January 18, 2009

I wonder if there is an underlying cognitive equivalence in these two tragic events [below]. At Islam’s holiest site, religious zealots en masse are so emotionally overwhelmed by the symbolism of a black building, as they partake in the tradition of circumambulation. Sadly, the sum of all these individuals’ spontaneous passions and groupthink inevitably leads to participants being trampled to death.

Oddly, five thousand miles away a similar group mentality of passionate dedication leads to the same morbid conclusion. That same sense of hyper-importance and urgency prompts individuals to push and shove those in front of them and prompts the herd to clear any obstacles in its path to attainment.

As these distinct events imply, the object of attainment can be either physical or metaphysical and still lead to that repulsive drive in the human psyche and its fatal unintended consequences. In Mecca, it is an other-worldly spiritual connection that is sought: a delusional and yet deeply-seeded belief that this location represents something greater than oneself, greater than what the eyes can see, and greater than the temporal world. On the south shore of Long Island, a slightly smaller cell phone will do.

—
Stampede During Pilgrimage to Mecca Kills 345
By HASSAN M. FATTAH
Published: January 13, 2006
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates, Jan. 12 – A stampede on Thursday at the annual pilgrimage to Mecca killed 345 people, the Saudi Arabian Interior Ministry said, the deadliest such event since 1990. The Saudi Red Crescent Society said as many as 1,000 had been injured.

Wal-Mart Employee Trampled to Death
By ROBERT D. McFADDEN and ANGELA MACROPOULOS
Published: November 28, 2008
Suddenly, witnesses and the police said, the doors shattered, and the shrieking mob surged through in a blind rush for holiday bargains. One worker, Jdimytai Damour, 34, was thrown back onto the black linoleum tiles and trampled in the stampede that streamed over and around him. Others who had stood alongside Mr. Damour trying to hold the doors were also hurled back and run over, witnesses said

So what if Obama were a Muslim?

October 21, 2008

I’m an entirely secular American-Iranian who was born a Muslim and I pride myself on the fact that I take offense to almost nothing. However, I’ve felt my nonchalance frequently disturbed by what others consider an acceptable statement regarding Barack Obama’s religion.

We’ve all seen and heard the factually inaccurate statements that Barack Obama is a Muslim, usually uttered by some uninformed, bigoted Neanderthal or spread via email by seedy political operatives. Surprisingly, these explicitly hateful remarks don’t bother me nearly as much as some of the people who supposedly come to Obama’s “defense” by stating that he is a Christian, not a Muslim, which would presumably disqualify him outright from the American presidency.

There is something distinctly un-American about the assumptions that too often underlie our national dialogue on the topic. By apathetically accepting both a superficial religious litmus test and the slurification of words like ‘Muslim’ and ‘Arab’, we are deeply insulting a large group of American citizens, distorting our qualifications for leading the country, and ultimately doing more harm than good in our War on Terror.

To be sure, there have been some who have begun to speak out, exemplified most prominently by Colin Powell. The retired General gave a megaphone to the simple idea that being an Arab or Muslim does not preclude being a family man or a good citizen, as John McCain seemed to have stated at a recent rally.

Despite this recent backlash, a great deal of the conversation this campaign season has left me feeling deeply offended and alienated from the political process. Are we really comfortable living in a society in which simply being a Muslim born in the United States makes you an outcast? That is, essentially, the assumption of these informed, urbane journalists and professionals who come to Obama’s “defense” when they so quickly assume that ‘Muslim’ is a dirty word of which Obama needs to be cleansed.

Even our current president, who first used the phrase “War on Terror”, has been careful to make a fundamental distinction between radical Islamists who seek to wage war against the United States and the vast majority of moderate Muslims who have the same kinds of ambitions as anyone else in America. By simply lumping all followers of Islam together and making their religious identity a slur, we not only attribute a lower status to them but we deny to the United States the sort of moral power that is necessary in a comprehensive War on Terror.

If we truly seek to reduce the terrorist threat posed to the United States and mend relations with moderate Muslim countries, we must consider our entire array of tools. The words we choose to employ when Islam is the topic and our framing of the conversation can become an either an asset or a liability in this global struggle. It all depends on how we choose to use them.