Registered user login:

TheFaithColumn

The Faith Column

Every week a different believer gives the inside track on their religion or philosophy.

The Faith Column Homepage

The necessity of criticism

  • Posted by Maryam Namazie
  • 07 February 2008

Maryam Namazie points to political hypocrisy about religion, in the last of her blog posts

I do think that in this day and age, criticism of political Islam - and its banner Islam - is an urgent necessity because of the havoc it is wreaking the world over.

You can’t tiptoe around, appease, ignore or excuse one of the outrages of our century no matter how much some try.

And whilst criticism is crucial, the reason behind it and to what aim are even more so. After all, throughout history, criticism and confrontation of reaction has always helped pave the way for progress and the advancement of the lot of humanity. It is within this context that criticism matters - for people’s lives at least.

I’ve always said that criticising Islam and its political movement is not racism in any way shape or form. You cannot be racist against a belief or idea, no matter how much that criticism may cause offence. But that doesn’t mean that racism does not exist, or that there are not racist groups and organisations - like the British National Party or the Stop Islamisation of Europe campaign as well as institutionalised racism - that aim to stop ‘Muslim’ immigration, or consider all those labelled as ‘Muslims’ as sub-human ‘teeming hordes’ destroying the ‘Christian nature of Europe’.

These groups have no problem with religion’s adverse role within society as long as it is theirs. They have no issue with reaction as long as it is theirs.

And the religious-nationalist left is no better. The Socialist Workers Party, Ken Livingstone and Stop the War Coalition deserve notable mention for their whirlwind love affair with political Islam.

Whilst the left has always been the traditional banner carrier of social justice, the religious-nationalist left are only concerned about ‘rights’ as it is applicable to themselves.

They want women’s liberation for themselves but the ‘right to veil’ for us; they are against homophobia but greet Qaradawi as a long lost friend and stay silent when gay teenagers are hung in public; they want pension rights for workers here but do not want the Islamic regime of Iran to be described in their resolutions as repressive. They don’t want Britain to be a nuclear power, but will quite happily debate the need for nuclear power for the Islamic regime of Iran (with the CND even inviting an official to speak at one of their meetings).

In this type of politics, there is also a deep-seated racism, which like the right, fails to distinguish between the oppressed and oppressor and actually sees them as one and the same.

A politics that implies that people want to live the way they are forced to.

That they actually deserve no better because it is ‘their own culture and religion’ imputing on innumerable people the most reactionary elements of culture and religion, which is that of the ruling class, parasitical imams and self-appointed ‘community leaders’.

In a sense, both of them fail to see millions of people as truly human - with just as many differences of opinions, and belonging to vast social movements and progressive organisations and parties - demanding and worthy of the same rights and dignity as they so strongly believe is their due.

Effectively they both promote a policy of minoritism or the more palatably labelled multi-culturalism - where people who are deemed to be ‘different’ are denied universal standards and norms, freedoms, equality and the secularism fought for by truly progressive movements over centuries.

In foreign policy too, whilst one is generally anti-war and the other pro-war, their politics don’t make much difference in terms of people’s lives. One wants to bomb Iran and Iraq; the other wants to make nice with the Islamic regime in Iran and Hezbollah - both at the expense of people’s rights, lives and freedoms.

I guess what I am trying to say here is that whilst criticism of Islam and political Islam is an historical duty and necessity it has to be based within a politics that puts people first to have real meaning and affect real change.

It has to be done but for humanity’s sake.

To find out more about the Council of Ex-Muslims, visit www.ex-muslim.org.uk. To read more of Maryam Namazie’s writings, visit her website: www.maryamnamazie.com or blog: maryamnamazie.blogspot.com.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

22 comments from readers

Irfan
08 February 2008 at 00:46

Yes the refusal by the 'left' and liberals to criticise political Islam (or Islam the religion) exposes their utter hypocrisy in regard to tackling oppression. What you could have mentioned is that they have actually take this a step further, that is to say, become apologists for Islamic reaction and attacking those who do as 'islamophobic'. Today, there has been a big stink regarding the Archbishop's appalling views on Sharia law - and it has been pleasing that he has received firm and widespread criticism, and in a manner that rules out the nonsensical 'Islamophobia'. However, I'm curious to see if the Islamophile 'left' will now line behind the good reverend and his Muslim reactionary friends and form a 'Theocratic front'.

May I congratulate Maryam Namazie for an excellent, and literally enlightening series of posts - and to New Statesman for allowing these to be posted and freely debated. None of this would of course be possible in a state governed by the Sharia law.

radius
08 February 2008 at 20:50

Irfan, damn right they'll line behind him! Bob Pitt's (ex-WRP) vile islamophobiawatch website has already posted just about every criticism of Williams as 'islamophobic', rounding it off nicely with "the same line" from the racist and fascist Stormwatch. (I do wonder at times how genuine Pitt and some of the other Trot apologists for what they used to call clerical fascism really are....)

Williams is maybe just a tad embarrassed by the extraordinary privileges enjoyed by the Established Church - and wants to share it around with his clerical buddies. 26 bishops in Parliament....if those buggers stay in there with their pointy hats and spats, sooner or later there'll be a bunch of mad mullahs and imams hanging around too, keeping "the Muslims" in line.

Stephen Gash
10 February 2008 at 01:30

I helped found Stop Islamisation Of Europe - SIOE and we expressly condemn racism.

The more the lazy media condemn as racist ordinary people who are implaccably opposed to Islamism the more they will shout back that "Racism is the lowest form of stupidity! Islamophobia is the height of common sense".

SIOE bans political parties from its demonstrations.

Stephen Gash
10 February 2008 at 01:35

Maryam Namazie has never once replied to SIOE's emails nor attempted to talk to me or my SIOE colleages, yet feels able to pass a quick judgement on us Imam-style.

BritishAirman
10 February 2008 at 08:33

You might like to read the lesson, posted toda, 10 February 2008:

http://markatscotland.blogspot.com

Asad
10 February 2008 at 13:08

I agree with every word you have said. It is absolutely essential that we make a distinction between Islamophobia and muslimphobia. Whilst the former is legitimate and should be pursued it is imperative that we vehemently oppose the latter.

Organisations like SOI have to demonstrate that they are equally opposed to the influence Christian parties exert in the formulation of European policies.

I agree with you wholheartedly that people belonging to any religion ( or none ) should be treated as individuals and not en bloc

Asad

Stephen Gash
10 February 2008 at 13:25

SIOE makes it clear that no religion should be protected in law and each one should be treated as a political part, open to criticism and indeed ridicule. This argument is strengthened when a political party puts a religion in its title.

The debate surrounding muslimophobia and islamophobia is ongoing, but there would be no islam without muslims and it was muslim leaders who use the word islamophobia. SIOE is more concerned with kuffarphobia.

Killfacer
11 February 2008 at 10:52

As a fairly ordinary british citizen im entirely islamiphobic. I'm frightened of bombs (not suprsingly), im frightened of the homophobic tendancies of so called "liberal" muslims and i'm even frightened of men with beards. Yeah the one at the end was a joke but i believe that my veiws are fairly reflective minority of the British left wing who are fed up with people being horribly chummy with Homophobes and racists. I do not no much about the "Stop Islamisation of Europe" but it's name is promising. Obviosly if they are a bunch of quasi-fascist christian nut jobs then maybe not but if what Stephen Gash sais is true then i beleive your a disgraceful to dismissing them without even talking with them.

Rana
11 February 2008 at 12:25

Given the recent furore about the archbishop's comments it is even more important that aspects of islam are looked at with a rational outlook. The Archbishop demonstrates exactly the kind of unthinking acceptance of islamic ideas, despite their discrimination of women and homosexuals that the author cites.

radius
11 February 2008 at 18:08

From what little I know about SIOE, they lump all 'Muslims' together, regardless of their politics or whether they're observant or not. Their hostility is directed at an entire population, not an ideology: they campaign against people rather than on issues. In Holland they have counted over a million enemy "soldiers" in a war - which is dangerous rhetoric, as it sets up a war against people. Wilders' "swamping" rhetoric is that of the far-right. SIOE consequently attract people who are viscerally anti-immigrant, campaigning to reverse the immigration, not of Islamists, but of all people identified as Muslim. Consequently they get support from far-right parties like the Northern League and Vlaams Belang.

LeeSouthend
11 February 2008 at 19:40

Though I agree with most of Maryam Namazies article I must point out that SIOE is not a racist organization.

I feel that its somewhat hypocritical to write an article explaining that criticism of Islam is not racism while at the same time accusing those who are speaking out as racists.

nawawimohamad
12 February 2008 at 04:22

Dear Maryam Namazie,

In all fairness why should you be criticizing Islam as if you are not satisfied and contented enough by denouncing it. (Please refer to my comments on your 2 other articles). What has Islam done to you that you are so full of grudges against it? Why are you not complaining on the actions by the US who is the so-called "absolute super-power" invading other countries, destroying properties, killing innocent human beings, wasting money, resources, careless about the climate and not giving the proper attentions to its own (US) citizens now and during natural calamities? What about the atrocities in Kenya? What about global warming affecting every living thing on this earth! What about the World Wars? What about the holocaust? Why pick on Islam which you knew little of ! You are blaming Islam for everything. You are so paranoid that you will blame Islam for your cat's death! Please blame yourself for whatever misgivings you had. You don't even know what is atheism! You are just mumbling and mumbling like a crazy person. You are just ignorant if not stupid!

Killfacer
12 February 2008 at 11:50

thats a bizzare rant nawawimohamad. You sound not only deranged but donwright dangerous. Your doing exactly what she said, calling her crazy, ignorant and playing the victim like islam has never done anything to offend anyone. She is simply asking for the right to critizise Islam. I critizise christianity, jeudaism and islam because they all have problems. Playing the victim and calling someone is exactly helpful is it.

Irfan
12 February 2008 at 17:52

Nawawimohamad makes exactly the kind of buffoonish remarks one so often finds coming from the mouths of so-called 'moderate' Muslims. Their blind faith to a totalitarian religion means that they just cannot cope with criticim - so they constantly resort to deflective tactics. It's a bit like a rapist complaining 'why pick on me? What about the murderers, arsonists, or bombers?' The likes of Ms Namazi know Islam only too well given their backgrounds in countries such as Iran. But we must never forget that in countries where Islam is dominant, it is virtually impossible to offer any criticism of Islam - you literally risk death. But these crazy Islamists in the West (for the most part utter hypocrites for they should follow their faith and live in a Muslim country) just cannot handle reasoned, humane, criticism. Their brains are dead, and to all intents and purposes are suffering form a of madness - Freud's analysis of religion fits these crazies beautifully.

I am deeply heartened by the outcry over Williams' remarks. It shows that the mass of the population has truly woken up to the appalling reality of Sharia law and do not want any religious 'leaders' to interfere with law-making. Let's hope the next step is for their removal from the House of Lords and finally action is taken against the deeply divisive 'faith' schools.

radius
12 February 2008 at 20:47

nawawimohamad, Maryam *does* complain about the actions of the US. Why on earth do you imagine she doesn't? Far from being mutually exclusive, for most of the past 60 years political Islam and western imperialism have been hand in glove. You seem to have a bad case of "whataboutism" - it is possible to criticise one thing without giving an encyclopedic account of all other criticisable things too.

Stephen Gash
12 February 2008 at 22:37

Radius - yes we say openly that we have difficulty with te concept of "moderate muslims". Geert Wilders is under contstant armed guard in Holland for ridiculing islam. Likewise the Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard is under threat of death, as revealed today. The onus is on muslims to ensure the safety of non-muslims who at worst show nothing more than bad taste. For all his faults I can't see the Archbishop of Canterbury issuing death sentences on muslims in foreign countries who insult the Anglican church. He would be out on his ear in minutes. However, insults against Christianity, are made hourly in mosques here and abroad with impunity.

There are no moderate muslims. Rather there are muslims and those desperate to leave islam but are afraid to do so because of muslims.

SIOE challenges "non-practising" muslims to read the koran and some of the hadiths then make a choice either to "remain muslim" or to leave.

Also, far from gaining support of political parties, SIOE's non-party stance has compelled parties to form their own organisation "Cities against islam" so don't fall into the trap of making assumptions.

nawawimohamad
13 February 2008 at 07:51

You are all confused yourselves! You can't even diffrentiate between Islam and Muslims or between Christianity and Christians. Your criticisms are on Muslims and many of them do un-Islamic things! Similarly with Christians. Your comments are all rather foolish, short-sighted and wrong! You can't say Christianity is bad just because a few Christians commit some atrocities, it is just the individuals and not their religion! So please use your brains .

Killfacer
13 February 2008 at 11:13

sorry but anyone who sais "your all rather foolish", "use your brrains" and "you are all confused" is clearly in a horribly defensive mode. Any attempt to interfere with the secular nature of the law is ridiculous. And to say that Islam and chistianity dont have problems despite the fact that some people belonging to both faiths commit atrocities is nigh on idiotic. Yes at their base they may be ok but if a political regime has some nice people in but alot of homophobic, racists in it also, it would be fair to say that the political regime had "problems". You are the one that has failed you engage their brain. Another problem with you point is that according to you some Muslims (9/11 for example) commit atrocities yet these are un-islamic acts. How can they be when they are just a different interpretation of the same book/religion. Both christianity and Islamd (and other religions for that matter) are easily interpreted in different ways and for you to dismiss other peoples interpretations seems massively hypocritical.

BobChurchill
13 February 2008 at 14:45

I agree with this article entirely.

People often think of criticism as an unfortunate side-effect of communication.

In reality it is essential to the growth of knowledge and to social progress.

Without criticism we could still offer new ideas, but there would be no true competition between ideas, because would be no process of elimination from the arena, no weeding, no de-selection of error, no rejection of deleterious norms of behavior.

Criticism, whether in the form of scientific experiment or social analysis or religious commentary, is not an unfortunate side-effect of communication. It is the life-blood of all kinds of growth.

PattyDB
13 February 2008 at 22:10

Thank you Maryam Namazie for pointing out the fallacies of many on the left in such a succint way & bringing the debate to the essential - the human beings that are caught up between the poles & that no one seems really interested in.

Stephen Gash
17 February 2008 at 17:45

There is no left and right wing. There are totalitarian oppressors and democrats. There is rich and poor.

Left wing and right wing have no sound basis. What is described as the "left" has killed more people than all the other regimes put together.

In 'national socialism' the operative word is 'socialism'

Is stoning someone to death for adultery left wing or right wing?

wilaw
02 July 2008 at 10:53

The most frustrating thing in the world is to see my freedom being assaulted by a group of foreigners I never wanted nor invited into the country and be told that they are good for the economy....especially when we all know that is a lie. Per capita it isn't good for anyone except them and a few sheister employers.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

About the writer

Maryam Namazie

Maryam Namazie is a rights activist, commentator and broadcaster. She is the Spokesperson of the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain and Equal Rights Now; National Secular Society's 2005 Secularist of the Year award winner and an NSS Honorary Associate; producer of TV International English; and Central Committee member of the Worker-communist Party of Iran. She was recently selected as Elle Magazine’s (Quebec) top 45 women of 2007.

Recent Posts

Will the Dalai Lama return to Tibet?

  • By Meindert Gorter
  • 29 August 2008

Why did the Dalai Lama ban Dorje Shugden?

  • By Meindert Gorter
  • 28 August 2008

Are Dalai Lama's critics backed by China?

  • By Meindert Gorter
  • 27 August 2008

The deity banned by Dalai Lama

  • By Meindert Gorter
  • 26 August 2008

Falun Gong: defying the odds

  • By Leeshai Lemish
  • 21 August 2008

China’s other world

  • By Leeshai Lemish
  • 20 August 2008

Why is Falun Gong Banned?

  • By Leeshai Lemish
  • 19 August 2008