Closed views treat Islam as a monolithic, static bloc with no internal diversity

Evidence

This view suggests that Islam is seen as a single monolithic bloc where Muslim diversity is overlooked both in terms of differences between Muslims and also between Muslims and non-Muslims. Muslims are also seen to be static and unresponsive to new realities and challenges. Sweeping generalisations insist that the negative attributes and characteristics of a few become projected onto all Muslims without differentiation: ‘any episode in which an individual Muslim is judged to have behaved badly is used as an illustrative example to condemn all Muslims without exception’. Over-simplifying or ignoring the majority Muslim experience, such projections draw particular attention to the term ‘fundamentalism’ and its use in the media as an inappropriate marker of identification. — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 365

Categorization

• DEFINE: Lays out the ‘closed views’ of Islam half of the Runnymede typology in detail.
• XREF: connects to: Essentialized views of Islam make any Islamic reform a betrayal of the essence; The closed views typology targets Islam as identity rather than Muslims as people — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 367; Islamophobia operates by reducing Muslims to a monolithic bloc — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 433 (+5 more)

Related

• Essentialized views of Islam make any Islamic reform a betrayal of the essence (similarity 0.90)
• The closed-versus-open views of Islam dichotomy anchors the Runnymede model. (similarity 0.89)
• The closed views typology targets Islam as identity rather than Muslims as people (similarity 0.88)
• Homogenizing Islam as a monolithic culture anchors all Othering frames (similarity 0.87)
• Runnymede defines Islamophobia as closed views of Islam (similarity 0.87)
• Runnymede’s core aim is countering monolith views of Islam (similarity 0.87)
• Perceiving Islam as monolithic and static drives most Islamophobia (similarity 0.86)
• The Runnymede Report redefined Islamophobia around closed views of Islam (similarity 0.86)
• The 1997 Runnymede Commission already distinguished open from closed views of Islam. (similarity 0.85)
• Runnymede’s eight closed views form an internally inconsistent typology (similarity 0.85)
• The Runnymede Report’s definition shifted within its own pages toward closed views (similarity 0.84)
• The Runnymede Report’s definition of Islamophobia shifted and changed within its own pages. (similarity 0.83)
• The Runnymede definition conflates Islamophobia’s effects with its core (similarity 0.83)
• Islamophobia should be analyzed as power-relations rather than as error about Islam. (similarity 0.83)
• The Runnymede model itself reduces Muslims to Islam as a common denominator. (similarity 0.82)

Broader Connections

• Islamophobia operates by reducing Muslims to a monolithic bloc #corroborates (0.95) — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 433
• Perceiving Islam as monolithic and static drives most Islamophobia #expands (0.90) — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 53
• The monolithic Islamic mind is a projection, not a reality #expands (0.85)
• There is no biological or ethnic basis for a monolithic Islam. #corroborates (0.80) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 162
• Orientalist dissenters defended Islam’s internal diversity against essentializing stereotypes #corroborates (0.75)