Generally speaking, I have come across this peculiar notion, which seems to be widely embraced among many Muslims, especially in the aftermath of September 11, that whenever a Muslim nation takes up arms against another Muslim nation, it is bad not only for morale, but for their basic image as well. The standard oft-quoted line is that Islam is a brotherhood that trascends all races and nations. Supposedly, Muslims are commanded to defend their brothers in Islam, to act as apologists, especially if the “brothers” are attacked from the outside. Hence, it is construed that an attack on Muslims is tantamount to an attack on Islam.
This is not correct. In my view, this idea is as nonsensical as is the notion that all Muslims, irrespective of whoever and wherever they are, are terrorists. The vast majority of Muslims, once confronted with such a hasty generalisation, are the quickest in swiftly pointing out that this argument commits a fallacy. Here the display of such corrective reasoning, for Muslims, is a matter of securing justice for the vast hordes of non-terrorist Muslims; the attainment of justice being something which they, without any hesitation whatsoever, unconditionally allocate to that of the highest importance in such discourse, indeed rightfully so.
Unfortunately, over the past few months after Sept. 11, I have observed a somewhat disproportionate number of Muslims, who do not care to apply a similar level of critical scrutiny upon their self-made assertion that “an attack on Muslims is tantamount to an attack on Islam”. Needless to say, I find this discouraging.
Why do so many insist upon such crude, simplistic characterisations of their own religion?
As far as I can tell, the assertion “an attack on Muslims is tantamount to an attack on Islam”, tends to be based around the following chain of argument:
[list=1]
[li] Islam is just;[/li]
[li] All Muslims follow the teachings of Islam;[/li]
[li] Therefore, All Muslims are just.[/li][/list=1]
Such conclusions, on the basis of such fallacious reasoning, through a guilty premise, is itself a hasty generalisation of Muslims. Muslims cannot, and will not ever, be represented as a homogenous group in their millions. It is indicative of simplistic thinking to claim otherwise. Irrespective of what lip service a number of Muslims may perform to the notion of justice this time round, in practice such thinking bypasses the norms of justice and fairness completely. It remains persistently obvious that too many Muslims continue to act and remain as if they were oblivious to the simple facts of the situation.
Let’s follow their reasoning through to its logical conclusion, helping us to understand what kind of mentality these people ascribe to. Consider, for instance, the question of why should Islam, if truly a religion of justice, be under attack as a result of military assaults upon it’s abusers, who would therefore have automatically rendered themselves as unjust perpetrators as a consequence? Only if those blind defendants, unwitting apologists, of al-Qaeda and the Taliban, who laid claim to the high moral ground of justice earlier, are now actively favouring injustice over justice. Such unconditional support for such blind statements only arises if they are being hypocritical. Ignorance is not really an option here as the fallacious reasoning inherent is far too blatant for anybody to remain innocent of it. I cannot imagine that such people would like to consider themselves as stupid. Also, hypocrisy and credibility of one’s own position, unfortunately for those Muslims, are not good bedfellows. Unless, of course, such “Muslims” believe that Islam is not a religion dictated by justice, at least when it comes to the indiscriminate killing of people. But if that is really the case, then why not come right out and say so?
Hence, the proponent of the statement “an attack on Muslims is tantamount to an attack on Islam”, has to reap the fruits of his thinking by selecting either one of two conclusions:
-
He himself is not a just person, as he is hypocritical, unknowingly or otherwise; or
-
He himself considers Islam not to be just, when it comes to killing people.
If he chooses 1), he will reduce his credibility to a pile of pants on the floor in front of all; if he selects 2), he will reduce his credibility to a pile of pants on the floor, especially to many Muslims. Hence, his original statement will be considered to be absurd. Q.E.D.
The moral of the story is that any Muslim who claims to protect Islam, by protecting Muslims who have commited terrorism, simply for the sake of public imagery, is favouring injustice over justice, and in the eyes of the vast hordes of Muslims, favouring injustice at the expense of Islam.
Being a British Muslim, although irrespective of my personal religious beliefs, I strongly feel that most Muslims should actually have reacted to this terrorist incident in exactly the same way, as they would have done, if the act had been committed against them, irrespective of what the attitude of the “West” is perceived to be. Our duty is not to stand blindly by our people. Our duty is to stand by justice.
