A recent Viewpoint published in the Apr. 4 edition of the Tufts Daily expressed concern over the maltreatment of Muslims and Arabs in America ("Victims of Fear"). Primarily decrying the alleged state of fear under which Muslims and Arabs are forced to exist, the opinion piece also accused the government of alleged rights violations.
Though well-intentioned, this Viewpoint not only fails to advance its cause of falsifying stereotypes, but also serves as a gross example of the faulty thinking of the politically correct and socially oversensitive.
The Viewpoint has two overarching themes. First, it attempts to expose the abuse of Muslims and Arabs in America as an urgent issue, which stems from associations that Americans have with these groups due to recent terrorist acts. Second, it highlights the problems of stereotyping and the fact that the vast majority of Muslims are moderates who reject the notions of radicalism and fanaticism that seem to dominate the media. With regard to its objectives, the Viewpoint and its writers not only mislead readers, but also do so without any warranted examples to support their assertions.
In expressing anger at the violation of the individual rights of Muslims and Arabs, the article fails to give specific examples of widespread discrimination, bias or prejudice. Rather, the writers inexplicably compare the treatment of Muslims and Arabs to that of Japanese-Americans during World War II.
Devoid of any facts to back up this argument, this claim is offensive for two reasons. First, it insults the intelligence of readers in assuming that they will fail to see the difference between the unjust internment of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and the condition of Muslims and Arabs in America. Second, it trivializes Japanese-American internment by comparing it to something far less grave.
The only defense of this analogy is a brief reference to a professor who was imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay and later released. However, the Viewpoint fails to reconcile how this is the modern day equivalent of mass internment. While ideally, no one innocent would ever be prosecuted or imprisoned under the law, mistakes occur.
With that said, one example of a wrongly imprisoned individual under the Patriot Act does not translate into widespread rights violations, nor does it explain why the government would waste time, money, resources and space in an effort to discriminate against innocent people. If anything, it is the international perception of our Guantanamo Bay prison and the failure of the administration to articulate its role that mar this country.
This is not to say that there has not been an increase in anti-Islamic and anti-Arab sentiment in this country, and it is not to deny that Arabs and Muslims in America have been faced with an unacceptable rise in discriminatory behavior. However, the ignorant and wrongful actions of a few do not equal the widespread rights infringements that the Viewpoint seems to imply.
Instead of focusing on the large-scale oppression of Muslims and Arabs which widely takes place at the hands of other Muslims and Arabs, these writers chose the easy route. Rather than looking to Iraq, where fanatics use violence to quell the democratic hopes and voices of moderates, and to Iran and Saudi Arabia, where the governments oppress millions, this Apr. 4 Viewpoint turns the other cheek and looks towards America.
The writers subsequently ask why Americans didn't react to whites after the Oklahoma City bombing in the same manner they have reacted to Arabs and Muslims since the Sept. 11 attacks. In responding to this discrepancy between American reactions to different forms of terrorism, it's essential to take an honest look at the world in which we live.
Arguably, the greatest external security threat to America is terrorism. This terrorism is rooted in the Middle East, teaches a brand of perverted Islam that is rapidly growing in popularity and is predicated upon the destruction of "infidels" (i.e. Americans, Europeans, Jews, Christians, Hindus and even Muslims who do not agree with a fascist doctrine). And, unfortunately, the face of this terrorism is a face that is both Arab and Muslim. Whereas the actions of Timothy McVeigh represent an isolated manifestation of a mad man's embrace of fundamentalist Christianity, each action of radically Islamic terrorism is another link in a long chain of anti-Western violence stretching back 20 years.
It is this unfortunate reality that links to the complaint that moderate Muslims are falsely portrayed as a minority. The writers imply that this is the fault of the foreign media and ignorant Americans. While this may be partially true, this outlook denies reality yet again. As the majority, it is the responsibility of moderate Muslims and Arabs to distinguish themselves from those who corrupt their regions and their religion.
While this may not be perfectly "fair," only they can change the images of Islam and Arabs across the world, just as they are the ones who must ultimately create environments hostile to radicalism and terror. To achieve their goals, moderates cannot passively oppose stereotyping in this country-they must actively fight its sources abroad.
Although the Apr. 4 Viewpoint is sincere in theory, it symbolizes the type of thought that is detrimental to society and the individuals who compose it. While we must be careful not to forfeit the rights and ideals that we as Americans value, we must also be wary of prematurely defining them as forfeited.
Moreover, we must not shy away from looking at the world through an honest lens. While it may be easier at times to divert our attention away from veritable threats and onto ourselves, we cannot afford to do so. To defeat our enemies, we must first recognize who they are. And, upon doing so, we must all play a role in staving off the internal division on which they so necessarily depend.
Matthew Ladner is a freshman who is undecided about his major.
