Pro-empire Muslim accommodation fails to win even a seat at the table

Evidence

What this controversy demonstrates is a dynamic in which Far Rightwing and liberal Islamophobia act as mutually reinforcing ideologies that serve to bolster empire. “Good” Muslims like Rauf and Khan, who had proposed the Islamic center and who believed that support for the war on terror would give them a seat at the table and therefore the ability to push back against Islamophobia, were sidelined. Moreover, the Obama era saw the rise of anti-Muslim racist groups driven not only by contempt for the first black president (and according to segments of the Far Right, first Muslim president), but also as a backlash against the shift to liberalism and multiculturalism within establishment politics. The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups, reported that the number of anti-Muslim groups tripled in 2011. … The report attributed this growth to a few key events, including what it called the “fever pitch” of Islamophobia during the Ground Zero Mosque controversy the previous year. Thus, the Far Right was able to consolidate its rhetorical victory in the form of a proliferation of organized racist groups. — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 675

Categorization

  • XREF: Directly feeds the reader’s MOC thread on why every fix (including collaboration with power) fails — the Rauf/Khan accommodated-good-Muslim path is a concrete instance of the co-optation loop described in ch12. — connects to: Muslim inclusion within empire does not dent racism, so anti-prejudice remedies fail — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of…, 90; Pro-imperial Muslim collaborators get sidelined while both racisms bolster empire; Empire produces anti-Muslim racism which in turn sustains empire (+3 more)
  • ADDENDUM: Supports the ‘Grafting & Growth’ claim set only loosely; stronger as supporting material extending the chapter’s argument that good-vs-bad Muslim framing tracks support for empire.

Broader Connections