Following the 9/11 attacks in the US, the world saw the unleashing of xenophobia towards all men and women of the Islamic faith with the now controversial phrasing of the "Axis of evil". With that one incident all Muslims are terrorist and everything about the religion of Islam has to be curbed in order to save guard the security of the population of the country and ultimately the world. The latest form of attacks come in the wake of plans to rebuild ground zero with the presence of a mosque and an Islamic center "a few blocks from the World Trade Center site".
Should the minority Muslims in America be allowed to have their place of worship (in a predominantly non-Muslim country) in close vicinity of a place that was destroyed by a fellow group of Muslims? Or should the collective Muslim minority in the country be punished for the transgression that saw the death of 2,752 people and the continued impact on the psyche of the Americans collectively?
The issue is, should the Muslims be given their rights as minority members of the land? Should their sense of public identity be "recognised" and acknowledged irrespective of the perpetrators who share their religion? Or should the minority Muslims in the country continue to carry the scarlet letter and be "misrecognised" as potential criminals and terrorists, if so, for how long?
As a member of a Muslim majority I empathise with my fellow Muslims in America who are continued to be 'terrorised' by the larger majority for a crime they did not participate in nor commit. As a member of humanity I empathise with the family of victims of 9/11 who continue to morn the lost of their loved ones. But emotions aside, how does this play out within the discourse of multiculturalism?
As Charles Taylor famously stated in his inaugural speech "The Politics of Recognition", members of society make certain "demands" of the state and those demands need to be "recognised" by the state in order to ensure the continued equality among all citizens irrespective of their ethnicity, religion, gender and sexuality. That, in a nutshell, is an aspect of Multiculturalism. As he states, "Where the politics of universal dignity fought for forms of nondiscrimination that were quite "blind" to the ways in which citizens differ, the politics of difference often redefines nondiscrimination as requiring that we make these distinctions the basis of differential treatment."
In this case, both parties are demanding distinction on the very basis of 'differential treatment'. The Muslim minority want the mosque built as a public recognition to their identity as members of the land. While the non-Muslims do not want the mosques built as a mark of respect for their lost. As their 'champion' Ms Sarah Palin eloquently puts it: "Peace-seeking Muslims, pls understand, Ground Zero mosque is UNNECESSARY provocation; it stabs hearts. Pls reject it in interest of healing,"
What is seen by some as "unnecessary provocation" can in fact be read as an unnecessary "misrecogniton" towards the Muslim minority, for to quote Taylor again:
"The thesis is that our identity is partly shaped by recognition or its absence, often by the misrecognition of others, and so a person or group of people can suffer real damage, real distortion, if the people or society around them mirror back to them a confining or demeaning or contemptible picture of themselves. Nonrecognition or misrecognition can inflict harm, can be a form of oppression, imprisoning someone in a false, distorted and reduced mode of being."
How are the Muslim minority "misrecognised"? They are asked to pay the price for the atrocities committed by other Muslims who attacked the World Trade Center by having their place of worship not built near the site. They are continued to be misrecognised as 'partners in crime' by sheer association of faith, which as Taylor clearly states "can be a form of oppression, imprisoning someone in a false, distorted and reduced mode of being."
I don't offer any solutions to this dilemma. Merely to acknowledge that both sides are demanding for the same thing, what is due to them as members of the society. In such situation the only possible outcome is a to practise tolerance and acceptance of the other, which as history has shown is a challenge we've yet to live up to. What history has shown is that the majority tend to have their way and the minority will continue champion their cause and save their fight for another day. Let's watch and see how this unfolds over the coming weeks.
No comments:
Post a Comment