The Appalling Sham Of The Concept Of Islamophobia
In response to the riots deemed far right that followed the killing of three young girls in Southport, UK, Keir Starmer, the left-wing prime minister, and Angela Rayner, the deputy prime minister, were considering adopting an official definition of Islamophobia before the law.
If some political commentators claimed that this would represent a threat to free speech (i.e. the institution of blasphemy law), establishing a specific criminal offense for such a vague notion would above all play into the hands of the most radical Islamist groups.
Indeed, the concept of Islamophobia serves as a political and religious project. It was introduced in the West by the Sunni Islamist organization known as The Muslim Brotherhood to prevent any criticism of Islam and Islamism and to re-educate a society that is (supposedly) structurally Islamophobic.
When in 1924, the Ottoman Caliphate was abolished, this was experienced as a humiliation by the Muslim world and many among them feared that their identity would be dissolved in Western modernity.
Subsequently, in 1928, The Muslim Brotherhood was created in Egypt while still under British rule. The goal of the brotherhood was to unite Muslims around the world under the symbolic community of the Ummah and free Muslim lands from any foreign authority in order to establish authentic Islamic societies and ultimately restore the Caliphate.
Beside the reconquest of the Muslim territories, The Muslim Brotherhood sought to spread Islam throughout humanity. Therefore, in the ’70s, their elites infiltrated campuses in the West where they developed a critique of the Western materialist that appealed to the anti-capitalist left.
Despite being considered a terrorist organization in many countries and their half-avowed objective of implementing an Islamic society, the ideas of The Muslim Brotherhood were welcomed with open arms in the social sciences.
The left rallied with them out of opportunism, because of their shared hatred for the West deemed responsible for all ills in the world, and because they saw in the international Muslim community, the Ummah, a neo-communism of some sort, a communism guided by God.
The Muslim Brotherhood also played on the notion of victimization, they characterized the Muslims in relation to the supposed bad treatment its members receive in the West because of their beliefs.
They have elevated Muslims to the status of an oppressed minority by redefining the concept of Islamophobia from the hostility towards Islam i.e. the religious ideas, into the hatred of Muslims i.e. individuals.
If being adverse to theological doctrines in the West is not problematic, loathing Muslims, therefore people, becomes problematic.
At this time, the ideology of the left was mutating from the social (class struggle) to the societal (race, sex, sexuality…), i.e. the indigenous working class was replaced by minorities as revolutionary agents.
And so, intellectuals from the Muslim Brotherhood, thanks to the exacerbated victimization of the Muslim population, successfully united with the societal left, fed with dogmas theorized in post-colonial studies, under the intersectionality banner.
As a result, they have given birth to a political chimera: Islamo-wokeism, an alliance against the presumed white supremacy, colonialism, and racism of the West.
In addition, thanks to the petrodollars provided by oil-producing Islamist nations to support their political maneuvers, The Muslim Brotherhood was able to open associations and Islamic centers all over the West.
They have also been accused of having infiltrated supranational groups such as FEMYSO, a pan-European network of 32 Muslim organizations across 22 European countries financed by the European Union, the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe (FIOE), and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) self-called “the collective voice of the Muslim world”.
Regardless of the veracity of those accusations, The Muslim Brotherhood considers that the international Muslim community, the Ummah, is sovereign and that Muslims are not assimilable. Therefore the West must take into account their particular needs. They demand the sanctity of Islam by Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
The Muslim Brotherhood seeks not to reshape Islam but the way Westerners look at Islam. The fight against Islamophobia became a sword, a pretext for political activism, it justifies religious actions, and the victimhood ideology became a shield, a protection against any criticism, and a means to find support through collective emotion, to obtain from Western democracies unilateral advantages under the pretense of reparation.
Islamophobia is not only a concept used to affirm Muslim identity, but also a fast track to the establishment of the crime of blasphemy. It gave birth to the idea that there is a specific discrimination against Muslims that is not based on race or ethnicity but culture, language, custom, or religion.
Consequently, it is not certain practices of Islam that are problematic (place of women, criminalization of homosexuality…) but how Westerners view Islam i.e. disapproving of some practice becomes Islamophobic acts.
Everything is susceptible and can be interpreted as Islamophobic: secularism is Islamophobic, imposing respect for the laws of a country is Islamophobic, anything that hinders the development of Islam is Islamophobic…
Therefore Islam must be accepted unilaterally in its entirety.
Furthermore, The Muslim Brotherhood considers that violent jihad can be justified in case of self-defense. Violence is only the result of injustice and Islamophobia. So, the West must adapt to prevent offended Muslims from becoming violent. Ultimately, as victimization via the notion of Islamophobia legitimizes violence through self-defense, the more brutal Islam is, the more our occidental nations call for tolerance.
The Muslim Brotherhood fed on Western guilt and victimized dogmas to impose their radical Islam in the West: an intellectual, political, and religious project that seeks to establish a global Islamic society through a progressive acclimatization to Sharia law.
Paralyzed by the fear of being accused of Islamophobia, a concept born from the confusion between the rejection of Islam (ideology) and the rejection of Muslims (the individuals), Islamo-wokists like Starmer have rendered any criticism of Islam impossible and supported the foundation of a new ideological terror.
In the end, Islamophobia is the Trojan horse of Islamism.
Wrong Speak is a free-expression platform that allows varying viewpoints. All views expressed in this article are the author's own.
 | A guest post by
|
Well, that certainly is chilling.
Correct on all points. What is happening in the UK is terrifying.