aziz
-
07:04:12 am on July 22, 2008 | # | |
Michael Totten talks about his experiences in Kosovo, perhaps the most truly liberal muslim country in the world. What struck me however was the repeated statements by various kosovars he interviewed, to the effect that they self-identify as “muslim” but also insist that religion is not the basis of their identity. I While I admire the way the Kosovars have crafted a free society, I can’t help but be curious about what their perception of Islam actually is. Is this “cultural Islam” made manifest?
perhaps the word Islamic can be used in a similar fashion to the old Woody Allen joke: “I’m not a Jew, I’m Jew-ish”
-
Tag this post
Comments
Leave a Comment
Sy 7:50 am on July 22, 2008 | #
This was overall very reflective of the author’s orientalist leanings, and as such, really feeds into some troubling ideas. One, the implied notion, that the numbers of hijabis correlates with some pernicious Wahhabi or anti-American presence, and that its lack of presence indicates great modernity and advancement. I personally also take issue with Totten’s claim that wahhabi funding is a huge problem for mosques here in the United States, while there is certainly a great amount of literature put out by wahhabi funding, most of darussalaam is pretty benign, and most mosques run on local donations. And then his statement that anti-Americanism in muslim countries essentially should not exist in light of the west help to Kosovo is utter bunk, I wouldnt even know where to begin. And wahhabi pants? let me know where I can get some to give out as Eid presents. The notion that Kosovar’s should send someone who looks like them as ambassador to Germany. Ugh. While his article is certainly one interesting take on Islam and its identity/role in the lives of Kosovars/Albanians, I think one should take a heavy grain of salt with this man’s perspective.
aziz 8:05 am on July 22, 2008 | #
I think all too often the term “orientalist” is thrown about too casually. I think you will be hard-pressed to find someone who is as articulate in terms of defending Islam as a rleigion that can be interpreted, rather than inherently violent as most right-wingers insist. Michael is someone I respect as an important voice in favor of muslim freedom and expression and he has been a consistent defender of the muslim american community against the rising jafi tide.
Note that the issue of the translator wearing a hijab was one decided by teh kosovars, not michael. He defends their right to choose their ambassador and certainly thats indeed their right. Image does matter and kosovo prides itself on a particular image that is no less “true” than the one that saudi arabia promulgates. Would you critique the saudis for refusing to allow a woman be their ambassador, who went uncovered? I think not, though of course w emight celebrate if they had no objection.
As far as wahabis in the US, theres no benefit to pretending the problem is totally nonexistent, though of course it isnt a massive systemic problem (yet - and will remain not so, as long as we dont get complacent). Unfortunately there are a number of mosques in the Jersey area that have come under scrutiny and publicity for hosting firebrand Imams and with well-known wahabi leanings. The salafi dawa in the US largely fizzled out but it was not negligible, and there remains a presence that we cannot sweep under thr rug.
Sy 8:51 am on July 22, 2008 | #
Re: wahhabi influence, I wasn’t trying to sweep anything under the rug, only trying to point out how exaggerated the threat is, especially from individuals within the community itself, like Nomani, thus legitimizing the grand threat to lots of non-muslim Americans. And sure there are firebrand imams in lots of places, but that doesnt mean we should knee-jerk associate them with the financial Wahhabism and/or Salafism machine.
As for the hijabi translator, I certainly grant Kosovo has the right to choose whomever they want, and that image is indeed important to this nascent nation trying to forge an identity. However at what expense will this/does this come for sacrifice of expression? Certainly an uncovered woman woudnt be chose by Saudi as an ambassador b/c that’s their law, but there exists, at least to my knowledge, no such prevention of a woman to wear hijab in Kosovo yet. I suppose one concern would be to the extent that “secularism” will become enforced.
While Totten’s intentions seem harmless enough, and while he may well be/do all of the things you say (I am not that familiar), he seems to gloss over the subtleties of Islamic belief, not only with generalization about “Wahhabi/Taliban” belief, but also the variations of Kosovar Islamic belief itself. To me, this implies that a conservative Islam interpretation is inherently deficient, and that an ultra liberal interpretation is vastly superior. you see this in his quotation at the end of how non-practiced Islam has prevented conflict, and his claim that Iran is a “jihad” state, whatever the hell that means.
Although, I may have pounced and judged this man too quickly, especially when I saw Hari and Sullivan giving props in the sidebar, i still think there are lacking things in the article and his approach, but that’s just my take. I’m curious as to what others think of him/the article.
Willow 9:02 am on July 22, 2008 | #
You can indeed buy wahhabi pants.
The wahhabis believe that male clothing should stop short of the ankles, so many of them (at least in the Arab world) wear what we would call clam-diggers, highwaters or capris. (Ironically a man wearing this variety of pants in the west is identifying himself with a very different community…) I’ve seen many a wahhabi pant in my time. They’re quite real.
And Aziz is right, pretending the problem of extremism doesn’t exist won’t make it go away. It’s here.
Having said all that, I do think the majority of western reporting on Islam, Africa and the Middle East is orientalist. (Though I think we ought to call a spade a spade and just admit it’s racist. Educated racist is still racist; hipster racist is still racist; liberal racist is still racist.) There are some real exceptions (Sebastian Junger, who does amazing work), but sadly they’re outnumbered by the unconsciously indoctrinated.
Sy 9:27 am on July 22, 2008 | #
Its one thing to have a style of pants adopted by someone with a certain religious persuasion/identification, its quite another thing to label a style with a religious identity and in the process demean religious conservatism as Totten does. His implication, to me, is that these symbols of religious conservatism are inherently dangerous and inherently reflective of deficient thought.
As for extremism, no one is saying it doesnt exist or sweeping anything under the rug. All I’m saying is its exaggerated greatly, while this could very well be due to the fact that having been to mosques all around the country, of all ethnic persuasions, I have yet to hear anything remotely “radical.” Again, for emphasis, not saying it does not exist, just something I think is exaggerated for effect by people liek Kabbani and Nomani.
Willow 10:13 am on July 22, 2008 | #
I take it you are a man. That’s not a criticism, but I think if in these mosques you were shuttled like a farm animal into airless little rooms where the words of the imam were piped in via loudspeaker, you might feel differently about what is and is not extreme. I can’t stand the self-appointed progressive talking heads either, but they’re not the ones trying to prevent me from practicing my religion with dignity.
muhammad mushtaq 10:29 am on July 22, 2008 | #
hahahahah
lol. THE TWO HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON! i have no problem with conservative interpretation muslims which you seem to be but at least get your facts right.
kabbani and nomani are as opposite as you and reality.
kabbani said mosques were wahhabi. nomani said mosques were run by men.
kabbani = hardcore traditionalist sufi that would never allow women in position of power.
nomani = liberal muslim lipstick feminist who writes articles about how hijab and fashion intersect.
are you starting to see the difference yet?
oh, my bad. anyone who disagrees with you can all be conflated in one space.
muhammad mushtaq 10:32 am on July 22, 2008 | #
btw. i have read this totten guy for a long time. he will tell you that he opposes hizbollah and islamists, but he’s not an orientalist.
unrelated: its not orientalism to say that the hijab is an expression of male power over muslim women.
it only becomes orientalism if a person then suggests that removing this power requires western domination.
if a person doesn’t make that second leap its not orientalism.
nice trick though. conservatives have been using it for a century now but its getting old.
Sy 11:11 am on July 22, 2008 | #
Fair enough, I should perhaps not have been so dismissive of the female experience in the American mosque, as I have not undergone it, and have not really asked my female muslim friends about it. I apologize for that oversight, and also for any difficulty you undergo in the American mosque due to those of my gender.
As for Totten, after having scoured through his archives for a little, he does seem to defend Islam as an interpretable religion but he is very dismissive of any conservative interpretation. He also called CAIR an Islamic wingnut organization, which, while I grant that the leadership can be obnoxious and overzealous at times (im looking at you Hooper), is hardly, hardly a “wingnut” organization, and he takes the Wash. Times hitpiece on membership to its word. He also makes bold claims for Iran’s attempts on the destruction of Iraq, for Tariq Ramadan, and also make some generalizations about Hamas and Hezbollah, and on the nature of “moderate” Islam, all conjectures which I’ve come to abhor not only for their unsubtle perspectives, but also for perpetuation of Islam and Muslim bogeyman stereotypes. He also links extensively to MEMRI, a questionable organization to say the least, in addition to Instapundit, LGF, Hari, Hitchens, Applebaum, Krauthammer, Steyn, Goldberg, Peretz, Cohen, Friedman, and Davis Hanson, hardly individuals who have gotten or get the “muslim” world right or anywhere close. While I have no doubt he is better than the likes of Spencer, Pipes, and Emerson in his coverage of Islam/ME, that doesnt really say much, especially when we have far better academics like Juan Cole and others to take up the cause.
Sy 11:26 am on July 22, 2008 | #
Actually Mushtaq, Nomani has extensively said that US mosques are run by Wahhabis, both in her books, and also in an NPR oxford debate that she had with Reza Aslan and others. While I’m aware of her fluff pieces for Slate, and her differences with Kabbani, that doesnt dismiss their convergence on this issue. I am not trying to “conflate” anyone, merely pointing out these two agreed on one particular issue, nor am I supporting a “conservative” viewpoint, only holding that it can be valid. But nice try.
And your orientalist defintion doesnt hold water, there have tons of orientalist tracts which don’t posit any removal of a social structure with “western” domination.
Willow 1:42 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
To be fair, Nomani and Kabbani have both aggressively courted the neoconservatives by hyping the fundamentalist threat. Perhaps not out of proportion, but often out of context. So they have that in common. That’s about it though…
muhammad mushtaq 4:35 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
nomani hasn’t courted neocons. wtf? where are u pulling this from?
jesus christ u people have lost it.
how in the world is talking about patriarchy ‘courting neo-cons.’ you sound like a wahhabi apologist right now.
in your people’s world critical muslims just shouldn’t engage with any media, any govt, any pundits, or anyone for that matter, cuz the rest of it will be ‘neo-con courting.’
dont u SUPPORT THE MAKING OF IMAGES? that’s haram! neo-con courter!
muhammad mushtaq 4:38 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
sy.
american mosques *are* run by wahhabis. have u ever been to an american mosque?
nearly every one is full of wahhabi literature.
i will openly say that just because someone is wahhabi don’t mean they are islamist, but dude, go look at the libraries, or how they decide their mosque leadership, or who they follow when it comes to eid.
in short: THEOLOGICALLY, most of our mosques are definitely wahhabi. i think kabbani was right.
i can’t think of a single sunni big mosque that operates under the hamza yusufi theology or under any theology posted by isna.
muhammad mushtaq 4:41 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
sy.
you seem to believe that anyone who favors liberal interpretations of islam suddenly runs the risk of going down the route of becoming a neo-con stooge.
i ask this honestly: have u ever lived among pakis or indians who live islam liberally? most of them hate america more than any crazed out leftist.
muhammad mushtaq 4:48 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
by the way, returning to the topic at hand:
kosovars don’t identify as muslim first. thank god. amen. hallelujah. they identify with their nation.
that sounds to me just like turks, iranians and afghan and bengalis.
the rest of the sick muslims of the world - egyptians, pakistanis and saudis - identifiy with islam first.
the reason for this is the former group of countries have real cultural histories that THEY TAKE PRIDE IN while the latter hate themselves, past, present and future.
Sy 5:06 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
Except for that Nomani has indeed, at least one, in Dawood Gartenstein-Ross. I don’t think anyone is apologizing for the Wahhabis, and I fully support this site and others like it for pointing out deficiencies of the Muslim community, theological interpretation, and practice everywhere.
Yes, I have been to *many* American mosques, and while lots have Saudi literature, mostly of the Darussalam variety, which, it should be noted could hardly be pop categorized as “wahhabi,” we should not equate conservative theology immediately with wahhabism. Lots of literature in American mosques is also written by people of a diversity of ethnic persuasions and opinions. And while I grant a conservative theology and wahhabism can and do feed off each other occasionally, conflation of the two is, I think, an obfuscation.
Re: liberal interp. of Islam
No, I don’t believe that anyone who favors liberal interpretations of Islam as running the risk of becoming a neo-con stooge. However Totten comes across as entirely dismissive of the conservative interpretation of theology which many, if not most, Muslims have, which I don’t think is helpful AND he does draw on a lot of sources which neo-cons utilize to great degree to inform his views.
As for having lived among Pakis or Indians who live Islam liberally, I’m not sure what you’re definition of liberal is, but being a South Asian myself, and having met Muslims who vary in their practice from non to Tablighi, I’d say most are rather indifferent about their American patriotism. But I’d be curious to see what rough geographic area you hail from, most of my opinions have been forged by my experience in the DC area.
Peace.
muhammad mushtaq 5:31 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
its evident to me that u, sy, are smarter than me.
Willow 6:29 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
dont u SUPPORT THE MAKING OF IMAGES? that’s haram! neo-con courter!
Finally we come to it. I’ve always said that the shriekers of the far-left make the best fundamentalists. Here you come and prove my point without my having to lift a finger.
By the by, if you’re looking for credibility as an enemy of the patriarchy, you might want to avoid making suggestions like “porn wouldn’t be a problem if Muslim women would just give more blowjobs.” I’m afraid your chauvinism is showing.
aziz 6:33 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
the shriekers of the far-left make the best fundamentalists.
You know, I never thought of it that way before, but you are so right its depressing. In many ways the rhetoric of te leftists tends to drown out the very progressive liberalism they claim to espouse.
Willow 6:41 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
Yes, yes and yes. This is exactly my beef with them. Ironically we don’t disagree about the problems in modern Islam–we disagree about whether loud dystopian obnoxiousness is required to correct them.
mushtaq 7:09 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
are you daft?
loool.
i was being sarcastic. trying to show that YOUR liberalism (making images) leaves you just as open to accusations of ‘courting neo-cons’ as nomani’s identifying patriarchy leaves her open.
clearly you don’t understand sarcasm. i hope this site is not paying you to write.
as far as my comment about porn in marriage, please dont misquote me.
here is what i said:
http://talkislam.info/2008/07/20/muslims-and-divorce/#comment-1649
and this was in RESPONSE to a comment on an external site in fact. i basically said that female imams should train muslim women to be less prudish and i suspect this would decrease porn usage.
there’s nothing wrong with what i’ve said. for you to turn this into “porn wouldn’t be a problem if muslim women would just give more blowjobs” is a lie. in fact your use of quotes (from another thread) suggests premeditation and pernicious behavior on your part. very unprofessional. those are not my words at all. if you were a journalist i’d sue you.
in that thread i also later clarified that sexual responsibility is something to be taken into consideration when greater equality enters the picture:
http://talkislam.info/2008/07/20/muslims-and-divorce/#comment-1677
if you don’t have anything to say about it, don’t. but dont lie about what i’ve said. severely disappointed.
finally im not a leftist at all, just a sarcastic, but like i already explained, you can’t follow that so i really have nothing to say to you.
far left shriekers. ill remember that. next time we actually talk about the left ill remind you of this moment.
mushtaq 7:11 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
test
mushtaq 7:12 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
dear administrator. please approve my MOST RECENT message.
i think i submitted multiple times.
it must have gotten caught up because of the double links in it.
thanks.
willow you’ll have your response soon enough.
- laughing in the meantime.
Sy 7:24 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
Mushtaq, I’m sorry if I’ve imbued this board with a flame-war-esque vibe to inspire that slightly patronizing comment; I probably deserve it. I should have been rather less defensive of my views and more curious in the elaboration of yours.
Pace.
Willow 8:00 pm on July 22, 2008 | #
MM, post away, but I’m letting you know now that I don’t plan to respond. I feel I have made my point and have nothing further to say. These kinds of running-in-place non-arguments are not something I want to promote on this board.
muhammad mushtaq 1:15 pm on July 23, 2008 | #
i guess im being censored. a whole day without getting approved.
oh well.
aziz 3:07 pm on July 23, 2008 | #
good grief muhammad stop whining. If I wanted to censor you I could delete every comment you’ve posted in a single click. Fpr the record, if I am busy, I might not get around to approving the comments for several days, so be patient and drop the petulant attitude. If you saw the crap that I just had to delete from the queue you’d understand why i am cranky about it.
muhammad mushtaq 8:01 pm on July 23, 2008 | #
thank you for approving my comment. however, the person who unnecessary villified me had already pre-emptively admitted her error and admitted she had “nothing” to say. still its good to see my comment is in the records.