew an analogy to Nazi Germany's ban on private ownership of firearms, and Sen. Kelli Stargel, who questioned whether the ban would be extended to fertilizer (used in the Oklahoma City bombing) and pressure cookers (used in the Boston Marathon bombing).
Stargel added "When we say 'thoughts and prayers,' it's frowned upon.
And I take real offense at that because thoughts and prayers are really
the only thing that’s gonna stop the evil from within the individual who
is taking up their arms to do this kind of a massacre."
Following the Saugus High School shooting in November 2019, Saugus alumnus and former Representative Katie Hill
released a statement saying her "thoughts and prayers are with the
victims and families in my community today". Her statement also singled
out Senator Mitch McConnell, saying he believed "it is more important to
protect the NRA and the money he receives than it is to protect our
kids" as McConnell has refused to advance four separate gun control
bills that had passed the House but were not taken up by the Senate.
Senator Chris Murphy moved to pass the universal background checks bill
the same day the shootings had occurred, but the motion was blocked by
Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith; both senators learned about the shooting after Hyde-Smith had blocked the bill. Vice President Mike Pence, in California for a tour of NASA Ames,
expressed support for the Saugus High School community, conveying the
hearts and prayers "of every American", adding "This president and this
administration will remain resolved to bring the scourge of mass
shootings to an end. And we will not rest or relent until we end this
evil in our time and make our schools and communities safe again", which was received with skepticism on social media.
Earlier that year, Pence had promised that "Under this President and
this Vice President, no one is taking your guns. Under this President
and this administration, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed" in an April speech before the NRA convention, held in
Indianapolis.
Gun control in other countries
After the Christchurch mosque shootings in 2019, prominent international figures offered their thoughts and prayers, including Queen Elizabeth II, Prime Minister of Pakistan Imran Khan, Pope Francis, and President of the Republic of China Tsai Ing-wen. New Zealand legislators responded by passing a law banning the ownership of most semi-automatic weapons aside from pistols under limited circumstances.
The response in New Zealand was singled out as a counterexample to "the
same old tired script: one politician after another condemning the
attack and offering thoughts and prayers to the victims and families.
But something different happened. Instead of offering thoughts and
prayers, New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern promised action". New Zealand had previously had less restrictions on gun ownership than many other Western countries.
Social media posts were made mocking the effectiveness of "thoughts and
prayers", comparing the rapid passage of gun control legislation in New
Zealand with the repeated failure of United States gun control laws.
In many other Western countries, stricter gun control laws have been passed in response to gun violence. Besides New Zealand, new gun control laws were introduced in the United Kingdom (after the Hungerford massacre in 1987, and again after the Dunblane massacre in 1996), Australia (the National Firearms Agreement, following the Port Arthur massacre of April 1996), Germany (after shootings in Erfurt in 2002 and Winnenden in 2009), and Norway (a belated response to the 2011 Norway attacks).
The sustained grassroots campaign that resulted in a ban of all
handguns in the UK following the Dunblane massacre of 1996 was
contrasted with American inaction in 2018 by a Dunblane resident: "I
wouldn't want thoughts and prayers, I would want policies and regulation
and a grown-up discussion about changing the American gun culture."
Climate change
In the wake of the February 2009 Black Saturday bushfires, PM Kevin Rudd sent his "thoughts and prayers" to those affected; a royal commission was set up to investigate the cause and response. The Climate Institute of Australia
and the United Firefighters Union of Australia concluded that climate
change had caused the extreme forest fire danger index leading up to
Black Saturday and may have contributed to earlier bushfires dating back
to 2001.
During the disastrous 2019–20 Australian bushfire season, PM
Morrison and other government officials extended their "thoughts and
prayers" to the victims; the phrase was criticized for how it was used
to deflect attention away from how climate change and government policy may have affected the duration and intensity of the fire season. Also, PM Morrison was singled out for failing to provide support to fire victims.
Earlier, in October 2019 PM Morrison had announced he would work to
stymie protesters and activists from discouraging businesses from
working with the coal mining industry.
After the fires prompted him to cut short a vacation to Hawaii in late
December, PM Morrison stated he had "always acknowledged the connection
between these weather events and these broader fire events and the
impact globally of climate change" and defended the government's actions
to mitigate climate change, saying "we'll do it without economy wrecking or job destroying. We'll do it with sensible targets that get the balance right."
Deputy PMMichael McCormack
dismissed the link between climate change and the bushfires as "ravings
of some pure, enlightened and woke capital-city greenies", despite the federal National Disaster Risk Reduction Framework
report, published in 2018, explicitly tying climate change to natural
disasters: "Many natural hazards are becoming more frequent and more
intense, driven by Australia's changing climate.... There is growing potential for cumulative or concurrent, large-scale natural hazards to occur." In addition, the State of the Climate 2018
report warned "There has been an associated increase in the length of
the fire weather season. Climate change, including increasing
temperatures, is contributing to these changes," and added "The drying
in recent decades across southern Australia is the most sustained
large-scale change in rainfall since national records began in 1900." Adam Bandt
called DPM McCormack "a dangerous fool" and added "[t]houghts and
prayers are not enough, we need science and action too" in calling for a
change in government policy. David Littleproud, Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources,
stated he did not "want to weaponise [climate change policy] in the
middle of someone's misery", stating it was "not the time" to discuss
the government's policy. Deputy Premier of New South WalesJohn Barilaro called those who would link climate change to the bushfires a "bloody disgrace" for politicising the tragedy.
Cumulatively, the comments brought forward theories that Australian Greens policies were partially responsible for the intensity of the bushfires by stopping hazard reduction efforts and shifted the debate from the effect of climate change to whether a debate about climate change was appropriate. Although hazard reduction policies have been criticized after previous catastrophic bushfires, the claims that Greens policies have prevented backburning were called "very tired and very old conspiracy theories... an obvious attempt to deflect the conversation away from climate change" by Professor Ross Bradstock;
the hotter conditions leading to elevated forest fire danger indices
for a longer time period instead were blamed for reduced preventative
burning.
After an estimated 20,000 marched in December 2019 through the
smoky streets of Sydney to protest the government's inaction on climate
change, DPM McCormack acknowledged that climate change was "a factor" in
the bushfires but added "it is important to note that most of these
fires have been caused by 'Little Lucifers'", alluding to the possibility of arson. Arsonists have been responsible for bushfires in the past, and it was estimated that up to half of all bushfires are the result of arson or suspected arson per year. However, arson is suspected to have caused a small minority of the bushfires in the 2019–20 season.
In culture
Visual media
In his third stand up special "Thoughts and Prayers", comedian Anthony Jeselnik
skewers people who tweet out "thoughts and prayers" on the day of a
tragedy, calling it a way for those people to garner attention in the
face of a tragedy and saying that tweeting thoughts and prayers is so
useless that it achieves "less than nothing".
In 2016, a web-based video game, Thoughts and Prayers: The Game, was published to argue that thoughts and prayers have had no effect on saving lives in the context of mass shootings.
The fifth episode of the fourth season of animated series BoJack Horseman, titled "Thoughts and Prayers", presents a real-life shooting that delays the opening of a new movie featuring gun violence.
Ironic sympathy for the NRA
In early August 2018, after court documents were made public showing the National Rifle Association was having financial issues, satirical tweets were made offering thoughts and prayers for the NRA's troubles.
Thoughts and prayers were again directed to the NRA in November 2018
after news broke that free coffee at the headquarters was being
discontinued amid a sharp drop in revenue and again in December 2018 after suspected spy Maria Butina pleaded guilty to using her connections with the NRA as a way to infiltrate American conservative groups.
After the state of New York announced it would investigate the tax-exempt status of the NRA in April 2019, Governor Andrew Cuomo announced he would remember the organization in his thoughts and prayers. In June 2019, after the NRA discontinued live programming that had been carried on NRATV, "thoughts and prayers" were sent via social media.
In August 2020, New York Attorney General Letitia James
filed a lawsuit against the NRA, seeking to dissolve it for illegal
conduct. The NRA is registered in the state of New York as a 501(c)(4) non-profit corporation,
and the suit charges the NRA and four named defendants with failure to
fulfill their fiduciary duty, resulting in a loss of $64 million in
three years. The March for Our Lives organization responded by sarcastically offering 'thoughts and prayers' to the NRA via Twitter.
In music
A song entitled "Thoughts and Prayers" appears on the 2018 album My American Dream by singer-songwriter Will Hoge, who wrote it after the Sutherland Springs church shooting. Hoge told Rolling Stone
writer Jonathan Bernstein "I know that phrase can be a kind and
thoughtful way to express sympathy when there is no other way to help,
but after these shootings, using that stock response from these cowards
on Capitol Hill is incredibly insulting. They have all the opportunities
in the world to make a difference, but they do nothing. Then to just
send out a phrase like 'thoughts and prayers,' as if we don’t all know
that there is something they could do? It's shameful."
After the Stoneman Douglas shooting in Parkland, Florida, Canadian-American musician grandson
wrote and released the song "thoughts & prayers" on March 23, 2018,
which also criticizes politicians who resist "any attempt at meaningful
gun reform".
The heavy metal band Motionless in White released a song entitled "Thoughts & Prayers" on June 2, 2019, the first single from their album Disguise. According to Chris "Motionless" Cerulli, "It's my commentary on the very evil ways that [religion is] used".
The Raconteurs also released their album Help Us Stranger in June 2019; the closing track is entitled "Thoughts and Prayers". When asked about that song, Jack White stated "That phrase has become meaningless. It's a thoughtless phrase. Basically an insult."
The punk group Good Riddance released an album entitled Thoughts and Prayers in August 2019. According to Russ Rankin,
"I'm sick of hearing that [phrase], especially when there's a mass
shooting in New Zealand and the nation takes steps to outlaw
semi-automatic weapons in the same week. Meanwhile, here in America,
we're dealing with hundreds and hundreds of mass shootings and not doing
anything about it."
The Drive-By Truckers publicized their song "Thoughts and Prayers" from the studio album The Unraveling in January 2020. In his review of the album for Rolling Stone, Jonathan Bernstein characterizes the song as taking aim at the phrase he called "phony right-wing piety".
Filter released "Thoughts and Prayers" ahead of their album Murica in June 2020. Vocalist Richard Patrick called for action in lieu of the phrase: "'Thoughts
and Prayers' has become a meaningless catchphrase that gets thrown out
every time something bad happens. Usually a mass murder etc. It's an
empty gesture. It's time for more than thoughts and prayers."
Islamophobia is the fear of, hatred of, or prejudice against the religion of Islam or Muslims in general, especially when seen as a geopolitical force or the source of terrorism.
The meaning of the term continues to be debated, and some view it
as problematic. Several scholars consider Islamophobia to be a form of xenophobia or racism,
although the legitimacy of this definition is disputed. Some scholars
view Islamophobia and racism as partially overlapping phenomena, while
others dispute the relationship, primarily on the grounds that religion
is not a race. The causes and characteristics of Islamophobia are also
subjects of debate. Some commentators have posited an increase in
Islamophobia resulting from the September 11 attacks, the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, and other terror attacks in Europe and the United States by Islamic extremists. Some have associated it with the increased presence of Muslims in the United States and in the European Union, while others view it as a response to the emergence of a global Muslim identity.
Terms
There are a number of other possible terms which are also used in
order to refer to negative feelings and attitudes towards Islam and
Muslims, such as anti-Muslimism, intolerance against Muslims, anti-Muslim prejudice, anti-Muslim bigotry, hatred of Muslims, anti-Islamism, Muslimophobia, demonisation of Islam, or demonisation of Muslims. In German, Islamophobie (fear) and Islamfeindlichkeit (hostility) are used. The Scandinavian term Muslimhat literally means "hatred of Muslims".
When discrimination towards Muslims has placed an emphasis on
their religious affiliation and adherence, it has been termed
Muslimphobia, the alternative form of Muslimophobia, Islamophobism, antimuslimness and antimuslimism. Individuals who discriminate against Muslims in general have been termed Islamophobes, Islamophobists, anti-Muslimists, antimuslimists, islamophobiacs, anti-Muhammadan, Muslimphobes or its alternative spelling of Muslimophobes, while individuals motivated by a specific anti-Muslim agenda or bigotry have been described as being anti-mosque, anti-Shiites (or Shiaphobes), anti-Sufism (or Sufi-phobia) and anti-Sunni (or Sunniphobes).
Etymology and definitions
The word Islamophobia is a neologism formed from Islam and -phobia, a Greek suffix used in English to form "nouns with the sense 'fear of – – ', 'aversion to – – '."
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word means "Intense dislike or fear of Islam, esp. as a political force; hostility or prejudice towards Muslims". It is attested in English as early as 1923 to quote the French word islamophobie,
found in a thesis published by Alain Quellien in 1910 to describe a "a
prejudice against Islam that is widespread among the peoples of Western
and Christian civilization".
The expression did not immediately turned into the vocabulary of the
English-speaking world though, which preferred the expression "feelings
inimical to Islam", until its re-appearance in an article by Georges
Chahati Anawati in 1976. The term did not exist in the Muslim world, and was later translated in the 1990s as ruhāb al-islām (رهاب الاسلام) in Arabic, literally "phobia of Islam".
The University of California at Berkeley's
Islamophobia Research & Documentation Project suggested this
working definition: "Islamophobia is a contrived fear or prejudice
fomented by the existing Eurocentric and Orientalist global power
structure. It is directed at a perceived or real Muslim threat through
the maintenance and extension of existing disparities in economic,
political, social and cultural relations, while rationalizing the
necessity to deploy violence as a tool to achieve 'civilizational rehab'
of the target communities (Muslim or otherwise). Islamophobia
reintroduces and reaffirms a global racial structure through which
resource distribution disparities are maintained and extended."
Debate on the term and its limitations
In 1996, the Runnymede Trust established the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia (CBMI), chaired by Gordon Conway, the vice-chancellor of the University of Sussex. The Commission's report, Islamophobia: A Challenge for Us All, was published in November 1997 by the Home Secretary, Jack Straw.
In the Runnymede report, Islamophobia was defined as "an outlook or
world-view involving an unfounded dread and dislike of Muslims, which
results in practices of exclusion and discrimination."
The introduction of the term was justified by the report's assessment
that "anti-Muslim prejudice has grown so considerably and so rapidly in
recent years that a new item in the vocabulary is needed". Johannes Kandel,
in a 2006 comment wrote that Islamophobia "is a vague term which
encompasses every conceivable actual and imagined act of hostility
against Muslims", and proceeds to argue that five of the criteria put forward by the Runnymede Trust are invalid.
In 2008, a workshop on 'Thinking Thru Islamophobia' was held at the University of Leeds,
organized by the Centre for Ethnicity and Racism Studies, the
participants included S. Sayyid, Abdoolkarim Vakil, Liz Fekete, and
Gabrielle Maranci among others. The symposium proposed a definition of
Islamophobia which rejected the idea of Islamophobia as being the
product of closed and open views of Islam and focused on Islamophobia as
performative which problematized Muslim agency and identity. The
symposium was an early attempt to bring insights from critical race theory, postcolonial and decolonial thought to bear on the question of Islamophobia.
At a 2009 symposium on "Islamophobia and Religious Discrimination", Robin Richardson, a former director of the Runnymede Trust and the editor of Islamophobia: a challenge for us all,
said that "the disadvantages of the term Islamophobia are significant"
on seven different grounds, including that it implies it is merely a
"severe mental illness" affecting "only a tiny minority of people"; that
use of the term makes those to whom it is applied "defensive and
defiant" and absolves the user of "the responsibility of trying to
understand them" or trying to change their views; that it implies that
hostility to Muslims is divorced from factors such as skin color,
immigrant status, fear of fundamentalism, or political or economic
conflicts; that it conflates prejudice against Muslims in one's own
country with dislike of Muslims in countries with which the West is in
conflict; that it fails to distinguish between people who are against
all religion from people who dislike Islam specifically; and that the
actual issue being described is hostility to Muslims, "an
ethno-religious identity within European countries", rather than
hostility to Islam. Nonetheless, he argued that the term is here to
stay, and that it is important to define it precisely.
The exact definition of Islamophobia continues to be discussed with academics such as Chris Allen saying that it lacks a clear definition.
According to Erik Bleich, in his article "Defining and Researching
Islamophobia", even when definitions are more specific, there is still
significant variation in the precise formulations of Islamophobia. As
with parallel concepts like homophobia or xenophobia, Islamophobia
connotes a broader set of negative attitudes or emotions directed at
individuals of groups because of perceived membership in a defined
category. Mattias Gardell
defines Islamophobia as "socially reproduced prejudices and aversion to
Islam and Muslims, as well as actions and practices that attack,
exclude or discriminate against persons on the basis that they are or
perceived to be Muslim and be associated with Islam".
Speaker at demonstration of initiative We don't want Islam in the Czech Republic on 14 March 2015 in České Budějovice, Czech Republic
Fear
As opposed to being a psychological or individualistic phobia,
according to professors of religion Peter Gottschalk and Gabriel
Greenberg, "Islamophobia" connotes a social anxiety about Islam and Muslims.
Some social scientists have adopted this definition and developed
instruments to measure Islamophobia in form of fearful attitudes
towards, and avoidance of, Muslims and Islam,
arguing that Islamophobia should "essentially be understood as an
affective part of social stigma towards Islam and Muslims, namely fear".
Racism
Several scholars consider Islamophobia to be a form of xenophobia or racism. A 2007 article in Journal of Sociology defines Islamophobia as anti-Muslim racism and a continuation of anti-Asian, anti-Turkic and anti-Arab racism. In their books Deepa Kumar
and Junaid Rana have argued that formation of Islamophobic discourses
has paralleled the development of other forms of racial bigotry.
Similarly, John Denham has drawn parallels between modern Islamophobia and the antisemitism of the 1930s, so have Maud Olofsson, and Jan Hjärpe, among others.
Others have questioned the relationship between Islamophobia and
racism. Jocelyne Cesari writes that "academics are still debating the
legitimacy of the term and questioning how it differs from other terms
such as racism, anti-Islamism, anti-Muslimness, and anti-Semitism."
Erdenir finds that "there is no consensus on the scope and content of
the term and its relationship with concepts such as racism ..." and Shryock, reviewing the use of the term across national boundaries, comes to the same conclusion.
Some scholars view Islamophobia and racism as partially
overlapping phenomena. Diane Frost defines Islamophobia as anti-Muslim
feeling and violence based on "race" or religion. Islamophobia may also target people who have Muslim names, or have a look that is associated with Muslims. According to Alan Johnson, Islamophobia sometimes can be nothing more than xenophobia or racism "wrapped in religious terms."
Sociologists Yasmin Hussain and Paul Bagguley stated that racism and
Islamophobia are "analytically distinct," but "empirically
inter-related".
The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance
(ECRI) defines Islamophobia as "the fear of or prejudiced viewpoint
towards Islam, Muslims and matters pertaining to them", adding that
whether "it takes the shape of daily forms of racism and discrimination
or more violent forms, Islamophobia is a violation of human rights and a
threat to social cohesion".
Proposed alternatives
The concept of Islamophobia as formulated by Runnymede was also criticized by professor Fred Halliday
on several levels. He writes that the target of hostility in the modern
era is not Islam and its tenets as much as it is Muslims, suggesting
that a more accurate term would be "Anti-Muslimism". He also states that
strains and types of prejudice against Islam and Muslims vary across
different nations and cultures, which is not recognized in the Runnymede
analysis, which was specifically about Muslims in Britain.
Poole responds that many Islamophobic discourses attack what they
perceive to be Islam's tenets, while Miles and Brown write that
Islamophobia is usually based upon negative stereotypes about Islam
which are then translated into attacks on Muslims. They also argue that
"the existence of different 'Islamophobias' does not invalidate the
concept of Islamophobia any more than the existence of different racisms
invalidates the concept of racism."
In a 2011 paper in American Behavioral Scientist, Erik
Bleich stated "there is no widely accepted definition of Islamophobia
that permits systematic comparative and causal analysis", and advances
"indiscriminate negative attitudes or emotions directed at Islam or
Muslims" as a possible solution to this issue.
In order to differentiate between prejudiced views of Islam and
secularly motivated criticism of Islam, Roland Imhoff and Julia Recker
formulated the concept "Islamoprejudice", which they subsequently
operationalised in an experiment. The experiment showed that their
definition provided a tool for accurate differentiation.
Nevertheless, other researchers' experimental work indicates that, even
when Westerners seem to make an effort to distinguish between
criticizing (Muslim) ideas and values and respecting Muslims as persons,
they still show prejudice and discrimination of Muslims—compared to
non-Muslims—when these targets defend supposedly antiliberal causes.
Origins and causes
History of the term
One early use cited as the term's first use is by the painter Alphonse Étienne Dinet and Algerian intellectual Sliman ben Ibrahim in their 1918 biography of Islam's prophet Muhammad. Writing in French, they used the term islamophobie.
Robin Richardson writes that in the English version of the book the
word was not translated as "Islamophobia" but rather as "feelings
inimical to Islam". Dahou Ezzerhouni has cited several other uses in
French as early as 1910, and from 1912 to 1918. These early uses of the term did not, according to Christopher Allen, have the same meaning as in contemporary usage, as they described a fear of Islam by liberal Muslims and Muslim feminists, rather than a fear or dislike/hatred of Muslims by non-Muslims.
On the other hand, Fernando Bravo López argues that Dinet and ibn
Sliman's use of the term was as a criticism of overly hostile attitudes
to Islam by a Belgian orientalist, Henri Lammens, whose project they saw
as a "'pseudo-scientific crusade in the hope of bringing Islam down
once and for all.'" He also notes that an early definition of
Islamophobia appears in the 1910 Ph.D. thesis of Alain Quellien, a
French colonial bureaucrat:
For some, the Muslim is the natural and irreconcilable
enemy of the Christian and the European; Islam is the negation of
civilization, and barbarism, bad faith and cruelty are the best one can
expect from the Mohammedans.
Furthermore, he notes that Quellien's work draws heavily on the work
of the French colonial department's 1902–06 administrator, who published
a work in 1906, which to a great extent mirrors John Esposito's The Islamic Threat: Myth or Reality?.
The first recorded use of the term in English, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, was in 1923 in an article in The Journal of Theological Studies. The term entered into common usage with the publication of the Runnymede Trust's report in 1997.
"Kofi Annan asserted at a 2004 conference entitled "Confronting
Islamophobia" that the word Islamophobia had to be coined in order to
"take account of increasingly widespread bigotry".
Contrasting views on Islam
The Runnymede report contrasted "open" and "closed" views of Islam,
and stated that the following "closed" views are equated with
Islamophobia:
Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change.
It is seen as separate and "other". It does not have values in
common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not
influence them.
It is seen as inferior to the West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational, primitive, and sexist.
It is seen as a political ideology, used for political or military advantage.
Criticisms made of "the West" by Muslims are rejected out of hand.
Hostility towards Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices
towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society.
Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural and normal.
These "closed" views are contrasted, in the report, with "open" views
on Islam which, while founded on respect for Islam, permit legitimate
disagreement, dialogue and critique.
According to Benn and Jawad, The Runnymede Trust notes that anti-Muslim
discourse is increasingly seen as respectable, providing examples on
how hostility towards Islam and Muslims is accepted as normal, even
among those who may actively challenge other prevalent forms of
discrimination.
It has been suggested that Islamophobia is closely related to identity politics,
and gives its adherents the perceived benefit of constructing their
identity in opposition to a negative, essentialized image of Muslims.
This occurs in the form of self-righteousness, assignment of blame and
key identity markers. Davina Bhandar writes that:
[...] the term 'cultural' has
become synonymous with the category of the ethnic or minority (...). It
views culture as an entity that is highly abstracted from the practices
of daily life and therefore represents the illusion that there exists a
spirit of the people. This formulation leads to the homogenisation of
cultural identity and the ascription of particular values and
proclivities onto minority cultural groups.
She views this as an ontological
trap that hinders the perception of culture as something "materially
situated in the living practices of the everyday, situated in time-space
and not based in abstract projections of what constitutes either a
particular tradition or culture."
In some societies, Islamophobia has materialized due to the portrayal of Islam and Muslims as the national "Other",
where exclusion and discrimination occurs on the basis of their
religion and civilization which differs with national tradition and
identity. Examples include Pakistani and Algerian migrants in Britain
and France respectively. This sentiment, according to Malcolm Brown and Robert Miles, significantly interacts with racism, although Islamophobia itself is not racism. Author Doug Saunders has drawn parallels between Islamophobia in the United States and its older discrimination and hate against Roman Catholics,
saying that Catholicism was seen as backwards and imperial, while
Catholic immigrants had poorer education and some were responsible for
crime and terrorism.
Brown and Miles write that another feature of Islamophobic
discourse is to amalgamate nationality (e.g. Saudi), religion (Islam),
and politics (terrorism, fundamentalism) – while most other religions
are not associated with terrorism, or even "ethnic or national
distinctiveness."
They feel that "many of the stereotypes and misinformation that
contribute to the articulation of Islamophobia are rooted in a
particular perception of Islam", such as the notion that Islam promotes
terrorism – especially prevalent after the September 11, 2001 attacks.
The two-way stereotyping resulting from Islamophobia has in some
instances resulted in mainstreaming of earlier controversial discourses,
such as liberal attitudes towards gender equality and homosexuals. Christina Ho has warned against framing of such mainstreaming of gender equality in a colonial, paternal discourse, arguing that this may undermine minority women's ability to speak out about their concerns.
Steven Salaita contends that, since 9/11, Arab Americans
have evolved from what Nadine Naber described as an invisible group in
the United States into a highly visible community that directly or
indirectly has an effect on the United States' culture wars, foreign
policy, presidential elections and legislative tradition.
The academics S. Sayyid and Abdoolkarim Vakil maintain that
Islamophobia is a response to the emergence of a distinct Muslim public
identity globally, the presence of Muslims in itself not being an
indicator of the degree of Islamophobia in a society. Sayyid and Vakil
maintain that there are societies where virtually no Muslims live but
many institutionalized forms of Islamophobia still exist in them.
Cora Alexa Døving, a senior scientist at the Norwegian Center for Studies of the Holocaust and Religious Minorities, argues that there are significant similarities between Islamophobic discourse and European pre-Nazi antisemitism.
Among the concerns are imagined threats of minority growth and
domination, threats to traditional institutions and customs, skepticism
of integration, threats to secularism, fears of sexual crimes, fears of misogyny, fears based on historical cultural inferiority, hostility to modern Western Enlightenment values, etc.
Matti Bunzl [de]
has argued that there are important differences between Islamophobia
and antisemitism. While antisemitism was a phenomenon closely connected
to European nation-building processes, he sees Islamophobia as having the concern of European civilization as its focal point. Døving, on the other hand, maintains that, at least in Norway, the Islamophobic discourse has a clear national element. In a reply to Bunzl, French scholar of Jewish history, Esther Benbassa,
agrees with him in that he draws a clear connection between modern
hostile and essentializing sentiments towards Muslims and historical
antisemitism. However, she argues against the use of the term Islamophobia, since, in her opinion, it attracts unwarranted attention to an underlying racist current.
The head of the Media Responsibility Institute in Erlangen,
Sabine Schiffer, and researcher Constantin Wagner, who also define
Islamophobia as anti-Muslim racism, outline additional similarities and
differences between Islamophobia and antisemitism.
They point out the existence of equivalent notions such as
"Judaisation/Islamisation", and metaphors such as "a state within a
state" are used in relation to both Jews and Muslims. In addition, both
discourses make use of, among other rhetorical instruments, "religious
imperatives" supposedly "proven" by religious sources, and conspiracy
theories.
The differences between Islamophobia and antisemitism consist of the nature of the perceived threats to the "Christian West".
Muslims are perceived as "inferior" and as a visible "external threat",
while on the other hand, Jews are perceived as "omnipotent" and as an
invisible "internal threat". However, Schiffer and Wagner also note that
there is a growing tendency to view Muslims as a privileged group that
constitute an "internal threat" and that this convergence between the
two discources makes "it more and more necessary to use findings from
the study of anti-Semitism to analyse Islamophobia". Schiffer and Wagner
conclude,
The achievement in the study of
anti-Semitism of examining Jewry and anti-Semitism separately must also
be transferred to other racisms, such as Islamophobia. We do not need
more information about Islam, but more information about the making of
racist stereotypes in general.
The publication Social Work and Minorities: European Perspectives describes Islamophobia as the new form of racism in Europe, arguing that "Islamophobia is as much a form of racism as anti-semitism, a term more commonly encountered in Europe as a sibling of racism, xenophobia and Intolerance." Edward Said considers Islamophobia as it is evinced in Orientalism to be a trend in a more general antisemitic Western tradition. Others note that there has been a transition from anti-Asian and anti-Arab racism to anti-Muslim racism, while some note a racialization of religion.
According to a 2012 report by a UK anti-racism group, counter-jihadist
outfits in Europe and North America are becoming more cohesive by
forging alliances, with 190 groups now identified as promoting an
Islamophobic agenda. In Islamophobia and its consequences on young people
(p. 6) Ingrid Ramberg writes "Whether it takes the shape of daily forms
of racism and discrimination or more violent forms, Islamophobia is a
violation of human rights and a threat to social cohesion.". Professor John Esposito of Georgetown University calls Islamophobia "the new anti-Semitism".
In their 2018 American Muslim Poll,
the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding found that when it
came to their Islamophobia index (see Public Opinion), they found that
those who scored higher on the index, (i.e. more islamophobic) were,
“associated with 1) greater acceptance of targeting civilians, whether
it is a military or individual/small group that is doling out the
violence, 2) greater acquiescence to limiting both press freedoms and
institutional checks following a hypothetical terror attack, and 3)
greater support for the so-called “Muslim ban” and the surveillance of
American mosques (or their outright building prohibition).”
Mohamed Nimer
compares Islamophobia with anti-Americanism. He argues that while both
Islam and America can be subject to legitimate criticisms without
detesting a people as a whole, bigotry against both are on the rise.
Opposition to multiculturalism
According to Gabrielle Maranci, the increasing Islamophobia in the West is related to a rising repudiation of multiculturalism.
Maranci concludes that "Islamophobia is a 'phobia' of multiculturalism
and the transruptive effect that Islam can have in Europe and the West
through transcultural processes."
Manifestations
Media
According to Elizabeth Poole in the Encyclopedia of Race and Ethnic Studies,
the media have been criticized for perpetrating Islamophobia. She cites
a case study examining a sample of articles in the British press from
between 1994 and 2004, which concluded that Muslim viewpoints were
underrepresented and that issues involving Muslims usually depicted them
in a negative light. Such portrayals, according to Poole, include the
depiction of Islam and Muslims as a threat to Western security and
values.
Benn and Jawad write that hostility towards Islam and Muslims are
"closely linked to media portrayals of Islam as barbaric, irrational,
primitive and sexist."
Egorova and Tudor cite European researchers in suggesting that
expressions used in the media such as "Islamic terrorism", "Islamic
bombs" and "violent Islam" have resulted in a negative perception of
Islam. John E. Richardson's 2004 book (Mis)representing Islam: the racism and rhetoric of British broadsheet newspapers, criticized the British media for propagating negative stereotypes of Muslims and fueling anti-Muslim prejudice.
In another study conducted by John E. Richardson, he found that 85% of
mainstream newspaper articles treated Muslims as a homogeneous mass who
were imagined as a threat to British society.
The Universities of Georgia and Alabama in the United States
conducted a study comparing media coverage of "terrorist attacks"
committed by Islamist militants with those of non-Muslims in the United
States. Researchers found that "terrorist attacks" by Islamist
militants receive 357% more media
attention than attacks committed by non-Muslims or whites. Terrorist
attacks committed by non-Muslims (or where the religion was unknown)
received an average of 15 headlines, while those committed by Muslim
extremists received 105 headlines. The study was based on an analysis of
news reports covering terrorist attacks in the United States between 2005 and 2015.
In 2009, Mehdi Hasan in the New Statesman criticized Western media for over-reporting a few Islamist terrorist incidents but under-reporting the much larger number of planned non-Islamist terrorist attacks carried out by "non-Irish white folks".
A 2012 study indicates that Muslims across different European
countries, such as France, Germany and the United Kingdom, experience
the highest degree of Islamophobia in the media. Media personalities have been accused of Islamophobia. The obituary in The Guardian for the Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci described her as "notorious for her Islamaphobia" [sic].
The Institute for Social Policy and Understanding published a report in
2018 where they stated, “In terms of print media coverage,
Muslim-perceived perpetrators received twice the absolute quantity of
media coverage as their non-Muslim counterparts in the cases of violent
completed acts. For “foiled” plots, they received seven and half times
the media coverage as their counterparts.”
The term "Islamophobia industry" has been coined by Nathan Lean and John Esposito in the 2012 book The Islamophobia Industry: How the Right Manufactures Fear of Muslims.
Unlike the relationship of a buyer and a seller, it is a relationship
of mutual benefit, where ideologies and political proclivities converge
to advance the same agenda. The "Islamophobia industry" has since been discussed by other scholars including Joseph Kaminski, Hatem Bazian, Arlene Stein, Zakia Salime, Reza Aslan, Erdoan A. Shipoli, and Deepa Kumar, the latter drawing a comparison between the "Islamophobia industry" and Cold War era McCarthyism.
Some media outlets are working explicitly against Islamophobia. In 2008 Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting
("FAIR") published a study "Smearcasting, How Islamophobes Spread
Bigotry, Fear and Misinformation." The report cites several instances
where mainstream or close to mainstream journalists, authors and
academics have made analyses that essentialize negative traits as an
inherent part of Muslims' moral makeup. FAIR also established the "Forum Against Islamophobia and Racism", designed to monitor coverage in the media and establish dialogue with media organizations. Following the attacks of 11 September 2001, the Islamic Society of Britain's
"Islam Awareness Week" and the "Best of British Islam Festival" were
introduced to improve community relations and raise awareness about
Islam. In 2012 the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation stated that they will launch a TV channel to counter Islamophobia.
There are growing instances of Islamophobia in Hindi cinema, or Bollywood, in films such as Aamir (2008), New York (2009) and My Name is Khan (2010), which corresponds to a growing anti-minorities sentiment that followed the resurgence of the Hindu right.
An English Defence League demonstration. The placard reads Shut down the mosque command and control centre.
Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) and the Freedom Defense Initiative are designated as hate groups by the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center. In August 2012 SIOA generated media publicity by sponsoring billboards in New York City Subway
stations claiming there had been 19,250 terrorist attacks by Muslims
since 9/11 and stating "it's not Islamophobia, it's Islamorealism."
It later ran advertisements reading "In any war between the civilized
man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat
Jihad." Several groups condemned the advertisements as "hate speech"
about all Muslims while others defended the ad as a narrow criticism of violent Jihadism.
In early January 2013 the Freedom Defense Initiative put up
advertisements next to 228 clocks in 39 New York subway stations showing
the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center
with a quote attributed to the 151st verse of chapter 3 of the Quran:
"Soon shall we cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers." The New York City Transit Authority, which said it would have to carry the advertisements on First Amendment grounds, insisted that 25% of the ad contain a Transit Authority disclaimer. These advertisements also were criticized.
The English Defence League
(EDL), an organization in the United Kingdom, has been described as
anti-Muslim. It was formed in 2009 to oppose what it considers to be a
spread of Islamism, Sharia law and Islamic extremism in the UK. The EDL's former leader, Tommy Robinson, left the group in 2013 saying it had become too extreme and that street protests were ineffective.
Furthermore, the 7 July 2005 London bombings
and the resulting efforts of the British civil and law enforcement
authorities to help seek British Muslims' help in identifying potential
threats to create prevention is observed by Michael Lavalette as
institutionalized Islamophobia. Lavalette alleges that there is a
continuity between the former two British governments over prevention
that aims to stop young Muslim people from being misled, misdirected and
recruited by extremists who exploit grievances for their own "jihadist"
endeavors. Asking and concentrating on Muslim communities and young
muslims to prevent future instances, by the authorities, is in itself
Islamophobia as such since involvement of Muslim communities will
highlight and endorse their compassion for Britain and negate the
perceived threats from within their communities.
Within the United States specifically, despite the rise in
Islamophobia, the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU)
has also found that the most Americans, “remain steadfast in their
commitment to the country’s fundamental freedoms”, one of which being
the freedom of religion. 86% of all Americans polled by ISPU said they
wanted to “live in a country where no one is targeted for their
religious identity”, 83% of the general public told ISPU they support
“protecting the civil rights of American Muslims”, and overall, 66% of
Americans, “believe negative political rhetoric toward Muslims is
harmful to U.S.”. Average Americans also seem to be aware of the fact
that islamophobia produces discriminatory consequences for Muslims in
America, with 65% of the general public agreeing.
The chart below displays collected data from the ISPU 2018 American Muslim Poll which surveyed six different faith populations in the United States.
The statements featured in this chart were asked to participants who
then responded on a scale from strongly agree to strongly disagree. The
total percentage of those who answered agree and strongly agree are
depicted as follows (Note: the phrase "W. Evang." stands for White
Evangelical, which was the specific demographic surveyed):
Question 1: "I want to live in a country where no one is targeted for their religious identity."
Question 2: "The negative things politicians say regarding Muslims is harmful to our country."
Question 3: "Most Muslims living in the United States are no more responsible for violence carried out by a Muslim than anyone else."
Question 4: "Most Muslims living in the United States are victims of discrimination because of their faith."
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Muslim
Jewish
Catholic
Protestant
W. Evang.
Non-Affiliated
Question 1 (% Net agree)
Question 2 (% Net agree)
Question 3 (% Net Agree)
Question 4 (% Net agree)
The table below represents the Islamophobia Index, also from the 2018 ISPU poll. This data displays an index of Islamophobia among faith populations in the United States.
ISPU Islamophobia Index
Most Muslims living in the United States...(% Net agree shown)
Muslim
Jewish
Catholic
Protestant
White Evangelical
Non-Affiliated
General Public
Are more prone to violence
18%
15%
12%
13%
23%
8%
13%
Discriminate against women
12%
23%
29%
30%
36%
18%
26%
Are hostile to the United States
12%
13%
9%
14%
23%
8%
12%
Are less civilized than other people
8%
6%
4%
6%
10%
1%
6%
Are partially responsible for acts of violence carried out by other Muslims
10%
16%
11%
12%
14%
8%
12%
Index (0 min- 100 max)
17
22
22
31
40
14
24
Internalized Islamophobia
ISPU also highlighted a particular trend in relation to anti-Muslim
sentiment in the U.S.- internalized Islamophobia among Muslim
populations themselves. When asked if they felt most people want them to
be ashamed of their faith identity, 30% of Muslims agreed (a higher
percentage than any other faith group). When asked if they believed that
their faith community was more prone to negative behavior than other
faith communities, 30% of Muslims agreed, again, a higher percentage
than other faith groups.
Trends
Islamophobia has become a topic of increasing sociological and political importance. According to Benn and Jawad, Islamophobia has increased since Ayatollah Khomeini's 1989 fatwa inciting Muslims to attempt to murder Salman Rushdie, the author of The Satanic Verses, and since the 11 September attacks (in 2001). AnthropologistSteven Vertovec writes that the purported growth in Islamophobia may be associated with increased Muslim presence in society and successes. He suggests a circular model,
where increased hostility towards Islam and Muslims results in
governmental countermeasures such as institutional guidelines and
changes to legislation, which itself may fuel further Islamophobia due
to increased accommodation for Muslims in public life. Vertovec
concludes: "As the public sphere shifts to provide a more prominent
place for Muslims, Islamophobic tendencies may amplify."
An anti-Islamic protest in Poland
Patel, Humphries, and Naik (1998) claim that "Islamophobia has always
been present in Western countries and cultures. In the last two
decades, it has become accentuated, explicit and extreme."
However, Vertovec (2002) states that some have observed that
Islamophobia has not necessarily escalated in the past decades, but that
there has been increased public scrutiny of it.
According to Abduljalil Sajid, one of the members of the Runnymede
Trust's Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia, "Islamophobias"
have existed in varying strains throughout history, with each version
possessing its own distinct features as well as similarities or
adaptations from others.
In 2005 Ziauddin Sardar, an Islamic scholar, wrote in the New Statesman that Islamophobia is a widespread European phenomenon. He noted that each country has anti-Muslim political figures, citing Jean-Marie Le Pen in France; Pim Fortuyn in the Netherlands; and Philippe van der Sande of Vlaams Blok, a Flemish
nationalist party in Belgium. Sardar argued that Europe is
"post-colonial, but ambivalent." Minorities are regarded as acceptable
as an underclass of menial workers, but if they want to be upwardly
mobile anti-Muslim prejudice rises to the surface. Wolfram Richter,
professor of economics at Dortmund University of Technology, told Sardar: "I am afraid we have not learned from our history. My main fear is that what we did to Jews we may now do to Muslims. The next holocaust would be against Muslims." Similar fears, as noted by Kenan Malik in his book From Fatwa to Jihad, had been previously expressed in the UK by Muslim philosopher Shabbir Akhtar in 1989, and Massoud Shadjareh, chair of the Islamic Human Rights Commission in 2000. In 2006 Salma Yaqoob, a Respect Party
Councillor, claimed that Muslims in Britain were "subject to attacks
reminiscent of the gathering storm of anti-Semitism in the first decades
of the last century.". Malik, a senior visiting fellow in the Department of Political, International and Policy Studies at the University of Surrey,
has described these claims of a brewing holocaust as "hysterical to the
point of delusion"; whereas Jews in Hitler's Germany were given the
official designation of Untermenschen,
and were subject to escalating legislation which diminished and
ultimately removed their rights as citizens, Malik noted that in cases
where "Muslims are singled out in Britain, it is often for privileged
treatment" such as the 2005 legislation banning "incitement to
religious hatred", the special funding Muslim organizations and bodies
receive from local and national government, the special provisions made
by workplaces, school and leisure centres for Muslims, and even
suggestions by the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams and the former Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips, that sharia law should be introduced into Britain.
The fact is, wrote Malik, that such well-respected public figures as
Akhtar, Shadjareh and Yaqoob need "a history lesson about the real
Holocaust reveals how warped the Muslim grievance culture has become."
A protester opposing the Park51 project, carries an anti-sharia sign.
In 2006 ABC News
reported that "public views of Islam are one casualty of the post-Sept.
11, 2001 conflict: Nearly six in 10 Americans think the religion is
prone to violent extremism,
nearly half regard it unfavorably, and a remarkable one in four admits
to prejudicial feelings against Muslims and Arabs alike." They also
report that 27 percent of Americans admit feelings of prejudice against
Muslims.
Gallup polls in 2006 found that 40 percent of Americans admit to
prejudice against Muslims, and 39 percent believe Muslims should carry
special identification.
These trends have only worsened with the use of Islamophobia as a
campaign tactic during the 2008 American presidential election (with
several Republican politicians and pundits, including Donald Trump,
asserting that Democratic candidate Barack Obama is secretly a Muslim),
during the 2010 mid-term elections (during which a proposed Islamic
community center was dubbed the "Ground Zero Mosque"),
and the 2016 presidential election, during which Republican nominee
Donald Trump proposed banning the entrance into the country of all
Muslims. Associate Professor Deepa Kumar writes that "Islamophobia is about politics rather than religion per se"
and that modern-day demonization of Arabs and Muslims by US
politicians and others is racist and Islamophobic, and employed in
support of what she describes as an unjust war. About the public impact
of this rhetoric, she says that "One of the consequences of the
relentless attacks on Islam and Muslims by politicians and the media is
that Islamophobic sentiment is on the rise." She also chides some
"people on the left" for using the same "Islamophobic logic as the Bush
regime". In this regards, Kumar confirms the assertions of Stephen Sheehi,
who "conceptualises Islamophobia as an ideological formation within the
context of the American empire. Doing so "allows us to remove it from
the hands of 'culture' or from the myth of a single creator or
progenitor, whether it be a person, organisation or community." An
ideological formation, in this telling, is a constellation of networks
that produce, proliferate, benefit from, and traffic in Islamophobic
discourses."
The writer and scholar on religion Reza Aslan
has said that "Islamophobia has become so mainstream in this country
that Americans have been trained to expect violence against Muslims –
not excuse it, but expect it".
A January 2010 British Social Attitudes Survey found that the British public "is far more likely to hold negative views of Muslims than of any other religious group,"
with "just one in four" feeling "positively about Islam," and a
"majority of the country would be concerned if a mosque was built in
their area, while only 15 per cent expressed similar qualms about the
opening of a church."
A 2016 report by CAIR and University of California, Berkeley's
Center for Race and Gender said that groups promoting islamophobia in
the US had access to 206 million USD between 2008 and 2013. The author
of the report said that "The hate that these groups are funding and
inciting is having real consequences like attacks on mosques all over
the country and new laws discriminating against Muslims in America."
Islamophobia has consequences. In the United States, religious
discrimination against Muslims has become a significant issue of
concern. In 2018, The Institute for Social Policy and Understanding
found that out of the groups studied, Muslims are the most likely faith
community to experience religious discrimination, the data having been
that way since 2015. Despite 61% of Muslims reporting experiencing
religious discrimination at some level and 62% reporting that most
Americans held negative stereotypes about their community, 23% reported
that their faith made them feel “out of place in the world”.
There are intersections with racial identity and gender identity, with
73% of Arabs surveyed being more likely to experience religious
discrimination, and Muslim women (75%) and youth (75%) being the most
likely to report experiencing racial discrimination. The study also
found that, although, “most Muslims (86%) express pride in their faith
identity, they are the most likely group studied to agree that others
want them to feel shame for that identity (30% of Muslims vs. 12% of
Jews, 16% of non-affiliated, and 4–6% of Christian groups).”
Anti-Islamic hate crimes data in the United States
A mannequin symbolizing a Muslim in a keffiyeh, strapped to a "Made in the USA" bomb display at a protest of Park51 in New York City.
Data on types of hate crimes have been collected by the U.S. FBI since 1992, to carry out the dictates of the 1990 Hate Crime Statistics Act. Hate crime offenses include crimes against persons (such as assaults) and against property (such as arson), and are classified by various race-based, religion-based, and other motivations.
The data show that recorded anti-Islamic hate crimes in the
United States jumped dramatically in 2001. Anti-Islamic hate crimes
then subsided, but continued at a significantly higher pace than in
pre-2001 years. The step up is in contrast to decreases in total hate
crimes and to the decline in overall crime in the U.S. since the 1990s.
Specifically, the FBI's annual hate crimes statistics reports
from 1996 to 2013 document average numbers of anti-Islamic offenses at
31 per year before 2001, then a leap to 546 in 2001 (the year of 9-11
attacks), and averaging 159 per since. Among those offenses are
anti-Islamic arson incidents which have a similar pattern: arson
incidents averaged .4 per year pre-2001, jumped to 18 in 2001, and
averaged 1.5 annually since.
Year-by-year anti-Islamic hate crimes, all hate crimes, and arson subtotals are as follows:
Anti-Islamic hate crimes
All hate crimes
Year
Arson offenses
Total offenses
Arson offenses
Total offenses
1996
0
33
75
10,706
1997
1
31
60
9,861
1998
0
22
50
9,235
1999
1
34
48
9,301
2000
0
33
52
9,430
2001
18
546
90
11,451
2002
0
170
38
8,832
2003
2
155
34
8,715
2004
2
193
44
9,035
2005
0
146
39
8,380
2006
0
191
41
9,080
2007
0
133
40
9,006
2008
5
123
53
9,168
2009
1
128
41
7,789
2010
1
186
42
7,699
2011
2
175
42
7,254
2012
4
149
38
6,718
2013
1
165
36
6,933
Total
38
2,613
863
158,593
Average
2.1
145.2
47.9
8810.7
1996–2000 avg
.40
30.6
57.0
9,707
2001
18
546
90
11,451
2002–2013 avg
1.50
159.5
40.7
8,217
In contrast, the overall numbers of arson and total offenses declined from pre-2001 to post-2001.
Anti-Islamic hate crimes in the European countries
There have also been reports of hate crimes targeting Muslims across
Europe. These incidents have increased after terrorist attacks by
extremist groups such as ISIL. Far-right and right-wing populist political parties and organizations have also been accused of fueling fear and hatred towards Muslims. Hate crimes such as arson and physical violence have been attempted or have occurred in Norway, Poland, Sweden, France, Spain, Denmark, Germany and Great Britain.Politicians have also made anti-Muslim comments when discussing the European migrant crisis.
Reports by governmental organizations
According to a survey conducted by the European Commission in 2015 13% of the respondents would be completely uncomfortable about working with a Muslim person ( orange), compared with 17% with a transgender or transsexual person ( green) and 20% with a Roma person ( violet).
The largest project monitoring Islamophobia was undertaken following 9/11 by the EU watchdog, European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC). Their May 2002 report "Summary report on Islamophobia in the EU after 11 September 2001", written by Chris Allen and Jorgen S. Nielsen of the University of Birmingham, was based on 75 reports – 15 from each EU member nation.
The report highlighted the regularity with which ordinary Muslims
became targets for abusive and sometimes violent retaliatory attacks
after 9/11. Despite localized differences within each member nation, the
recurrence of attacks on recognizable and visible traits of Islam and
Muslims was the report's most significant finding. Incidents consisted
of verbal abuse, blaming all Muslims for terrorism, forcibly removing women's hijabs, spitting on Muslims, calling children "Osama", and random assaults. A number of Muslims were hospitalized and in one instance paralyzed.
The report also discussed the portrayal of Muslims in the media.
Inherent negativity, stereotypical images, fantastical representations,
and exaggerated caricatures were all identified. The report concluded
that "a greater receptivity towards anti-Muslim and other xenophobic
ideas and sentiments has, and may well continue, to become more
tolerated."
The EUMC has since released a number of publications related to Islamophobia, including The Fight against Antisemitism and Islamophobia: Bringing Communities together (European Round Tables Meetings) (2003) and Muslims in the European Union: Discrimination and Islamophobia (2006).
Professor in History of Religion, Anne Sophie Roald, states that Islamophobia was recognized as a form of intolerance alongside xenophobia and antisemitism at the "Stockholm International Forum on Combating Intolerance", held in January 2001. The conference, attended by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Secretary General Ján Kubis and representatives of the European Union and Council of Europe,
adopted a declaration to combat "genocide, ethnic cleansing, racism,
antisemitism, Islamophobia and xenophobia, and to combat all forms of
racial discrimination and intolerance related to it."
The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation,
in its 5th report to Islamophobia Observatory of 2012, found an
"institutionalization and legitimization of the phenomenon of
Islamophobia" in the West over the previous five years.
In 2014 Integrationsverket (the Swedish National Integration
Board) defined Islamophobia as "racism and discrimination expressed
towards Muslims."
In 2016, the European Islamophobia Report (EIR) presented the "European Islamophobia Report 2015" at European Parliament which analyzes the "trends in the spread of Islamophobia" in 25 European states in 2015.
The EIR defines Islamophobia as anti-Muslim racism. While not every
criticism of Muslims or Islam is necessarily Islamophobic, anti-Muslim
sentiments expressed through the dominant group scapegoating and
excluding Muslims for the sake of power is.
Research on Islamophobia and its correlates
According to data by the Pew Research Center
elaborated by VoxEurop, in European Union countries the negative
attitude towards Muslims is inversely proportional to actual presence
Various studies have been conducted to investigate Islamophobia and its correlates among majority populations and among Muslim
minorities themselves. To start with, an experimental study showed that
anti-Muslim attitudes may be stronger than more general xenophobic attitudes.
Moreover, studies indicate that anti-Muslim prejudice among majority
populations is primarily explained by the perception of Muslims as a
cultural threat, rather than as a threat towards the respective nation's
economy.
Studies focusing on the experience of Islamophobia among Muslims have shown that the experience of religious discrimination is associated with lower national identification and higher religious identification.
In other words, religious discrimination seems to lead Muslims to
increase their identification with their religion and to decrease their
identification with their nation of residence. Some studies further
indicate that societal Islamophobia negatively influences Muslim
minorities' health. One of the studies showed that the perception of an Islamophobic society is associated with more psychological problems, such as depression and nervousness, regardless whether the respective individual had personally experienced religious discrimination. As the authors of the study suggest, anti-discrimination laws
may therefore be insufficient to fully protect Muslim minorities from
an environment which is hostile towards their religious group.
Farid Hafez and Enes Bayrakli publish an annual European Islamophobia Report since 2015.
The European Islamophobie Report aims to enable policymakers as well as
the public to discuss the issue of Islamophobia with the help of
qualitative data. It is the first report to cover a wide range of
Eastern European countries like Serbia, Croatia, Hungary, Lithuania, and
Latvia. Farid Hafez is also editor of the German-English Islamophobia Studies Yearbook.
Geographic trends
An increase of Islamophobia in Russia follows the growing influence of the strongly conservative sect of Wahhabism, according to Nikolai Sintsov of the National Anti-Terrorist Committee.
Various translations of the Qur'an have been banned by the Russian government for promoting extremism and Muslim supremacy. Anti-Muslim rhetoric is on the rise in Georgia.
In Greece, Islamophobia accompanies anti-immigrant sentiment, as
immigrants are now 15% of the country's population and 90% of the EU's
illegal entries are through Greece. In France Islamophobia is tied, in part, to the nation's long-standing tradition of secularism. In Myanmar (Burma) the 969 Movement has been accused of events such as the 2012 Rakhine State riots.
Jocelyne Cesari, in her study of discrimination against Muslims in Europe,
finds that anti-Islamic sentiment may be difficult to separate from
other drivers of discrimination. Because Muslims are mainly from
immigrant backgrounds and the largest group of immigrants in many
Western European countries, xenophobia
overlaps with Islamophobia, and a person may have one, the other, or
both. So, for example, some people who have a negative perception of and
attitude toward Muslims may also show this toward non-Muslim
immigrants, either as a whole or certain group (such as, for example,
Eastern Europeans, sub-Saharan Africans, or Roma), whereas others would
not. Nigel Farage,
for example, is anti-EU and in favor of crackdowns on immigration from
Eastern Europe, but is favourable to immigration from Islamic
Commonwealth countries such as Nigeria and Pakistan.
In the United States, where immigrants from Latin America and Asia
dominate and Muslims are a comparatively small fraction, xenophobia and
Islamophobia may be more easily separable. Classism
is another overlapping factor in some nations. Muslims have lower
income and poorer education in France, Spain, Germany, and the
Netherlands while Muslims in the US have higher income and education
than the general population. In the UK, Islam is seen as a threat to secularism in response to the calls by some Muslims for blasphemy laws. In the Netherlands, Islam is seen as a socially conservative force that threatens gender equality and the acceptance of homosexuality.
The European Network Against Racism
(ENAR) reports that Islamophobic crimes are on the increase in France,
England and Wales. In Sweden crimes with an Islamophobic motive
increased by 69% from 2009 to 2013.
A report from Australia has found that the levels of Islamophobia among Buddhists and Hindus are significantly higher than among followers of other religions.
In July 2019, the UN ambassadors from 22 nations, including Canada, Germany and France, signed a joint letter to the UNHRC condemning China's mistreatment of the Uyghurs as well as its mistreatment of other Muslim minority groups, urging the Chinese government to close the Xinjiang re-education camps, though ambassadors from 53 others, not including China, rejected said allegations. According to a 2020 report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, since 2017, Chinese authorities have destroyed or damaged 16,000 mosques in Xinjiang – 65% of the region's total.
Although by the first decade of the 21st century the term "Islamophobia" had become widely recognized and used,
its use, its construction and the concept itself have been criticized.
Roland Imhoff and Julia Recker, in an article that puts forward the term
"Islamoprejudice" as a better alternative, write that "... few concepts
have been debated as heatedly over the last ten years as the term
Islamophobia."
Academic debate
Jocelyne Cesari reported widespread challenges in the use and meaning of the term in 2006. According to The Oxford Encyclopedia of Islam and Politics,
"Much debate has surrounded the use of the term, questioning its
adequacy as an appropriate and meaningful descriptor. However, since
Islamophobia has broadly entered the social and political lexicon,
arguments about the appropriateness of the term now seem outdated". At the same time, according to a 2014 edition of A Dictionary of Sociology
by Oxford University Press, "the exact meaning of Islamophobia
continues to be debated amongst academics and policymakers alike." The
term has proven problematic and is viewed by some as an obstacle to
constructive criticism of Islam. Its detractors fear that it can be
applied to any critique of Islamic practices and beliefs, suggesting
terms such as "anti-Muslim" instead.
The classification of "closed" and "open" views set out in the Runnymede report has been criticized as an oversimplification of a complex issue by scholars like Chris Allen, Fred Halliday, and Kenan Malik. Paul Jackson, in a critical study of the anti-Islamic English Defence League,
argues that the criteria put forward by the Runnymede report for
Islamophobia "can allow for any criticism of Muslim societies to be
dismissed...". He argues that both jihadi Islamists and far-right
activists use the term "to deflect attention away from more nuanced
discussions on the make-up of Muslim communities", feeding "a language
of polarised polemics". On one hand, it can be used "to close down
discussion on genuine areas of criticism" regarding jihadi ideologies,
which in turn has resulted in all accusations of Islamophobia to be
dismissed as "spurious" by far-right activists. Consequently, the term
is "losing much [of its] analytical value".
Professor Eli Göndör wrote that the term Islamophobia should be replaced with "Muslimophobia". As Islamophobia is "a rejection of a population on the grounds of Muslimness", other researches suggest "Muslimism".
Professor Mohammad H. Tamdgidi of the University of
Massachusetts, Boston, has generally endorsed the definition of
Islamophobia as defined by the Runnymede Trust's Islamophobia: A Challenge for Us All.
However, he notes that the report's list of "open" views of Islam
itself presents "an inadvertent definitional framework for
Islamophilia": that is, it "falls in the trap of regarding Islam
monolithically, in turn as being characterized by one or another trait,
and does not adequately express the complex heterogeneity of a
historical phenomenon whose contradictory interpretations, traditions,
and sociopolitical trends have been shaped and has in turn been shaped,
as in the case of any world tradition, by other world-historical
forces."
Philosopher Michael Walzer
says that fear of religious militancy, such as "of Hindutva zealots in
India, of messianic Zionists in Israel, and of rampaging Buddhist monks
in Myanmar", is not necessarily an irrational phobia, and compares fear
of Islamic extremism with the fear Muslims and Jews could feel towards Christians during the crusades. However, he also writes that:
Islamophobia is a form of religious intolerance, even
religious hatred, and it would be wrong for any leftists to support
bigots in Europe and the United States who deliberately misunderstand
and misrepresent contemporary Muslims. They make no distinction between
the historic religion and the zealots of this moment; they regard every
Muslim immigrant in a Western country as a potential terrorist; and they
fail to acknowledge the towering achievements of Muslim philosophers,
poets, and artists over many centuries.
Commentary
In the wake of the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy, a group of 12 writers, including novelist Salman Rushdie and activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali, signed a manifesto entitled Together facing the new totalitarianism in the French weekly satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo in March 2006, warning against the use of the term Islamophobia to prevent criticism of "Islamic totalitarianism". Rushdie added in 2012 that 'Islamophobia' "took the language of analysis, reason and dispute, and stood it on its head".
Hirsi Ali added in 2017 that Islamophobia was a "manufactured" term
whose usage emboldens radical Muslims to push for censorship and that
"we can't stop the injustices if we say everything is 'Islamophobic' and
hide behind a politically correct screen."
Left-wing journalist and 'New Atheist' writer Christopher Hitchens
stated in February 2007 that "a stupid term – Islamophobia – has been
put into circulation to try and suggest that a foul prejudice lurks
behind any misgivings about Islam's infallible 'message.'" Writing in the New Humanist in May 2007, philosopher Piers Benn
suggests that people who fear the rise of Islamophobia foster an
environment "not intellectually or morally healthy", to the point that
what he calls "Islamophobia-phobia" can undermine "critical scrutiny of
Islam as somehow impolite, or ignorant of the religion's true nature."
Alan Posener and Alan Johnson have written that, while the idea
of Islamophobia is sometimes misused, those who claim that hatred of
Muslims is justified as opposition to Islamism actually undermine the
struggle against Islamism. Conservative social commentator Roger Kimball argues that the word "Islamophobia" is inherently a prohibition or fear of criticizing of Islamic extremism. According to Pascal Bruckner, the term was invented by Iranian fundamentalists in the late 1970s analogous to "xenophobia" in order to denounce as racism what he feels is legitimate criticism of Islam. The author Sam Harris, while denouncing bigotry, racism, and prejudice against Muslims or Arabs, rejects the term Islamophobia
as an invented psychological disorder, and states criticizing those
Islamic beliefs and practices he believes pose a threat to civil society
is not a form of bigotry or racism. Similarly, Pascal Bruckner
calls the term "a clever invention because it amounts to making Islam a
subject that one cannot touch without being accused of racism."
Writing in 2008 Muslim reformist Ed Husain, a former member of Hizb ut-Tahrir and co-founder of Quilliam,
said that under pressure from Islamist extremists, "'Islamophobia' has
become accepted as a phenomenon on a par with racism", claiming that
"Outside a few flashpoints where the BNP is at work, most Muslims would be hard-pressed to identify Islamophobia in their lives".
Conservative political commentator Douglas Murray has described Islamophobia in 2013 as a "nonsense term" and stated "a phobia
is something of which one is irrationally afraid. Yet it is supremely
rational to be scared of elements of Islam and of its fundamentalist
strains in particular. Nevertheless, the term has been very successfully
deployed, not least because it has the aura of a smear. Islamophobes
are not only subject to an irrational and unnecessary fear; they are
assumed to be motivated (because most Muslims in the West are from an
ethnic minority) by "racism". Who would not recoil from such charges?"
In his paper 'A Measure of Islamophobia', British academic Salman Sayyid
(2014) argues that these criticisms are a form of etymological
fundamentalism and echo earlier comments on racism and anti-Semitism.
Racism and anti-Semitism were also accused of blocking free speech, of
being conceptually weak and too nebulous for practical purposes.
French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said in January 2015 following the Charlie Hebdo shooting "It is very important to make clear to people that Islam has nothing to do with ISIS.
There is a prejudice in society about this, but on the other hand, I
refuse to use this term 'Islamophobia,' because those who use this word
are trying to invalidate any criticism at all of the Islamist ideology.
The charge of 'Islamophobia' is used to silence people".
Conservative journalist and commentator Brendan O'Neill
stated in 2018 "Anti-Muslim prejudice is out there, yes. But
'Islamophobia' is an elite invention, a top-down conceit, designed to
chill open discussion about religion and values and to protect one
particular religion from blasphemy. The war on Islamophobia is in
essence a demand for censorship."
Muslim reformist Maajid Nawaz, a former member of the Islamist Hizb ut-Tahrir group and founder of the counter-extremism Quilliam
think-tank has criticized the term "Islamophobia" on several occasions,
stating in 2020 it conflates racism with blasphemy and "there's a huge
difference in being critical of an idea and critical of a person because
of their political or religious identity." Nawaz argues that
"anti-Muslim bigotry" is a more accurate phrase to use instead of
Islamophobia when addressing prejudice faced by people of Muslim origin.
The Associated Press Stylebook
In December 2012, media sources reported that the terms "homophobia" and "Islamophobia" would no longer be included in the AP Stylebook,
and Deputy Standards Editor Dave Minthorn expressed concern about the
usage of the terms, describing them as "just off the mark" and saying
that they seem "inaccurate". Minthorn stated that AP decided that the
terms should not be used in articles with political or social contexts
because they imply an understanding of the mental state of another
individual. The terms no longer appears on the online stylebook, and
Minthorn believes journalists should employ more precise phrases to
avoid "ascribing a mental disability to someone".
Countering Islamophobia
Europe
On 26 September 2018, the European Parliament in Brussels launched the "Counter-Islamophobia Toolkit" (CIK), with the goal of combatting the growing Islamophobia across the EU
and to be distributed to national governments and other policy makers,
civil society and the media. Based on the most comprehensive research in
Europe, it examines patterns of Islamophobia and effective strategies
against it in eight member states. It lists ten dominant narratives and
ten effective counter-narratives.
One of the authors of the CIK, Amina Easat-Daas, says that Muslim
women are disproportionately affected by Islamophobia, based on both
the "threat to the west" and "victims of...Islamic sexism" narratives.
The approach taken in the CIK is a four-step one: defining the
misinformed narratives based on flawed logic; documenting them;
deconstructing these ideas to expose the flaws; and finally,
reconstruction of mainstream ideas about Islam and Muslims, one closer
to reality. The dominant ideas circulating in popular culture should
reflect the diverse everyday experiences of Muslims and their faith.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_-_KORWiN.JPG)
_crop.jpg)
.svg){kind=spacer}
