David Horowitz and Robert Spencer Justify Their Islamophobia by Claiming It Doesn’t Exist

by Sheila Musaji

“Islamophobia: Thought Crime of the Totalitarian Future” by David Horowitz and Robert Spencer is an attempt to perform a magic trick.  Their strategy seems to be something like - We have been accused of being Islamophobes, but that can’t be true because there is no such thing as Islamophobia.  I don’t think that they have been successful in their attempt to “disappear” this particular rabbit.

The World Jewish Congress noted that in May of 2011 In Brussels, leaders of Islamic and Jewish communities from several European countries today presented a joint declaration to the presidents of the three main European Union institutions. Ahead of a meeting of European religious leaders representing all major faiths in Europe, Bosnian Grand Mufti Mustafa Ceric and Brussels Chief Rabbi Albert Guigui handed the document on behalf of the 33 signatories to Commission President José Manuel Barroso, European Parliament President Jerzy Buzek and European Council President Herman Van Rompuy.  The declaration says in part:

“Bigotry against any Jew or any Muslim is an attack on all Muslims and all Jews. We are united in our belief in the dignity of all peoples” and urges “all Europeans of conscience to put a stop to any group that espouses racist or xenophobic ideologies long before they are in a position to gain legislative or other power. We must never allow anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, xenophobia or racism to become respectable in today’s Europe. In that regard, we call upon all political leaders not to pander to these groups by echoing their rhetoric.”

“We remember together the horrors that took place on this continent in the 1940’s - a campaign of mass murder, unique in history, which resulted in the annihilation of one third of world Jewry in the Holocaust. That atrocity and others, such as the mass killing of Muslim civilians in Bosnia-Herzegovina during the 1990s, resulted from the triumph of racist and xenophobic ideologies that demonized those that they targeted.”

David Horowitz obviously was not pleased about this development as he published an article by Phyllis Chessler Equating Anti-Semitism With ‘Islamophobia’ on his Front Page magazine site which railed against this interfaith effort and statement and said Anti-Semitism cannot, must not, be equated with Islamophobia.  She also expressed horror that the holocaust and the Bosnian genocide were mentioned as if they were in any way equivalent.

Horowitz has often written and spoken out against anti-Semitism.  For example, here are the titles of just a few Horowitz articles:  — Ron Paul Is A Vicious Anti-Semite and Anti-American and Conservatives Need To Wash Their Hands of Him ** — The Anti-Semitic Jihad On Campus: My Night at USC ** — Suicidal Jews and the Anti-Semites They Ignore (and Sometimes Embrace) ** — AAUP and AJC Support for Anti-Semites on Campus **

Horowitz has also accused many individuals of racism. 

He obviously understands that there is such a thing as prejudice towards a particular group of people based on religion, ethnicity, race, etc.

Suspicion of, hatred towards, fear of, or discrimination against a group of people because of their ethnicity, race, religion, or any other trait connected to their heritage and stereotyping all members of a group based on the actions of some members of that group, claiming that the group is inferior has been called by many different terms.  When it is directed at a race - it is racism, when directed at foreigners - it is xenophobia, when directed at Jews - it is anti-Semitism, when directed at Muslims - it is Islamophobia.

All of these forms of prejudice and bigotry are wrong and must be resisted and countered by all decent human beings.

If someone wants to argue that the actual word being used to describe any of these forms of bigotry and prejudice is not the “right” word, they can do so, but to deny that prejudice, racism, or anti-Muslim sentiment exists is laughable.  The bottom line is that no matter what word you use to describe bigotry, it is still bigotry.  Whether you call it Islamophobia, anti-Muslim prejudice, anti-Muslim bigotry, or any other term, it still describes a very negative and destructive trait or belief system.

David Horowitz and Robert Spencer have just published a pamphlet titled “Islamophobia: Thought Crime of the Totalitarian Future” which is over 70 pages of denial.

They argue that the term “Islamophobia” is an attempt to silence freedom of speech, to label any criticism of Islam a “thought crime”.  They say the term itself was created by a Muslim Brotherhood front group.

They cleverly insert all sorts of anti-Muslim insinuations, carefully worded so as to be able to claim that “that isn’t what we meant”.  For example, this gem:  “Islam is often defended as a religion no different from Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism and most other faiths.  But this overlooks the fact that unlike other modern faiths, Islam is a political religion. Islam has had no reformation since its founding in the 7th Century, and Muslims recognize no separation between religion and state. In its canonical texts and teachings, Islam regards all other religions (and non-religions) as “infidel” creeds, and instructs believers to regard themselves at war with those who will not submit to the Muslim God. Unlike Christians or Jews, Muslim leaders seek to establish a global Islamic state or “caliphate” that would impose Islamic law on individuals everywhere and thus criminalize heretical thoughts.” 

Islam is often defined as a religion like other religions, BUT and then they give their personal interpretations of what Islam is as if those interpretations are a fact and disprove the definition of Islam as a religion.  In case anyone misses their point they make it again a little later:  “Because the tenets of Islamic belief are not open to question, and because as a religion Islam prescribes moral behavior for every aspect of individual and social life, Islamic law – sharia – is by its very nature totalitarian. A religion that recognizes no principle of separation from governmental authority, whose prescriptions dictate what is proper for every aspect of private life is the very definition of totalitarian rule.”

The pronouncement that “the tenets of Islamic belief are not open to question” is true only in the Madhab of Horowitz and Spencer.

Islam (and therefore Muslims) are not like other religious groups, and Islam (and therefore Muslims) are by their “very nature totalitarian”.  Obviously these are dangerous people who are not like other people, and in fact a danger to “us”.

They object to the term “Islamophobia”, and to the most commonly used definition of that term which was developed by the Runnymede Trust in England.  They call the Runnymede Trust, a “leftist group”.  They do quote the basics of the definition fairly:

Under the Runnymede definition, Islamophobia includes any one of these eight components:
1. Islam seen as a single monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to new realities.
2. Islam seen as separate and other – (a) not having any aims or values in common with other cultures (b) not affected by them (c) not influencing them.
3. Islam seen as inferior to the West – barbaric, irrational, primitive, sexist.
4. Islam seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism, engaged in ‘a clash of civilizations’.
5. Islam seen as a political ideology,
used for political or military advantage.
6. Criticisms made by Islam of ‘the West’ rejected out of hand.
7. Hostility towards Islam used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society.
8. Anti-Muslim hostility accepted as natural and ‘normal’.”

But then, they attack the definition by saying that “It serves their primary goal, which is to conflate criticisms of some Islamic doctrines and opposition to Islamic terrorists with attacks on Muslims as such.    Thus critics of Islam’s relegation of women to second-class citizenship are labeled anti-Muslim even though they are defending Muslims, and opponents of Islamic terror are called Islamophobes.    There is no mystery as to how the Runnymede principles will be interpreted. They have already been used to condemn every critic of the Islamic oppression of women, Islamic support for suicide bombings and other acts of terror, and of Islamic intolerance. Such critics are Islamophobes.”

Actually, this is utter nonsense.  Muslim individuals and groups themselves have spoken out and continue to speak out about these issues, and against extremists within the Muslim community.  Muslims have also allied with members of other faith groups to work on addressing issues such as women’s rights, interfaith relations, minority rights, etc. 

It is also ironic, because the definition of what constitutes Islamophobia is the same definition that would apply to anti-Semitism - just substitute Judaism for Islam.

Spencer and Horowitz simply throw out charges that many different reports about Islamophobia by Muslim and non-Muslim organizations “smeared” them unfairly.  CAIR, FAIR, the New York Times, SPLC, CAP, etc. anyone who has identified their very particular form of anti-Muslim speech for what it is are smearing them unfairly.  Interestingly, they are selective in their accusations and for example, don’t mention statements about Islamophobia by the ADL and other Jewish organizations or individuals who have also noticed the remarkable similarities between Islamophobia and anti-Semitism and other forms of prejudice.

Spencer and Horowitz respond to a statement that “Muslims are being targeted by a campaign of defamation, denigration, stereotyping, intolerance and discrimination” -  by saying there have been fewer hate crimes against Muslims than there have been against other groups, and by pointing out that there have been at least 6 crimes originally reported as hate crimes by Muslims that turned out to be untrue. 

Actually, defamation, denigration, stereotyping, intolerance, and discrimination can exist whether or not the end result is actual violent hate crimes.  Although, the more these bigoted attitudes are present, the more likely it will ultimately come to violence against the targeted group.  And, many individuals from different groups have attempted to cover criminal activity by falsely claiming a hate crime.  In fact, Horowitz himself is all too aware of at least one such incident when he published an article about a “Princeton University student who claimed he had been assaulted because of his conservative views. The Sun article reported that Francisco Nava, “leader of the Anscombe Society, a morally conservative student group that speaks out against same-sex marriage and pre-marital sex,” claimed he was attacked by two men two days after he and other members of the Anscombe Society “received death threats via e-mail.” Horowitz was quoted in the article saying: “It’s a terrible incident, but it doesn’t surprise me. ... The left has now become the hate group.” The very same day, however, the Sun updated the story, reporting that Nava admitted to police that “he fabricated the assault, and that he sent e-mail death threats to himself, three other Princeton students, and a prominent conservative professor at Princeton.”  source

Spencer and Horowitz say:  “Therefore, the left has sponsored the creation of “hate crime” laws as precursors of the desired blasphemy laws. “Hate crime” claws [sic] are by their very nature crimes against thought. A crime of violence is a crime whatever the motivation. Making it a “hate crime” merely criminalizes the alleged motive.  The very term “Islamophobe” has roots in leftist political jargon, as a variation on the term “homophobe.” But “homophobe” is itself a coinage derived from similar categories – “racist” and “sexist” – which the left has detached from any meaning other than disagreement with its own agendas, and which it has then deployed to stigmatize and silence its critics. Islamophobe is but the latest of these weapons.”

So, the same Horowitz who himself has called out individuals and groups for being anti-Semitic or for being racist, and called particular events hate crimes, now is opposed to the concepts of “hate crime laws”, and of the terms “racist” and “sexist”.

How is it possible that to call a statement anti-Semitic is perfectly reasonable - but to call a statement anti-Muslim or Islamophobic is a weapon against free speech, or an attempt to stigmatize and silence critics?  Using the term Islamophobia is no more an attempt to accuse someone of commiting a thought crime than is using the term anti-Semitism. 

I have seen no calls by anyone to take away the right of free speech from Horowitz or Spencer, or any of their Islamophobic cronies.  They are welcome to say any hateful or crazy thing they want within the law.  However, that doesn’t mean that those of us who see their speech as hateful and bigoted cannot also speak freely and tell them so.  In fact, it is a moral obligation to do just that.

It is no longer socially acceptable for individuals to make openly racist or anti-Semitic statements publically.  Most people know that they will be called for their racism and bigotry, and that is what needs to happen with Islamophobia and anti-Muslim prejudice.  They need to know that decent people don’t consider such speech acceptable, and won’t let it pass unremarked.

SEE ALSO:  [A short list of articles on the parallels between anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.  Type anti-Semitism or Islamophobia into the TAM search engine for many articles]

David Horowitz and the Freedom Center, http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/david_horowitz_and_the_freedom_center and Robert Spencer and Jihad Watch http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/the_politically_incorrect_guide_to_robert_spencer/  (our TAM Who’s Who in the Islamophobia entries on Horowitz & Spencer with background and article collections)

A Who’s Who of the Anti-Muslim/Anti-Arab/Islamophobia Industry http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/a_whos_who_of_the_anti-muslimanti-arabislamophobia_industry

Anti-Semitism Through the Lens of Islamophobia, Sumbul Ali-Karamali http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/anti_semitism_through_the_lens_of_islamophobia

Antisemitism and Islamophobia, Chip Berlet http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chip-berlet/antisemitism-islamophobia_b_184904.html

Antisemitism = Islamophobia, Leslie Hazleton http://accidentaltheologist.com/2011/03/08/anti-semitism-islamophobia/

Anti-Sharia Movements’ Unintended Consquences For Jews, Native Americans, and Others, Sheila Musaji http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/anti-sharia-movements-unintended-consquences

Christian Brotherly Love Difficult For Some To Attain http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/christian_brotherly_love_difficult_to_attain

The day hate became everyone’s problem, Abraham Foxman http://www.huffingtonpost.com/abraham-h-foxman/the-day-hate-became-every_b_942645.html?ir=Yahoo

Holocaust cartoon and hate speech double standards, Sheila Musaji http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/holocaust_cartoon_vs

Instructive Parallels between Christian anti-Semitism and Islamophobia, Paul Williams http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/instructive_parallels_between_christian_anti-semitism_and_islamophobia 

Islamophobes Attack CAP Fear Inc. Report - More Sound & Fury Signifying Nothing, Sheila Musaji http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/islamophobes-attack-cap-fear-inc.-report-more-sound-fury-signifying-nothing

Islamophobia and Anti-Semitism: Mechanisms of Exclusion and Discrimination, Claudia Mende http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/islamophobia-and-anti-semitism-mechanisms-of-exclusion-and-discrimination

Islamophobia does have consequences, Sheila Musaji http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/encouraging_hatred

Islamophobia:  Real or Imagined - TAM article collection http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/islamophobia_real_or_imagined

Jewish “Ahavah shel achvah” Brotherly Love is Difficult for Some to Attain http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/jewish_ahavah_shel_achvah_brotherly_love_is_difficult_for_some_to_atta

Muslims Who Fought Against the ‘Real’ Fascists, Sheila Musaji http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/muslims_who_fought_against_the_real_fascists

The new anti-Semitism, Daniel Luban http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/43069/the-new-anti-semitism-2/

Religion and violence: another look at Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, Hussein Ibish http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/religion_and_violence_another_look_at_islamophobia_and_anti-semitism

Statement Of American Muslim Imams And Community Leaders On Holocaust Denial & anti-Semitism http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/statement_of_american_muslim_imams_and_community_leaders_on_holocaust_denia

Where the Anti-Muslim Path Leads, Anya Cordell http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/where_the_anti-muslim_path_leads