*On the Political Participation of Muslims

A couple days ago, I went to a seminar on 'The Political Participation of Muslims in Britain and France.' The speaker provided a great historical context post WWII. With the waves of immigration into the UK and France, many immigrants from South East Asia, Africa, and other regions of the world with a predominant Muslim background.

During the 50's and 60's the working conditions for immigrants were deplorable. Long hours, stuffed in worker hostels, minimum wage, and gradually increasing rent with no increase in pay. This was a time of exploitation and undermining the immigrant population as sub-human workers. There is much to be said in analogy to the U.S. of African-Americans post slavery, the waves of immigrant workers from Europe, and Asia. From my own background I know that many of the first Koreans that migrated to the U.S. were promised better working conditions, they were sold the "American Dream" only to come to America as sugar cane workers who worked 18 hour days, minimum wage, and stuffed into rooms with several other workers. Indentured servitude was the way. Come work for us while you pay off your debt in the costs we used to bring you here. The Korean women were brought over as mail-order brides, objects of property, the new house slave. In the UK and France, these were primarily the south east Asians of India and Pakistan.

Eventually, protests emerged. They banned together for better working conditions and economic injustice. They were racially profiled and derogatory names were called. Interestingly enough, nothing was mentioned about their religion. They themselves did not consider it as a religious issue either. In fact, many did not agree with much of the practices of their religious background. Just like many do not agree with some of the practices and values of their Christian background, many of the immigrant workers were similar. They banned together against economic injustice. Later as the years went on, further protests were held regarding race and the prejudice that continued to be aimed towards them. They considered themselves "politically black" as they identified with the Black panther movement in the U.S.

It is not until recently that religion has come to the forefront. Where religion was considered a non-issue before it has been singled out. What is argued is that since religion was given the spotlight as a point of emphasis in difference, many have become more and more religious and "Islamic." Protests are held now in the name of religion. Much of this can be considered as obvious social reasons. When initially male workers came to these countries and began working, it was not much concern other than the color of their skin. As their families came, wives, and children, the apparent differences in dress and style become more apparent. This furthered the curiosity about the immigrants and religious differences began to creep up.

However, another side of the focus on religious differences can also be considered as a by-product of over-sensitizing language and a product of power. With respect to the first, race and color has become an increasingly sensitive issue and practically taboo to mention race. There is an underlying subconscious fear of being labeled racist or imperialistic, colonialist, or whatever the label for oppressor might be. And because of this sensitization and the tremendous back-draw politicians would receive if they called out a group by color, the dynamics of power has adapted to exclude the issues of race. They have masked the term into other categories and other labels. One way of focusing and creating a common enemy, as a method of mobilizing consent and power, has been the focus on religion. This was not done with the Christians when they bombed abortion clinics, committed hate crimes against homosexuals, but radically quick to create an association of fear with the religion of Islam. 9-11 was one of those mobilizing forces. And although the collection of evidence and the ensuing information that has come to light after the event where further suspicion has been placed, the effect was already accomplished. By utilizing the character of Osama bin-Laden, an out-group enemy was created. The tremendous rage and anger from the collapse of the twin towers in America is an example of creating an in-group dynamic, a bandwagon, a team USA.

Religion is now at the forefront rather than color or worker's rights. This is not to say that the issues of race and the working class has disappeared. But rather they have subsided under the hype of terror and the group of people associated with that label. What the past does indicate is that with the sensitization of language, and as we begin to see a sensitization with religion, it will be curious to see what the new labels for creating an out-group dynamic will be as power-mongering and manipulation of the masses for it continues to perpetuate its culture. One other interesting thing is the return of worker's rights and their protests. Their issues have never truly died down. We see the anti-globalization movement, which emphasized the economic hegemony that has come to be dominating the world markets. Getting rid of the local corner store and the rise of McDonald's and Starbucks. In America we see the occupy movement that has gained ground in protesting against income inequality and the greed of Wall Street. How CEO's get paid salaries that most could never dream of making in their life time. How we have fallen into a debt culture and we are bound by a system of forever paying back our debts. This raises the question of cyclical patterns of protest and emphasis; issues with the nature of governance, economy, social justice, and the creation of out-groups to mobilize a discourse of power.

What this does tell us, at the very least, is the impact that language has on creating social groups and even in effect pushing stances further from a common public sphere. It could be argued that the recent rise in Muslims and a rise in its conservative form is a product of linguistic sensitivity. A hypothesis that language and evolving discourse shapes and molds the way society functions.