Part 2
Since I lasted posted on the subject of Islamophobia I've noticed a marked and worrying increase in the use of the term, particularly by politicians and so-called journalists, who wish to confirm their politically-correct, multicultural and 'woke' credentials by making unsupported and undefined accusations of anti-Muslim prejudice towards their political rivals and ill-prepared interviewees.
This is noticeably true of politicians on the left and interviewers working for the mainstream media, especially those employed by the BBC, who inevitably use the accusation of Islamophobia as a supposed counter-balance whenever anyone accuses those on the left of anti-Semitism. This was clearly evident this morning (November 9th 2019) on The BBC's Today Programme, when the accusation of Islamophobia was levelled at the Conservative Party as a counterweight to a criticism made of the Labour Party for anti-Semitism.
What is surprising is the apparent acceptance by most commentators that the two accusations are somehow morally equivalent and that anti-Semitism and Islamophobia are both well defined and understood to be examples of bigoted prejudice against race and religious belief. However, such an assumption is patently false. Anti-Semitism has a very long and well-documented history spanning thousands of years and its consequences are well known and well understood. Islamophobia on the other hand, is a relatively recently invented word, designed to suppress criticism of Islam by labelling all those who question its religious claims and its culture as racist bigots. This is clearly intended to deflect attention from the truth concerning Islamic history, doctrine and actions. The term is also misleading in a linguistic sense. A 'phobia' is defined as an irrational fear, but it's abundantly clear from the barbarous slaughter of innocents perpetrated by Islamist fanatics that fear of Islam cannot and indeed could not in good conscience, ever be categorised as irrational.
Recently, there have been misguided attempts to define Islamophobia so as to make it possible to criminalise legitimate criticism of Islam and so shut down debate regarding the ongoing threat it poses to the continuation of Western civilisation and freedom of speech. An attempt to introduce into European countries Islamic blasphemy laws presents a grave danger to us all and unless vigorously resisted, could result in a serious diminution of our hard-won liberties and cultural freedoms.
No person, no group, no organisation, no political, religious or temporal authority should ever be granted the legal right not to be offended. The legal right to be offensive is the cornerstone of freedom of speech and is necessary for individuals to be able to think and express themselves without fear of judicial punishment. Everyone must have the right to think what they like and to say, or write what they think.
Everyone, but particularly the young, must have the right to criticise bad ideas. Indeed, I would go further and argue that people have a civic and social responsibility to challenge all ideas and opinions which advocate harm to others, or which spring from assertions of truth and validity offered without good and demonstrable supporting evidence. This would include all claims to truth made by faith-based organisations. Thus, all statements made from the standpoint of divine revelation or claims to know the wishes of an imaginary deity must always be challenged in the most rigorous manner possible.
I would advise all individuals, or organisations who are ever accused of Islamophobia to insist that their accusers define precisely what they mean by the term and what specific evidence they possess to support their accusations and further, to explain why such evidence proves that the individual or organisation has broken the current law. For, all attempts to make criticism of any so-called religion a criminal offence must be challenged and defeated if we are to preserve our right to live in a free and libertarian society.
Accusations of an ill-defined term like Islamophobia only serves the interests of those who desire to diminish our established freedoms and make criticism of Islam seem like xenophobic racism, when such a position is totally untenable, due to the fact that Islam is not a race and therefore, any criticism of it, or ridicule of its doctrines can not be defined as motivated by racism. All such false accusations must be called out and subjected to critical analysis of the accuser's loyalties and motivation.
In conclusion, all people and organisations must never give a free pass to sloppy politicians and biased journalists who throw around accusations of Islamophobia as though there were an agreed public consensus as to its meaning and an accepted societal view that it represents a bigoted state-of-mind. We must insist that fear of Islam is not irrational and that criticism of all its stated beliefs and doctrines is not only permissible but necessary in any truly free society.
What is surprising is the apparent acceptance by most commentators that the two accusations are somehow morally equivalent and that anti-Semitism and Islamophobia are both well defined and understood to be examples of bigoted prejudice against race and religious belief. However, such an assumption is patently false. Anti-Semitism has a very long and well-documented history spanning thousands of years and its consequences are well known and well understood. Islamophobia on the other hand, is a relatively recently invented word, designed to suppress criticism of Islam by labelling all those who question its religious claims and its culture as racist bigots. This is clearly intended to deflect attention from the truth concerning Islamic history, doctrine and actions. The term is also misleading in a linguistic sense. A 'phobia' is defined as an irrational fear, but it's abundantly clear from the barbarous slaughter of innocents perpetrated by Islamist fanatics that fear of Islam cannot and indeed could not in good conscience, ever be categorised as irrational.
Recently, there have been misguided attempts to define Islamophobia so as to make it possible to criminalise legitimate criticism of Islam and so shut down debate regarding the ongoing threat it poses to the continuation of Western civilisation and freedom of speech. An attempt to introduce into European countries Islamic blasphemy laws presents a grave danger to us all and unless vigorously resisted, could result in a serious diminution of our hard-won liberties and cultural freedoms.
No person, no group, no organisation, no political, religious or temporal authority should ever be granted the legal right not to be offended. The legal right to be offensive is the cornerstone of freedom of speech and is necessary for individuals to be able to think and express themselves without fear of judicial punishment. Everyone must have the right to think what they like and to say, or write what they think.
Everyone, but particularly the young, must have the right to criticise bad ideas. Indeed, I would go further and argue that people have a civic and social responsibility to challenge all ideas and opinions which advocate harm to others, or which spring from assertions of truth and validity offered without good and demonstrable supporting evidence. This would include all claims to truth made by faith-based organisations. Thus, all statements made from the standpoint of divine revelation or claims to know the wishes of an imaginary deity must always be challenged in the most rigorous manner possible.
I would advise all individuals, or organisations who are ever accused of Islamophobia to insist that their accusers define precisely what they mean by the term and what specific evidence they possess to support their accusations and further, to explain why such evidence proves that the individual or organisation has broken the current law. For, all attempts to make criticism of any so-called religion a criminal offence must be challenged and defeated if we are to preserve our right to live in a free and libertarian society.
Accusations of an ill-defined term like Islamophobia only serves the interests of those who desire to diminish our established freedoms and make criticism of Islam seem like xenophobic racism, when such a position is totally untenable, due to the fact that Islam is not a race and therefore, any criticism of it, or ridicule of its doctrines can not be defined as motivated by racism. All such false accusations must be called out and subjected to critical analysis of the accuser's loyalties and motivation.
In conclusion, all people and organisations must never give a free pass to sloppy politicians and biased journalists who throw around accusations of Islamophobia as though there were an agreed public consensus as to its meaning and an accepted societal view that it represents a bigoted state-of-mind. We must insist that fear of Islam is not irrational and that criticism of all its stated beliefs and doctrines is not only permissible but necessary in any truly free society.
