Talk:Islamophobia/Archive 3

message: Where the current article has ...
::It has been argued by some, most notably Edward Said, that the denigration of Islamic civilisation associated with Islamophobia is central to the concept of Western Civilisation. The ousting and marginalising of Islam marks the debut of ***‘Western’ Civilisation*** and, thus, explains the depth and longevity of western Islamophobia:
... please note the quote marks around "Western" and consider their importance. The phrase in asterisks may be rephrased, as I see it, as ***"so-called 'Western,' as distinguished from so-called 'Eastern,' Civilization."***
I believe the most important component of the phenomenon of Islamophobia (with apologies to the Runnymede folks, who are clearly doing their best) is precisely this artificial distinction between West and East, with Islam representing the Other, and securely in the far cultural distance, as opposed to, you know, here. Where the normal people are.
Facts to consider:
* The last time I checked, Spain was in Europe; in the ninth century, the library at Cordoba contained 500,000 books. Were they Eastern or Western books?
* Much of the knowledge that fueled Europe's Scientific Revolution was generated by Islamic scientists working in the fields of astronomy, chemistry, optics, mathematics, etc. Were these Eastern or Western advances?
* The present European (and hence global) number system comes from Islam. So does algebra. Are they Eastern or Western numbers? 
* The National Library of Medicine (a public domain source) writes: "Chaucer ... (names) physicians from the medieval Islamic world: Ibn Sarabiyun or Serapion as he was known to Europe, a Syriac physician of the 9th century; `Razis' the great clinician of the early 10th century; and `Avicen', or Avicenna as other Europeans called him, referring to Ibn Sina whose early 11th-century medical encyclopedia was as important in Europe as it was in the Middle East. Just as early Greek medical teaching served as a common intellectual framework for professional medical practice in the Islamic Near East, so Arabic medical literature of the 9th to 12th centuries, through Latin translations, provided late medieval Europe with ideas and practices from which early modern medicine eventually arose."  Is modern medicine an Eastern or Western development? 
* There are today between six and ten million Muslims in the United States. Are they Easterners or Westerners?
* There are between one and three million Muslims in the United Kingdom. Are they Easterners or Westerners?
* A huge community of Muslims has been growing steadily in and around Dearborn, Michigan since the early decades of the twentieth century. Are they Easterners or Westerners?
* The conservative group Muslims for America (formerly Muslims for Bush)  is launching a fundraising drive to aid victims of the recent tsunami. Is this an Eastern or Western initiative? 
All of this doesn't mean that Greeks weren't great mathematicians, or that Newton wasn't a great scientist, or that Jonas Salk wasn't a great physician, or that George Bush is promoting tolerance toward Muslims. My point is that that human knowledge, inspiration, and cultural advancement doesn't have any problem cross-pollenating between communities, regardless of the labels the residents of those communities may attach to themselves. That was true in ninth-century Spain, and it's true today.
I believe this whole Islam vs. the West thing is itself an example of stark cultural bias, and is in no way neutral.
This trend toward Islam being identified with the Other ... this trend toward Muslims being identified with the East (the Eastern side of Dearborn, Michigan, maybe?) as opposed to the "civilized" West, is nevertheless intensifying with every passing day. 
It is fair to ask: Why is this trend so much more noticeable recently, i.e., within the last ten years? Islamophobia predates 9/11, as the article points out.
Could economic and geopolitical pressures related to the scarcity of oil supplies have made it convenient for certain groups to focus obsessively on that which separates Muslims from non-Muslims?
To what degree is the perpetuation of this supposed "East/West" distinction a maninfestation of Islamophobia? And should this issue be addressed in the article? BrandonYusufToropov 13:56, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "West" 

message: Thanks. BrandonYusufToropov 15:41, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please address POV points in "The 'West'" above before making major edits, Djames 

message: editing the text again, okay?
Many thanks. BrandonYusufToropov 16:39, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "islamophobia" (the title is in itself POV in my opinion)Djames 
I cited both the US State Department and the UN. Both have condemned "Islamophobia" as despicable as racism and anti-Semitism, but Djames thinks that the title is POV! How would people feel if a Nazi comes here and claims that the title of the article "anti-Semitism" is POV? And, if the article on ati-Semitism is on wikipedia, it must give equal space to Nazis and anti-Semities to justify their hatred by bashing Jews?  This kind of POV nonsense should of course never be tolerated OneGuy 21:33, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  before 

message: Djames and BrandonYusufToropov, be careful to note the three-revert rule which it appears both of you have violated.  Djames, I don't see any of your comments on the Talk page and the version to which you keep reverting makes subjective statements (e.g., "Islamophobia is hostility to the religion of Islam and especially to its inherent political dimensions").  The tone in general sounds as if it is coming from an Islamophobe apologist (e.g. putting Islamophobe in quotes in the intro), and is clearly not NPOV.  --MPerel( talk | contrib) 17:52, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)
BrandonYusufToropov, do not revert more than three times in 24 hours. Djames would have been dealt with for violating 3rv rule. OneGuy 19:45, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  revert war 

message: I've commented the following statement in the main article, as it's clearly political and does not show prejudice against Islam in the way that the others do:
*Rabbi Meir Kahane (1974): "There are no 'moderate' Arabs. There are only clever and less clever, patient and impatient. The final solution for all is the same - the elimination of any Jewish State. And so we repeat: There is no 'Palestine people' and there is no 'Palestine.'"
I've also noticed from this discussion that some people agree with me on this. Thanks, -=vyruss=- 13:40, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irrelevant quote 

message: regarding:
*Michael Savage: "I think these people [Arabs and Muslims] need to be forcibly converted to Christianity ... It's the only thing that can probably turn them into human beings." [05/12/03] (on his radio show The Savage Nation)
Savage never said "Arabs and Muslims."  One's opionion should not be displayed as fact on wikipedia.  He was referring to terrorists that beheaded Nick Berg, and Paul Johnson.  In fact, Savage often states that Islam is a peaceful religion except for a very small, but very violent minority.
Jm51 03:37, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV edit 5/4/05 

message: Currently the article begins with
:Islamophobia is term used by Islamic advocates to discredit proponents of criticisms of Islam and Islamic culture.
So, the word doesn't actually mean anything, it's merely a tag to indicate "I'm an Islamic advocate" ?
I'm reverting the first paragraph to what it used to say on 19:04, 13 May 2005.
Because I think an article should begin by defining what the word means, rather than who uses it.
--DavidCary 09:36, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not at all David, the word is a rhetorical epithet used by the  islamic propaganda machine to redefine anyone who criticizes Islamic Culture as irrational and racist. That is the first thing wikireaders needs to know about this word. You would not for instance begin defining the word "nigger" with the propaganda definition of the Klu Klux Klan. (You can probably guess what the KKK definition would be). You would instead begin by saying that it is an racial epithet that is used by certain groups to demean people of the black race.--68.130.206.36 12:00, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  defining what the word means, rather than who uses it. 

message: I reverted a very POV introduction to the article, and then decided that the previous version was POV in its own way. Since there are apparently at least two sides to the issue, I rewrote the first para to include both sides, and moved the anti-Islamophobia section UP, so that both POVs got approximately equal billing. I hope that this will defuse some of the conflict -- though, given the subject, that's probably a forlorn hope <g>. Zora 02:01, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revised article to try to defuse conflict 

message: Yuber, you reverted to the old intro to the article, which assumed that Islamophobia was a real phenomenon. But some people assert that it's just a ploy to deflect criticism. That's exactly why I rewrote the intro, so that it didn't take sides. It's possible that one side is true, or that the other is true, or indeed, that they're both true. I know you think you're being NPOV but I assure you that the old intro is subtly biased. You know I'm not one of the Islam-bashers. I'm trying to defuse the conflict, so that the article doesn't get vandalized as often. Zora 00:27, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, but looking at other phobia articles that refer to ethnic and social groups the -phobia ending itself means an irrational hatred of the certain group.  There is a criticism of the concept section, a section that is not present on any other phobia article, and that section is sufficient.  You can expand that section as much as you like and show how much people think that Islamophobia is a "PC term" and that hatred of all things Muslim is in fact justified.  That does not change the original meaning of the term or how it is used today.Yuber(talk) 00:31, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

text: I removed the word "irrational", perhaps that is what the LGFers had a problem with.  If they feel that it is totally rational to hate all Muslims then so be it.Yuber(talk) 00:58, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disagreement with Yuber 

message: I just reverted Germen's edits, and those of the anon immediately preceding. If anyone wants to sort through gems like "As such, it is opposed to islamophilia, the supposed irrational attribution of positive qualities to Islam or muslims", "others attribute the differences in socio-economic position to the cultural isolation in which many Muslims choose to live in", or "violent Islamist movements and the massive support those movements have in the Muslim community" for worthwhile material, you're welcome to look through them.... - Mustafaa 23:49, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, I was being sarcastic in calling those "gems".  Those are some of the most egregious sentences in your proposed version. Care to back them up?  - Mustafaa 18:15, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Revert

message: I would like to know why these changes were reverted. The topic is "Reasons for Islamophobia" and we are just presenting the typical arguments given by Islamophobes to justify their position. It is clearly stated that those are the reasons given by "Islamophobes" and need not be valid reasons. Also, all the reasons are presented in quotes to highlight that those need not be truths. So, I am not saying X is true, but that "A justifies Islamophobia by asserting X is true." Are you, by any chance trying to hide these arguments from people who might find them reasonable?
: See my previous comment for why I reverted - "extensive, massively POV-ridden changes too extensive to sort through."  Quite possibly some parts of your edit are neutral and worth keeping, but clearly not all, or even most. - Mustafaa 17:44, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Revert? 

message: This has become more of a propaganda article, where all changes made to make the article more neutral are simply deleted without stating any reasons. It's a extremely POV article hijacked by some brainwashed extremists.
:Why not adopt a username, sign your posts, and make your case here for the specific points you feel should be incorporated? BrandonYusufToropov 17:48, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propaganda Article 

message: Deletion of a link to Islamophilia by one person shows the extreme degree of intolerance of this Islamic Fundamentalist.
:Nothing in the above justifies your edits to the introduction and definition of islamophobia, and POV inclusion of the term "apologists". I have reverted your changes and ask that you participate in the call for references above before making any further changes. Axon 14:46, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Islamophobia is as POV as is islamophilia. I agree with the argument given by Anonymous. --Germen 15:15, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  The anonymous user doesn't give any reasons for the inclusion of said link so I'm not sure what you are referring to here. I also do not see how the use of the term "apologist" is explained by your own remarks. Axon 16:54, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Islamophilia