MSA Faculty Advisor Responds to Geert Wilders event

I attended the presentation by Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders on Temple’s Main Campus on Tuesday 20, October labeled “Dutch Parliamentarian presentation on free speech.” Granted, he did speak on the concept of free speech, however, it came over as a mere ruse in an effort to spew his hate and anti-Islam, anti-Muslim rhetoric. This became very evident by the questions the students raised; seventy-five percent of whom apparently did not agree with the “message” that he was spreading. Mind you, I am not saying that they did not agree with the concept of free speech, as it is something that many of us – Muslims and non-Muslims place a high premium on – but they did not agree that the concept that free speech should be used as a guise for hate speech.

The one benefit is that I got to see his “docudrama” without having to pay for it; for that I say “thank you” to Horowitz and the on-campus organizers. I attended hoping to take down significant points that would be refuted during the MSA’s pre-planned “Peace Not Prejudice Week” scheduled for the first week in November. The timing was rather appropriate. The challenge, however, is that the things Wilders highlighted and picked out were identified by he himself and by other students as a misrepresentation of the whole. He attempted to validate his scare tactic by saying that he separates Muslims from Islam. This statement was made early in the speech, and at this point it was evident that anything that would follow would be as fallacious and misinformed as the previous statement. For us Muslims, the ideology of Islam is what defines us. Anyone who attempts to make a distinction between Islam and Muslims demonstrates a lack of understanding of what Islam is and what being a Muslim means. We get our title of Muslims because we have adopted Islam as our way of life. To claim that there is “no such thing as moderate Islam” is to discount the fact that Muslims are encouraged in the Qur’an that this is a religion of balance and moderation and that we are encouraged by the Prophet to seek a balanced way and not be too extreme. To remove Islam from a Muslim is like removing jelly from a doughnut and still calling it a jelly-filled doughnut (used the Euro spelling here for relevance). In essence, you cannot have a problem with Islam and not have a problem with those who adhere to Islam.

Muslims, like many others, deplore when people who have political or social agendas use religion as an excuse for inflicting harm and pain on others. All of the national Muslim organizations, professors, and those who other Muslims refer to as apologists (yes, we too have different viewpoints – and that is allowed) have repeated this time and time again. Historically people have killed other people, suppressed viewpoints and attempted to silence others because they disagree. Many of the world’s leaders who have transformed people have been assassinated because others were intolerant of their views. This is a human condition, not an Islamic one. Discrimination is not innate or endemic to Islam. It is endemic to an intolerant worldview – very akin to the worldview Wilders and Horowitz espouse.

Wilders made two other significant generalizations that further discredit his repertoire as a person knowledgeable about this subject. First, as one student aptly pointed out, he is confusing culture with Islam. The two emotionally sensitive practices he mentioned were female circumcision and honor killing. These two practices, once again, are tribal and cultural practices that are not sanctioned by Islam. Something that is akin to honor killings, killing female children, is something that Islam prohibited centuries ago. The mindset of a man who decides to kill his daughter or sister because she was raped is not present because of Islam, but is present because of his personal and myopic view on the concept of family honor. Wilders argues that because this happens in a Muslim area, that it is Islam that sanctions it. Do we then accept that because apartheid or colonialism or slavery was practiced by a predominant religion, that that religion sanctions it? Muslims do not even make such a misrepresentative claim.

Wilders then went on to criticize President Obama, who mind you, is not above critique. However, to criticize Obama for creating more understanding and fostering peace raises the question of who is really the more dangerous person. Would he criticize others who sought to foster peace with Muslims in the same manner, and would he assert that they are weak? Gandhi – attempted to create more peace between Indians and Muslims. King, did not agree with all the views of the Muslims of that era, but did not try to malign them. Malcolm X, in his later days, tried to foster greater ties and collaboration between Muslims and non-Muslims. I guess these transformational leaders are also weak and misinformed. Extremist views are not endemic to Muslim societies, nor are they alien to the so-called Western countries. Extremist, intolerant and xenophobic leaders have emerged in the Middle East, Asia, Israel, UK, US and obviously now in the Netherlands. Wilders’ assertion that his party’s popularity is a clear indication that he is not spreading hate and is not intolerant is a circular argument that requires us to be gullible enough to believe that intolerance and free speech infringement are only present in a particular part of the world.

It was refreshing to see Temple students demonstrate to Wilders and Horowitz that intolerance, irrespective of how it is cloaked, is unwelcomed. Horowitz attempted to couch the hate speech espoused by Wilders in the belly of an academic institution under the cloak of allowing students to be “completely informed” and with the hope of “eradicat[ing] ignorance by being able to support other views.” It is interesting that Horowitz HIMSELF prevented one student from speaking at the event after the student said that his response “will not be only five seconds.” Furthermore, the organizers pulled the microphone from the last student who challenged Wilders’ credibility as someone spreading valuable information. It would do Horowitz and Wilders well to do some research before coming to a research institution. The good thing is that they got the opportunity to learn firsthand why Temple has been heralded as one of the most diverse campuses. Temple might have some of the lowest tuition in the region, but this is one case in which you get a lot more than what you pay for.

Thank you to Temple students for making your voices heard, and thank you to Temple administration for reassuring all parties involved that they can continue feeling safe and welcomed at Temple.

Quaiser Abdullah
MSA Faculty Advisor