Ain't That You With The Muslims?
-
In Junaid Rana’s description, although Islam is a religion, she says that there are certain characteristics, behaviours, origins, and ways of being that are associated with Muslims. There has been a set of characteristics created for the Muslim body that supposedly moves around space in a particular way, holds itself in a specific way, and performs in a specific way according to a shared religious belief, and it is through these characteristics that Rana claims that the Muslim has been racialized, despite, of course, Islam being a religion and not a race. In other words, race is not just about skin colour but about categorizing followers of Islam into having certain physical characteristics, ideas and origins that may or not be true and discriminating against them when they do move in space and supposedly embody these stereotypes. This also includes non-Muslim bodies whose origins or physical characteristics fit the racial category of Muslim. Rana also discusses the idea of the Muslim being the “geographically external other”, the idea that the Muslim belongs to somewhere else. Although Islam may have started in the east (where Christianity also came from), there is an idea that believers of this eastern religion do not belong to the civilized world. Despite Islam being a system of belief, there is this idea that its followers do not belong to the Western world or more specifically; civilized Europe. She brings up important historical context from the medieval period, specifically Al-Andalus. She says, “it was precisely their understanding of the religious other and of religious difference that formed the lens through which to understand racial difference in the new World,” (Rana pg32), the “other” in this case was the Jew or Muslim. Although existing physically in Europe, being born there, even sometimes having European ancestry and just happening to convert to Islam, which was a common practice in Al-Andalus, the Muslim was still the religious and geographical other. The believer, and their beliefs belong far from Europe, in the barbaric east. Religious other: believing in another religion, geographical other: belonging to a land that is closer to the barbaric eastern world than it is to the civilized western one. Even if the Muslim was European, Islam had rendered them in closer proximity to the east, and further from the west. Rana even goes as far as to say that the Muslim, along with other racialized groups is excluded from the “family of man”. Additionally, they are also seen as geographical others in the sense that they are seen as invaders or conquerors. One coming from the far lands of the east, attempting to once again conquer the civilized western world as they once did during the Muslim conquest of Spain, for example. A geographical other coming to either conquer our lands (the dangerous Muslim) or infiltrate our lands (the Muslim migrant). On another note, Heems in “Soup Boys” is being quite casual in his lyrics about drones, saying things like “that drone cool, but I hate that drone,” as if it is not something that can kill humans. Being so casual about something as severe as drones is clearly Heems being ironic, possibly trying to convey the way in which we talk about destruction in the Middle East. (Also, in the beginning, the interview says, “you use drones to attack terrorists,” which is so general and casual, and can have very destructive consequences on innocent Muslims because who is a terrorist?) Destruction of infrastructure and societal collapse in the Middle East, and all throughout the Muslim World is spoken about so casually. We talk casually about civilian casualties in these faraway places which is similar to the way that Heems is talking so casually about the modes of destruction of the Muslim world: drones. It is the same reason, perhaps that he references both mosques and temples, not being clear of the differences between them. This once again could be ironic, mocking Americans who justify the “war against terrorism” and speak in favour of throwing drones on the middle east as well as destroying and defacing anything Muslim such as the places in which they worship. People who speak in favour of the war on terror, oftentimes, don't even know where the middle east is on a map. Many of them also don't know what Muslims look like (an example of this is the fact that the first “anti-Muslim" hate crime after 9/11 was done to a Sikh man). In the same way, many racists don’t even know where Muslims pray. Either they genuinely don't know, or don't care to know the difference between a Mosque, the place of worship for Muslims, and a temple, the place of worship for Hindus, as well as many other religions. Similarly, in Heems’ lyrics of Swetshop Boys’ “Benny Lava”, he talks about being Hindu, wearing gold chains, and then he goes on to say that his cousin is on the field and tends to poppy all day. This is clearly referring to the Islamist Taliban in Afghanistan who grow poppy. He then says “Aint that you with the Muslims?”. Once again Heems is blurring the lines between different religions, nations and cultures to, in a way, mock white people who speak of the war on terror, despite not knowing who they are going to war with. Something interesting about Bill M-103 is that Faycal Al Khoury, a liberal from Laval voted Yea. Despite the fact that the way in which MPs might vote has less to do with personal identity and more about party, I think it would be a fair assumption to say that this person, with an Arab, seemingly Muslim name would vote Yea for a bill in favour of fighting islamophobia, however funnily enough, Al Khoury is actually a Christian Arab name, Khoury meaning “Priest” in Arabic. Despite being Christian, the contradictory nature of Islamophobia, and the tendency for Islamophobes to group all “Orientals” into one group, is that it also targets non-Muslims with so-called “oriental” names, or Arab names, therefore Faycal Al Khoury might experience Islamophobia first-hand, despite being a Christian.