This article was forwarded by Nasik Elahi. It is a thought-provoking article and commentary on why the efforts to stop terrorism are failing both by the concerned Muslims as well as by the West. The author argues that fear mongering always wins-both by those in West who are creating Isalmphobia and by those who claim that Islam is in danger and propagate Jihad to save Islam and Muslim populace. The author writes about Muslim populace;
“Thus, a global enterprise works to create an Islamic populace, whose members think of themselves as “Muslims” and nothing else, who revel in their supposed victimhood and live perpetually in fear of physical and cultural survival. We look at the rest of the world as an enemy we are at war with, an enemy we must fight and kill―even if it means dying in the process. “Martyrdom”, in fact, is hailed as the highest virtue we can aim for.
Depending on individual factors, Muslims the world over are persuaded by this message to varying degrees. Most of us buy the idea of victimhood; we live in fear, talk to friends, family and children about it (thus spreading the message further), but basically get on with our lives. A few are persuaded enough to join the “war” ourselves.”
Some in the West use the same tool to scare their populace. The author write;
(To be sure, there is a similar Us-Versus-Them communication being propagated in the West by credible “experts” such as social theorists Bernard Lewis and Samuel Huntington, and popular commentators such as Glenn Beck and Daniel Pipes. It is remarkable how much the two opposing sides in this war―Islamists and Islamophobes―agree with each other, and how well they work in tandem, helping each other out by validating each other’s “fear-arousing appeals”.)
The author argues that same time tested method “fear”, as described by Hovland in his 1953 book “Communication and Persuasion” should be used to be successful against terrorism. The Author writes;
“A crucial reason why communicators of peace find it difficult to have greater impact is that the content of their communication is not “fear-mongering”, identified by Hovland as being the most persuasive. This problem can be overcome if they present terrorism not simply as a misinterpretation of Islam but as a mortal danger to Islam. Much is written on how Islamophobia encourages terrorism―the opposite is also true. We need to say more on how terrorism creates the very conditions that Muslims fear, and how this fabricated atmosphere is, in fact, driving a number of Muslims away from Islam. Another way our communicators can challenge the credibility of Ladens and Naiks is by questioning the obligation for we, the audience, to see ourselves as Muslims first and Muslims last. Of course we are Muslims, but each of us has a lot of other identities at the same time―sexual, racial, regional, national, linguistic, professional, and so on. Why can’t I see myself more as a journalist, more as an Indian or more as a cricket enthusiast, and less as a Muslim?”
To read the complete article click on the Link below:
A very sensible article. Tolerance is the only hope. Not the tolerance of others; it should work both ways