“Radical Islam” is a phrase that’s been an all but ubiquitous since the attacks of September 11, 2001. It’s an umbrella term that’s been used to cover everything from general activity in the vastly diverse region of the Middle East to the way its descendants choose to dress in America. For many Americans it’s simply descriptor of “the enemy”—but is this descriptor too simple?
Since September 11th, many Americans have imposed a prejudice against Muslims and residents of the Middle East because of an inherent assumed association with “radical Islam.” Fifteen years later, Westerners are widely beginning to realize that this association is one made too broad.
Because of the terminology used, Americans are casting a net far too wide in whom they call “enemy.” As the term “radical” is typically used to suggest an augmented, progressive or reformist version of something, the term “radical Islam” suggests that Islamism and the resulting terrorism are derivatives inextricably bound to Islam at large. And to be put simply, this is not the case.
“Radical Islam killed them!” said Texas Republican Representative Louie Gohmert during the Democrat sit-in protest of gun control in June of the victims of the Orlando massacre. During an interview with Fox and Friends, he elaborated. “81,000 names are on the no-fly list, but fewer than 1,000 are Americans,” he recited, neglecting to divulge how many of these people were actually connected with radical Islamism, or the fact that being wrongly placed on the no-fly list is no rarity.
“It means if this administration would protect us from people coming in, then we wouldn’t have to worry about maybe 1,000 people.” Gohmert made no comment regarding the 74 percent of law enforcement agencies that rank American right-wing extremist groups as a much larger threat than jihadists, or in regards to the fact that the death toll of nonjihadist extremists is twice as high in the US than that of jihadist extremists since 2011 (New York Times).
In addition to being a drain upon the energies and humanity of Muslims across America, the association of terrorism with Islam an ineffective, counterproductive drain of resources.
“What exactly would using this label accomplish? What exactly would it change?” Mr. Obama asked his audience in a Statement to the Press this June. In his presidency, he has abstained form the use of the phrase in a rejection of jihadism’s connection to “one of the world’s great religions.”
“Since before I was president, I’ve been clear about how extremist groups have perverted Islam to justify terrorism,” He continued. “As president, I have repeatedly called upon our Muslim friends and allies at home and around the world to work with us to reject this twisted interpretation of [Islam].”
Sorry, no related posts found.
