As we bid farewell to 2007, it’s important to look back on three separate events that, taken together are significant, but went largely unreported.

A video surfaced on the Internet, showing two masked Russian neo-Nazis with two hostages, one from Tajikistan and the other from Dagestan. With a swastika flag waving in the background, one of the hooded men proceeded to saw off the head of one victim. The video ends with the two killers extending their arms in the classic Sieg Heil. Then, during a visit to Israel, Jewish billionaire and “philanthropist” Sheldon Adelson, head of the Republican Jewish Coalition, promoted a DVD about Islam, along with donating 60 million dollars to the Taglit-Birthright Israel project that brings young Jews to Israel for free. As one Taglit organizer told Haaretz:

“He talks with the participants about the dangers that Israel has to deal with and the risks from radical Islam. “He passed out copies of a documentary on how Islam is spreading in the West.” Last, Pope Benedict XVI’s secretary and close adviser, Msgr. Georg Gänswein, reportedly called on Europe to defend its Christian identity against the Muslim immigration onslaught. According to the Associated Press, Gänswein said, “Attempts to Islamize the West cannot be denied. The danger for the identity of Europe that is connected with it should not be ignored out of a wrongly understood respectfulness.” In the same vein, Daniel Pipes, an American  “scholar” dubbed by the Council of American-Islamic Relations as the nation’s leading Islamophobe, wrote about a “campaign of intimidation,” suggesting an Islamist-inspired movement to silence any criticism of “radical Islam.” The campaign will go on, Pipes said, “until Westerners either do submit or Muslims realize their effort has failed.” The reality? There is a robust Islamophobic movement of various ideologies and agendas united by their fear and hatred of Islam and the presence of Muslim communities in their midst. As a movement, they’re not a single, cohesive unit that operates from some unified command or leadership. Rather, it’s the vanguard of a growing consensus within Western political culture identifying an enemy that poses either an existential threat or a strategic threat, depending on whom you ask. Irregardless of a particular political position, the Islamophobic movement is a collection of political parties and organizations, think tanks and “intellectuals,” that’s tapping into the large reservoir of prejudice that filled to the brim after 9/11. A movement of opportunists, they take advantage of the current socio-political climate to make money and promote their ideas, where institutionalized racism and popular prejudice is the order of the day and hating Muslims incurs many rewards and few penalties. It can be roughly broken down into  three ideological/ethnic groups: the Jewish/pro-Israel wing; the Christian rightist wing; and the nationalist-fascist wing. In addition, there are two broad “policy” categories — colonial and exterminationist. 

The colonial category consists of those differentiating between “radical” and “moderate” Islam, and believing that it’s “radical Islam” —not Islam itself — that’s the problem. They believe that through colonial intervention, i.e. regime change, occupation and covert action, Islam can be “modernized” or, in reality, emasculated. In other words, Islam is fine as long as it’s under control; “radical Islam” is Islam out of control. When Islam is out of control, it’s a threat to American and Western strategic interests: when the “moderates,” as they call them, gain the upper hand, then the threat is neutralized and it’s business as usual. Those in the colonial category believe that there’s a war of ideas and that the West can win. A long and bloody war is what they offer, and they justify it on the grounds that it’s our identity and way of life that’s at stake. Adherents to this include Daniel Pipes, Samuel Huntington, Steve Emerson, Bernard Lewis, Norman Podhoretz and the neoconservative movement. According to the second category — exterminationism — the problem isn’t “radical” or “moderate” Islam, but the religion and its community themselves. Islam, in fact, isn’t viewed as a religion, but as an expansionist political movement. As Gregory Davis, producer of “Islam: What The West Needs To Know,” wrote in his book, “Religion Of Peace?”: “Islam is an alternative form of government in competition with Western governments that seeks to weaken and, ultimately, replace them.” The logical outcome of this line of thought is genocide, ethnic cleansing, or something else along those lines. If Muslims aren’t part of a religious community, but an “alternative form of government,” instead, then Muslims cease to be civilians; they become soldiers. This type of revisionism is not only false, it’s  dehumanizing as well, creating an atmosphere conducive to atrocities by converting ordinary people into “enemy combatants.” Included among this group are Davis, Walid Shoebat, Robert Spencer, Diana West, Ann Coulter and the Jewish/Israeli far right, including but not limited to Kahanism. Much of the Christian right also belongs in this category, especially the Millenialist wing, which calls for destroying the Al-Aqsa Masjid and rebuilding the Temple to usher in the End Times. This includes Pat Robertson and the Christian Coalition, Gary Bauer, John Hagee, etc. It also includes the nationalist-fascist scene, especially European neo-Nazi groups like the British National Party, Nationaldemocratische Partei-Dutchlands, or NPD and the Belgian Vlaams Belang, to name a few. Whether playing on racial fears, promoting Israel’s interests or moving forward a Christian theocratic program, the Islamophobic movement advances an inverted reality where Islam is threatening a complacent West; they claim to offer a worldview that will summon the political will to combat this existential threat. The reality of course, is quite the opposite; the Muslim world — including the diaspora — is the one facing the potential existential threat. Just look at Israel’s destruction of Palestine, the European colonization of North Africa and the U.S. occupation of Iraq! Given that the Islamophobic movement wants to take this paradigm a step further in a world where anti-Muslim prejudice is mainstream and backed up by movies like “300,” we should treat this movement like the existential threat that it is. The problem is that many of us don’t. Polite discourse and non-confrontational protest is the order of the day, and this movement that seeks our destruction fully takes advantage of this to organize and spread their oppressive ideology to the masses. In Jan. 2007, Walid Shoebat brought his “3 ex-terrorists” circus to Ann Arbor, preaching his exterminationist view on Islam to an auditorium packed full of admiring sheep bleating their approval. The only opposition was organized by Students Allied For Freedom and Equality, a campus group whose response was to file out of the auditorium in the middle of the “lecture.” What that was supposed to accomplish, I’m not sure, but  allowing Shoebat to go on unhindered only emboldened him and his fans. Later on in October, Nick Griffin of the BNP made an appearance on Michigan State University’s campus during “Islamofascism Awareness Week,” where he was supposed to give a talk on the dangers of the “Islamization” of Europe. A raucous demonstration greeted him, with one vital component missing — the Muslims. The Muslim Student Association was rumored to be there, but they were a no show. Why? Because, according to the head of Michigan CAIR, they were advised not to show up in order to preserve what he called “Islamic etiquette.” Here we are faced with two assaults on our existential well being and this meek reaction is all we could muster. In order to effectively counter racism and protect our place in society, we not only have to first examine the nature of those who oppose our freedom and existence — and democracy — we also need strategies and leaders who will take this to heart and act in our best interests. Otherwise, we’ll be forced to admit failure without having made any effort.