Written
May 20, 2010
These past two
years have been particularly weird. I've been spending a lot
of time trying to counter something that I thought common
sense could address alone, but many are holding on for dear
life. Perhaps, it's because the proponents of such a program
were right all along?
Why is there
such an obsession by some in the Muslim community to adopt a
“Youth De-Radicalization” program? I can’t stop wondering
about this question since the loaded concepts of ‘homegrown
terrorism’ and ‘radicalization’ have been pounded into the
public psyche by the likes of Daniel Pipes and Stephen
Emerson – two of the biggest Islamophobes on the planet. Why
are we so preoccupied with giving credence to such sloppy
theories? What makes Islam so different from other religions
that we somehow require such a program?
I can’t help but
still be surprised when I hear that another well-known
figure in the Muslim community, someone that does command
significant attention for whatever reason, has jumped on the
Pipes/Emerson bandwagon. Now this pseudo-discussion has been boxed
in even more: What model should we follow?
No one is
denying that there should be efforts to curb the mindset
that can lead someone to terrorism or other violent acts.
That should be a given. Nevertheless, recognizing that
something must be done does not mean adopting a one track,
obsessive, ignorant and poorly constructed, mindset.
Despite my
hesitancy to adopt the loaded language, I will take the
approach that some are so overly-obsessed with long enough
to offer some suggestions. If the community does choose to
adopt a “Muslim Youth De-Radicalization” program, it should
stay within these parameters:
i. To
avoid the lone-gunman approach, the religious explanation,
of terrorism – particularly, its roots.
ii. To
recognize the fact that there have been a tremendous effort
from the Muslim community already (since Muslims came to
Canada!) to properly inform youths about Islam through our
Islamic schools. This effort alone suffices to address this
so-called “problem”.
iii. If
we are to ask for government funding, to ask for our schools
under the premise of properly educating youths about Islam
and not under the premise of curing the ills of “Muslim
Youth Radicalization” or other loaded and sloppy concepts.
We just want to better our schools even more.
What are the
things that can be avoided if these are adopted?
i. The
oversimplification of the “roots of terrorism”
(particularly, putting it mainly in ‘religious’ terms) and
what type of responses is necessary to address “terrorism”
or in our participation in the so-called “War On Terror”.
Thus, the social and political roots can be addressed –
particularly, the inconvenient facts of this so-called “War
On Terror”.
ii. The
acceptance of a sloppy and prejudiced framework of
discussion imposed upon the community by those outside of
it. Ones with questionable methods and intentions.
iii. The
risk of centralization and dominance of one group (ie. way
of thinking/ideology) on the “De-Radicalization Process”.
Therefore, it will be a true community initiative and
dialogue, not a witch-hunt.
iv. The
adoption of the biased approach that Muslim youths are
somehow more inclined to violence and radicalization (thus,
should be feared) as
opposed to a white kid coming across Nazi skinhead
propaganda on the internet.
So which model
do we follow? There’s an easy answer to that: an honest one.
