I’ve been a long time reader of Tariq Nelson and have recently benefited from the writings of brothers AbdurRahman and Charles. These writers focus on issues mostly relating to Black American Muslims (BAMs), such as the BAM identity, marriage/divorce, education, American politics, and so on.
One of the points that they are all in agreement upon is the rampant racism against BAMs found in the immigrant communities and the need for BAMs to finally step out of the shadow and create their own identity. These brothers are a testimony to the (relatively) new direction that BAMs are taking in redefining themselves and their role in the socio-political landscape of America. Their call for self-empowerment within the Muslim community and determination to create their own space is long overdue.
I commend them on this most laudable of efforts.
Having said that, I hope this effort is not carried out at the cost of relations with the immigrant community. That is why I was disturbed to see this recent post by Br. AbdurRahman where he expressed his criticism of Uncle Tom (my description, not his) BAM’s, who have sold out their people, and the immigrant American Muslim community who they supposedly serve. Please read his piece as well as my comment which I have reproduced below:
------
AA- Abdur-Rahman,
Thanks for the background. I must admit that as I was reading your post and your understanding of the dynamics between the immigrant community and the BAM community, I immediately thought about the way Malcolm X viewed the politics of the civil rights movement, where the white establishment handpicked and vetted the black leaders who were approved to deliver a controllable ideology.
Does that sound about right?
But then my second thought was to question your suppositions. While no one can deny the outright racism that exists in the immigrant community against the BAM community, am I being naïve to suggest that talk of a conspiracy to subjugate the BAM is a bit too much?
Of course there are problems between the various communities, but to talk of a conscious effort to suppress the BAM voice is taking it to a paranoid extreme, IMO
I agree that the BAM voice needs to be heard and included in the larger American Muslim conversation (and simultaneously developed outside of that conversation, similar to the Arab and Pakistani communities who are forging their own identities).
I agree that the immigrant community had a role in advocating the ‘Just Muslim’ attitude that has stifled the growth of the BAM and resulted in a general identity crisis.
I also agree that for too long, the immigrant community has hijacked the dialogue within/out the American Muslim community and that a balance desperately needs to be achieved.
But a conspiracy? Really? Do you believe that accusations of a conspiracy are productive towards redressing these wrongs? Instead of working constructively, your approach comes off as a tad bit negative.
------
I understand that the dynamics of this troubled relationship are very complex and multifaceted, but they need to get addressed in a proper manner. I readily acknowledge that an element of the solution necessitates that each community carry out internal programs to the exclusion of the other, but there must be a joint effort between both sides to build/maintain bridges and keep the channels of communication open. I fear that comments such as Br. AbdurRahman's reflect an attitude antagonistic towards such joint efforts.
If the two communities ignore each other while trying to empower and enable themselves, the soil is fertile for the weeds of animosity and hostility to creep into the fruits of any future endeavors.
WAW
2 days ago
17 comments:
as-salaam alaykum,
Br Nameem,
I agree with you and hope that animosity does not develop. However, I see three major points of division forming.
1 - Working in the local community. I think that the good news is that this barrier is being broken.
2 - Immigrant Muslims will have to be more assertive against store owners that sell haraam goods in minority communities. This is an issue for all of us...not just blacks and Latinos.
2 - While we can all agree that the Palestinians are in a horrible situation, most BAMs will not agree that it is somehow "Islamic" to blow up and maim women and children - whether they are Jewish or otherwise. There is a hard line drawn on this issue. If you condemn terrorism, then you are with the 'Zionists'. We are basically being told that we MUST follow the company (read: Hamas) line on this issue and there is no room for disagreement. Those who follow this thinking are also usually those who forcefully try to tell us to drop activism in the 'kaafir' community as well.
Having said all of that, I don't think that there is any conspiracy of some sort against BAMs. All of these are just growing pains and I feel that we will eventually work it out, insha Allah
Thanks for the good mention brother. I've seen you out there a bit too.
I certainly hope that when people read my articles on BAM self-determination they don't think I want complete and infinite seperation. I think you know that. But it is a real fear of many that we are calling to disunification when in fact, we are seeking unity through maturation.
Conspiracy theories? Not so much, but as an academic I do have major issues with BAMs outright acceptance and promotion of 'Sunni' Islam. I see evidence of many different interpretations having a more lasting impact on BAMs and I don't think BAMs have been open to them nor do I think the immigrants of yesterday or today care to venture out to discover the vastness of Muslim scholarship beyond their own company.
AA- Tariq,
I appreciate your comments. However, I'm not sure I agree with your call for Immigrants to 'be more assertive' against the sleezy corner-shop owners indulging in Haram. Where is the correlation except that the two groups share a nationality?
So CAIR and ISNA must step up and take the burden of correcting the misguided actions of their immigrants brethren, who more often than not are barely associated with their local masjids, much less those national groups??
That makes as much sense as asking me to be more assertive against those carrying out terrorist attacks, just because I happen to share their faith.
I have nothing to do with them in the same way that immigrant muslims have nothing to do with these crummy store owners - except in the rare case where said owner is an active member of the community, but from my experience in Baltimore, that was never the case.
Not sure what exactly you are asking of the immigrant community in this case.
Tariq,
One further note to my last comment. I have never bought into the argument that Muslims must be loud and very public in their denunciations of terrorist attacks. Such a tactic reeks of apologetics and Muslims who are innocent of this extreme ideology need not apologize for it.
That's the logic I'm using with the immigrant store owners and the immigrant Muslim community who has nothing whatsoever to do with their haram activities.
Asalaamu Alaykum brother,
"I have never bought into the argument that Muslims must be loud and very public in their denunciations of terrorist attacks."
I can respect that position. I have often asked officials this: does the possibility exist that by condemning Muslims who promote or engage in terrorism, we inadvertently make their blood halal? That question is peppered with my academic and personal self. I have not reached a full conclusion nor has anyone I've asked.
I cannot speak for Tariq but I must say that though it may seem people are being a little hard on certain organizations to speak out and act against the store owners, we must realize that sometimes culpability is not bought but is also assigned. Accountability is the new dance here and in other countries. On one hand, if you do not feel responsible, I cannot make you responsible. On the other hand, to a degree, I can assign a perceived responsibility even though it might be based entirely on spin.
I do concur; it is erroneous to associate all Blackamericans with drug abuse or peddling because some in a certain age demographic engage in such activities, but how do law-abiding Blackamericans combat that perception? Should they act silently alone?
"So CAIR and ISNA must step up and take the burden of correcting the misguided actions of their immigrants brethren, who more often than not are barely associated with their local masjids, much less those national groups??"
In some cases the store owners aren't involved in any community and in other cases they are. Even if they are not involved in the community it does not mean their actions are right. I for one would love to see CAIR and ISNA go away. They are both played out. What concerns me is that what you and I know as perception is what too many Americans' believe to be true about Muslims.
So do we step out against these stores or do we remain silent?
I think I see one major issue about the growing dialogue and that is: Muslims are talking primarily about Muslim-affiliated stores when we should have been talking about all of these establishments in poor areas a long time ago. If you have read some of my writings you will see I am big on Muslims becoming human; that is to say, taking on the problems of humanity, secular and religious.
From my personal experience I can say this; my parents and sister live in a neighborhood with two of these corner stores at the entrance. They sell and do it all brother. If you name it, they do it. How do people in the neighborhood view them? They view them as Muslims. As my brothers. I can't go home to that neighborhood and speak about Islam because the people there look to those store owners as Islamic examples. And that is the crux.
If we don't do something people are going to start taking matters into their own hands. It is not right but it will happen. I'm from 'da hood'. I know what people are saying and thinking and I don't want it to play out that way so what do you suggest?
Now, so that it doesn't seem like I'm being abrasive, I would like to ask you what direction you think the dialogue between indigenous Muslims (read White and Blackamerican) and immigrant and GEN II should proceed in? That question does not pertain to stores either.
If you were here in the States what would you add to the discussion?
AA- Charles,
Thank you for your insightful comments. You've given me quite a bit of food for thought. I'm working on a proper response. In the meantime can you explain what you meant here:
"I do have major issues with BAMs outright acceptance and promotion of 'Sunni' Islam. I see evidence of many different interpretations having a more lasting impact on BAMs"
Thanks bro...
"I do have major issues with BAMs outright acceptance and promotion of 'Sunni' Islam. I see evidence of many different interpretations having a more lasting impact on BAMs".
This is a book brother but I'll try to provide a short response. Basically, BAMs moving into mainline 'Sunni' Islam created a sense that that interpretation was the only interpretation and/or methodology. At some point in our development, and possibly the development of immigrants and GEN II as well, we began stating and accepting from history that we were Sunni because we adhered to the Sunnah. Outside of Quraanists, who doesn't? Even today my Muslim students find it hard to inspect their assumptions. When I ask them to go beyond the 'Ahl Sunnah' slogan, they then proceed to following the Four Caliphs, but when we examine the accounts, some of my students backpedal, asking more questions.
Coming from other movements, BAMs needed a methodology consistent with what they were experiencing as they moved into the mainline. 'Sunni' Islam stipulated that ijtihad was by-and-large closed or at least that it was not necessary to apply one's self in one's own time to ijtihad. 'Shia' Islam, (some schools anyway) held that ijtihad was continually open and even each believer had to strive to a degree, to seek holy application of the text.
BAMs, many of whom were coming from the Nation of Islam, were getting accustomed to a logical approach to religion and God in an attempt to move away from the 'spookiness' attributed to Christian Jesus. Mutazilite rational would have been well received in the late 70s but was not incorporated by anyone at that time.
In addition to the above, BAMs lacked exposure to Muslim people who had similar family tradition and customs. Let me explain: we are a matrifocal or matriarchal people and have been for quite some time, yet the application and interpretation of Islam we find among the majority of BAMs is, with regard to family, inheritance, leadership etc, quite ill-advised. We lack competent men to promote a patriarchal setup but we have many capable women. So placing our women behind us or in a another role falls short of what we need in our community. That does not mean any interpretation existed to fix this, but it is to say that one has not been sought.
I will say this. If a more vast interpretation of Islam had been introduced as BAMs entered the mainline, we would have had these conversations a long time ago instead of now. For example, many Shia imams wrote extensively of the need to learn and understand Quranic Arabic but BAMs were not introduced to this concept until late and are presently 30 years behind. I am not saying Sunni scholars didn't talk about the need, but it wasn't elevated to the degree Shia scholars elevated it. That has severely hurt us.
Lastly, I do not promote Shiite or Sunni Islam, or some other, as a cure-all but try to bring good points to the attention of people so that we can build on what they set before us. I don't believe in the Deobandi/Naqshbandi "here is the sweet, now you eat it". I believe in making it sweeter so others can do the same.
Br Naeem you wrote:
I appreciate your comments. However, I'm not sure I agree with your call for Immigrants to 'be more assertive' against the sleezy corner-shop owners indulging in Haram. Where is the correlation except that the two groups share a nationality?
Here is what I mean. When the general community organizes to ban (or limit) the sale of alcohol, porn or other haraam, the Muslims should join in (and even LEAD) such efforts rather than remaining silent. Often the store owners are fighting to keep selling the haraam and their faces become visible in promoting it. Plus, people on th street will OFTEN ask: "why don't you guys say anything about your brothers selling that poison in the neighborhood?" It looks like hypocrisy. This not only goes for immigrant Muslims, but Muslims of ALL backgrounds.
My experiences have shown that some of these guys give money to the masjid and/or have family that are involved in the community and feel that they are in a 'catch 22' and do not want to speak out. One of them got angry at a group of us on this issue and shouted "how do you expect us to speak out against our cousins?!"
On the terror issue, it is because the lunatics are using Islam as THE pretext for this nonsense. It is different from random acts of violence committed by Muslims. I don't see this as apologizing. It is clarifying. If we all remain silent, then we allow the maniacs to speak for Islam when they release their videos and other insane rants
If someone asks me from the media or otherwise, I will be very clear in my denunciation of it. These half hearted answers have only made the issue linger. "Well 9/11 was bad, but..."
I feel that we must condemn it regardless. Ditto the store owners. Triangulation and trying to appear to be righteously above the fray does not work. We just don't live in a vacuum and the silence will be seen as approval.
Look at it this way. If someone from my family (God forbid) robbed a bank and announced relentlessly and constantly that he did it in the name of the Nelson family, what do you think people would think if we all just decided to remain silent on the issue?
Which is a better answer:
1 - When asked we say "no comment"
2 - When asked, we say "he is out of his mind, he acted alone and we have NOTHING to do with this and do not appreciate him bringing us into his crap"
AA- Charles,
"But it is a real fear of many that we are calling to disunification when in fact, we are seeking unity through maturation."
I'm very glad to read that. Dare I suggest that this point needs to be doubly hammered and made clear to all parties – maybe even ramp up joint efforts to solidify this concept that unity is not being threatened by maturity?
"On the other hand, to a degree, I can assign a perceived responsibility even though it might be based entirely on spin."
You bring up a good point, one that Tariq constantly alludes to, namely the *perception* of association and responsibility, and the need to constantly respond to this pereception.
But in such cases where the perception is based on spin, should not the spin be called out and debunked as opposed to accepting the misdirected association/responsibility and constantly apologizing for it?
"I do concur; it is erroneous to associate all Blackamericans with drug abuse or peddling because some in a certain age demographic engage in such activities, but how do law-abiding Blackamericans combat that perception? Should they act silently alone?"
Using your example to build my argument, should the law-abiding BAM community be asked to employ extra efforts in rejecting, denouncing, and thwarting the illegal activities of drug-dealers (some of whom may be BAMs)?
I don't believe so, but according to Br. Tariq's logic, it stands to reason that the BAM community must step up and do something about this problem.
According to Br. Tariq's logic, if said criminals are carrying out their activities in the immigrant Muslim community, the immigrant Muslims are justified in asking the BAM community to assert themselves to rid the immigrant community of this plague?
I can see where the two communities can join forces and help each other, but the BAM community has no inherent responsibility against the drug-dealers, simply because those criminals may happen to be black.
"So do we step out against these stores or do we remain silent?"
Of course we all condemn these store-owners. No one, in their right mind, would ever suggest turning a blind eye to their illegitimate activities. But to give this issue some sort of primacy is misplaced. There are so many more foundational issues that must be addressed before we can reach the level of confronting these peripheral issues (as important as they are – I'm not diminishing the harm caused by these store-owners, just trying to put issues in perspective).
Major issues such as education, unemployment, racism b/w the communities, empowerment, domestic vs foreign policy, and so on are good starting points.
"I for one would love to see CAIR and ISNA go away. They are both played out."
I find such a weighty statement by yourself to be quite problematic. As an academic, you are expected to be more in-tune with the roles played by these organizations and how they can be developed and enhanced. I do believe that we need to add more varying voices to the circle of AM leadership, but to carelessly wish for these orgs to simply 'go away' is a bit imprudent and doesn't serve your objectives well, IMO.
"Muslims are talking primarily about Muslim-affiliated stores when we should have been talking about all of these establishments in poor areas a long time ago. If you have read some of my writings you will see I am big on Muslims becoming human; that is to say, taking on the problems of humanity, secular and religious."
Excellent point Charles! I'm actually using your post on this very topic as fodder for a future post.
As Salaam Alaikum,
I just wanted to say I found the civility of the conversation refreashing. there are so many blog discussing that sink to disgusting levels but this conversation (thus far) has given me renewed hope.
I found myself bouncing between Tariq and Nameem's stance dependingon the situation. These issues clearly aren't so black and white, so which path to take requires extra consideration.
I hope the discussion continues in this manner.
Brother Naeem, I didn't forget to clarify what I mean by seeing ISNA and CAIR "go away" but I will in the near future. Just wanted you to know I'm not dodging it brother.
To Hijabisoverrated: I don't believe you will see impolite dialogue here.
AA- HijabisOverrated,
Thank you for the kind words. And I believe this is a conversation that really needs to take place...as constructive as possible. I'll be posting some more stuff on this oft-neglected topic, IA-
@ Hijab is Overrated:
I just want to clarify that I am not saying that we should condemn each and every single terrorist attack done by a Muslim or Muslim group, but that we should make our position very firm and clear - especially when asked. I cringe when I see Muslims on the news doggedly refuse to denounce a terror attack without even offering what Br Naeem has suggested (I had nothing to do with it so why should I denounce it?)
Good productive dialogue, I learned something new from this post and the responses!
Salaam brother,
I wanted to come back to this dialogue for a number of points I think need to be added on my part. Let me add one before my kids go crazy.
As to placing emphasis on the Muslim community in America to put pressure on Muslim-owned liqour stores, I'd like to add two maxims to the conversation. That of removing harm (al-darar yuzal) and hardship must be alleviated (al-'usr yajlib al-taysir). Both principles are represented in the traditional schools of thought, including Jafari and Zaydi. We must also add to this, the responsibility of a Muslim in the social contract even where non-Muslims may not be the best pristine guiding lights. In an attempt to preserve the religion, communities, and children, Muslims of every order in the US at some point, have to recognize the many factors which contribute to harm among them and their non-Muslim brothers. While it should not be the sole purposes of CAIR and of ISNA to fight these businesses alone, BAMs and others are rightly concerned that the two major organizations supposedly representing 'Muslim' interests in the country have failed to address some of the most glaring issues between Muslims and non-Muslims. ISNA is still ranting about how much 'Islam means peace'. I guess that leads to my heavily-tinged opinion of ISNA and CAIR.
Having worked ISNA for several years, I know they still have not considered issues Americans face here indiscriminately. That is hard to deny. For many Muslims and not just BAMs, ISNA appears to be little more than an immigrant (all too often, Pakistani and Indian-American) organization and this was its purpose years ago; for those two groups to do dawah and promote an authentic Islam. Nothing wrong with that intention at all. But today, ISNA is not prepared to encounter its most formidable foe; the youth. Even as BAM attendance has decreased, so has youth attendance and not without good reason. In discussing the convention (which is what ISNA is largely known for) the seminars are largely repetitive and very seldomly delve into substantive issues in traditional thought or American maladies. ISNA hasn't even addressed drug abuse intervention on a platform yet. Its been more of topic-in-passing. ISNA has constantly done your 'favorite' thing by trying to condemn every terrorist act but never address some of the valid complaints of both Muslim terrorism or of other American dissidents. On another front, I am totally at odds with the status-quo position of circumventing women in leadership but ISNA basically pulled the EOE card over the last eight years without allowing the minority-heads to direct the organization. Dr. Ingrid Matteson is proving to be little more than what my Shaykh Muhammad Nur Abdullah was for ISNA and she is outstandingly bright and talented. ISNA may not 'go away' but it certainly needs to take a good look in the mirror because its leaving the 'Islamic Society of North America' behind literally. I will come back for CAIR.
Post a Comment