Maryam Namazie from the Council of Ex-Muslims on uncritical attitudes to Islamism and Islamists from parts of the left.
The politics of the pro-Islamist Left is a politics of betrayal.
It’s a betrayal of the dissenters and victims of Islamism but also of the very principles that the Left has historically defended (from social justice, egalitarianism, secularism, universalism, and human liberation, including from religion).
This Left uses multiculturalism, charges of racism and Islamophobia, and anti-imperialism, amongst others to defend the far-Right political Islamic movement.
Multiculturalism and Cultural Relativism
The Pro-Islamist Left relies on multiculturalism (not as a positive lived experience but as a social policy and political point of view) to deny the existence of dissent by pigeonholing innumerable individuals with innumerable characteristics into one imagined homogeneous grouping: ‘the Muslim community’ or ‘the Muslim world’. And since it is those in power that determine the dominant culture, this point of view sees Islamist values and sensibilities as that of ‘authentic Muslims’.
In fact, ‘Muslims’ or those labelled as such include secularists, ex-Muslims, atheists, free thinkers, women’s rights activists, LGBT campaigners and socialists.
Conflating Islamism with Muslim is a narrative peddled by Islamists in an attempt to feign representation.
Contrary to how it’s viewed, regressive Islamists are given authority as ‘community leaders’ not because they actually represent the ‘Muslim Community’ but because of their access to the state, political power and their links with the political Islamic movement. Multiculturalism is a cheap way for the state to outsource social control.
Clearly, the ‘Muslim community’ is not synonymous with Islamism any more than English is synonymous with the English Defence League or Christian with the Christian-Right.
Ironically, like the far-Right which ‘despises’ multiculturalism yet benefits from its idea of difference to scapegoat the ‘other’ and promote its own form of white identity politics, the post-modernist Left also uses multiculturalism to defend cultural and moral relativism and side with the oppressor.
To accept the Islamist narrative that Muslim equates Islamist is to hand over countless individuals to the political Islamic movement and to ignore the dissent, political, social and civil struggles and class politics.
This conflation means that those who challenge Islamism are accused of cultural imperialism and orientalism because the pro-Islamist Left has bought into the culturally-relativist notion that societies in the Middle East and North Africa (and the ‘Muslim community’ in the west) are ‘Islamic’ and ‘conservative’. Whilst those in power determine the dominant culture, there is no one homogeneous culture anywhere. Those who consider opposition to the veil or Sharia law as ‘foreign’ and ‘culturally inappropriate’ are only considering Islamism’s sensibilities and values, not that of the many who resist.
Only those who see their rights and lives as separate and different from those deemed ‘other’ and who have bought into (or are selling) Islamism’s narrative can see solidarity and the demand for equality in this warped way.
In fact, this politics doesn’t merely ignore dissent, in many ways it forbids it. The likes of StWC, Socialist Workers Party, Unite against Fascism, Islamophobia Watch, and Respect Party or Ken Livingstone and George Galloway are there as prefects to silence dissenters and defend Islamism as a defence of ‘Muslims’. There are many examples to show that they equate Muslim with Islamist.
In responding to those opposing its alliance with the Muslim Association of Britain (which is understood to be a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood), the StWC’s leadership Andrew Murray and Lindsey German have written:
Anyone remotely acquainted with the British trade union movement will be aware that neither sexism nor homophobia are uncommon in its ranks. […] woman can be subjected to more crude sexist behaviour than they might be likely to encounter within the Muslim Association of Britain. No one would suggest that an anti-war movement should have no truck with trade unionism until its ranks are 100 percent cleansed of such behaviour. Yet this is good enough as a stick to beat Muslims. Such attitudes indicate a form of racism, a desire to hold their organisations at arm’s length for the flaws which are, in some measure, tolerable in ours.
The comparison is absurd. The difference of course is that the ethos of the trade union is not anti-woman, its ethos does not say that apostates should be killed or as the head of the MAB said recently at a debate with One Law for All that women should be stoned to death. StWC’s alliance with the MAB is akin to aligning with the EDL and then saying that racism exists in the ranks of the trade unions too so why single out the English!?
Racism and Islamophobia
This pro-Islamist Left deems any criticism of Islam or Islamism as racism or Islamophobia. However, criticising a religion, ideology or political movement – far-Right or otherwise – has nothing to do with racism. In fact, Islamophobia is a political term used to scaremonger people into silence.
In some ways, these bogus accusations serve Islamism in the same way that Sharia law serves them where they are in power. It helps to threaten, intimidate and silence criticism and dissent. Charges of offence and Islamophobia are the equivalent of ‘secular’ fatwas. It is a warning by the powers that be of what is acceptable and what is not; of what is sacred and cannot and must not be challenged.
This is of course not to ignore that racism exists. Of course it does. But racism cannot be stopped by silencing much needed criticism of Islam and Islamism. Also as campaigner Rahila Gupta says: ‘Recent anti-racist alliances… reveal the capitulation of the left to the fascists within while organising against the fascists without. We should be sophisticated enough by now to construct a politics that is simultaneously anti-racist and anti-fundamentalist so that vulnerable groups like women, lesbians and gays and religious minorities do not get hung out to dry. As feminists we have been abandoned by those who should have been supporting our right to make ‘legitimate criticism’. They feel now, during the War on Terror, is not the right time. In a racist society, it is never the right time. When we expose the underbelly of our communities we are told that we are providing ammunition for racists. For us it isn’t a choice. We can’t hide one evil to fight another.’
Anti-imperialism and force of resistance
Fundamentally, this Left’s support of Islamism comes down to its affinity with Islamism, which it sees as a force of resistance against imperialism. If racism was its real concern, it wouldn’t support the blatantly racist notion of different and lesser standards and rights for those deemed ‘different’.
This Left is part of an anti-colonial movement whose perspectives coincide with that of the ruling classes in the so-called Third World. It is on the side of the ‘colonies’ no matter what goes on there. And their understanding of the ‘colonies’ is Eurocentric, patronising and even racist. To them the people in these countries (and the ‘Muslim minority in the West’) are one and the same with the Islamists they are struggling against. This is why StWC manhandles and expels anti-Iranian regime activists from its demonstrations and rejects resolutions that simultaneously opposes a war on Iran and the regime’s attacks on the working class and population at large. It sees Islamism as a force for resistance whilst it is nothing more than a regressive force for repression. But an enemy’s enemy is not necessarily an ally.
As Women Living Under Muslim Laws says:
Fundamentalist terror is by no means a tool of the poor against the rich, of the Third World against the West, of people against capitalism. It is not a legitimate response that can be supported by the progressive forces of the world. Its main target is the internal democratic opposition to their theocratic project and to their project of controlling all aspects of society in the name of religion, including education, the legal system, youth services, etc. When fundamentalists come to power, they silence the people, they physically eliminate dissidents, writers, journalists, poets, musicians, painters – like fascists do. Like fascists, they physically eliminate the ‘untermensch’ – the subhumans –, among them ‘inferior races’, gays, mentally or physically disabled people. And they lock women ‘in their place’, which as we know from experience ends up being a straight jacket…
What’s most ironic is that Islamism is a force that came into existence as a far-Right, anti-Left movement, supported by Western powers. It’s only after 9/11 that their relationship has changed and only to some extent. It’s still a close ally in helping to manage revolutions and rebellions in the Middle East and North Africa.
This politics of betrayal supports a far-Right movement that has slaughtered an entire generation in a place like Iran, that just recently assassinated socialist leader Chokri Belaid in Tunisia, and that shot 15 year old Malala Yousefzai in Pakistan for wanting education for girls…
Clearly, the Pro-Islamist Left’s politics of betrayal is just as inhuman as that of the far-Right. It’s particularly dangerous given that unlike the far-Right it has managed to gain portrayal in mainstream discourse as ‘progressive politics’.
Any principled position must oppose the far-Right of all varieties but also this pro-Islamist Left and rather side with universalism, equality for all, secularism as well as citizens and human beings, irrespective of beliefs.
Originally posted on Maryam Namazie's blog
Comments
http://freethoughtblogs.com/m
http://freethoughtblogs.com/maryamnamazie/2015/09/25/warwick-university-student-union-the-islamists-incite-hatred-not-us/
Maajid Nawaz called these
Maajid Nawaz called these leftists the "regressive left".
It has become rather odd to see the left denounce Ayaan Hirsi Ali using some of the most vulgar anti immigrant rhetoric, accusing her of making up her abuse because she lied about the timeline she arrived and in which country first, so she could get asylum. Apparently some segments of the left mirror Rupert Murdoch and fox news when the foreigner in question condemns Islam.
Another funny one is queers for Palestine, on a fierce "anti zionist" crusade against israel, where homosexuality is legal, supporting Palestine where people voted in a group who torture and kill gay and lesbian workers.
It seems like the left has adopted the stance that any criticism of Islamism detracts from what they see as the main evil, American imperialism and to denounce both at the same time is to detract from the other and thus objectively condone imperialism.
I can't see the gay and lesbian, atheist and other oppressed groups being oppressed by the majority Muslim societies in which they live being very appreciative of this fairly new stance. Some of the lefties on my facebook get more upset and spurned to action over a Charlie hebdo cartoon than they do over trying to do something to help Raif Badawi. Anyone who points this out is suspect for veiled hatred of Muslims, naturally.
Saw Maryam Namazie speak a
Saw Maryam Namazie speak a couple of weeks ago. She seemed pretty sound.
Serge Forward wrote: Saw
Serge Forward
She is a communist, she identifies herself as a "workerist communist" (whatever the f that is). She is a part of the commitee against stoning, which organises for womens rights, takes part in relief aid programs for refugees, is involved in the gay and women's rights movements in places like Iran, where it is dangerous to be so.
Yet all over the internet self proclaimed far leftists/Communists are calling her an islamophobe, a white supremacist and a hate speech figure because she condemns the ideology of islam, an organised religion that is part of the ruling system in many nations which oppresses and often kills the very people communists are supposed to be supporting.
How is this woman more hated on the far left than Hezbollah and Hamas?
Recke410 wrote: Serge
Recke410
Is it perhaps a reference to the "Worker-communist" parties of Iran and Iraq?
Recke410 wrote: Yet all over
Recke410
do you have examples of this?
jura wrote: Recke410
jura
yes, to the Iranian one ... there was a thread on them: http://libcom.org.libcom.org/forums/general/what-do-u-know-about-these-guys-18032013
Quote: How is this woman more
Because Anti-Imperialism. See for example:
Judith Butler:
“Ok, well, I would just briefly say: I think its imperative to figure out what the mechanisms are of the various lobbies in the US – the American Jewish Congress, the American Jewish Committee, the Anti-Defamation League – how they work to help to formulate US foreign policy toward Israel. I think there’s no question we need an honest, rigorous appraisal. I think there are some versions of it that strike me as perhaps a little too easily subscribing to conspiracy theories, and I think that there can be an antisemitic version, and there can be a really useful, critical version as well. I have no doubt it’s a very powerful lobby – I actually think of it as multifaceted – and I think we need more careful, rigorous analyses of it.
So you know the short answer is: one neither has to dispute the existence of such a lobby, or its power, to prove that one is not antisemitic; but neither does one have to accept every version of that, given that some versions are, I think, problematically bound up with conspiracy theories.
Similarly, I think: Yes, understanding Hamas, Hezbollah as social movements that are progressive, that are on the Left, that are part of a global Left, is extremely important. That does not stop us from being critical of certain dimensions of both movements. It doesn’t stop those of us who are interested in non-violent politics from raising the question of whether there are other options besides violence. So again, a critical, important engagement. I mean, I certainly think it should be entered into the conversation on the Left. I similarly think boycotts and divestment procedures are, again, an essential component of any resistance movement.”
jura wrote: Recke410
jura
It sounds like a Monty Python sketch group name.
Just while we were on the
Just while we were on the subject of Maryam Namazie, who is active in the muslim world, does anyone have any information of any kind of organising or a history of union struggle or secular movements in saudi Arabia?
I am currently reading path of blood, about Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and their attempt to ignite civil war in the Kingdom. The writer seems to make the case that the Saudi people are more devout and zealous in their religious belief than the state and that many Saudi's considered it verging on apostacy for allowing pictures, television and other modern reforms. He seems to also show that their was quite a high ammount of support for AQAP amongst the general population and the clerics.
If this is so I imagine there isn't much of a movement there, but if anyone has any book reccomendations or documentaries I would be very interested.
She is a member of the
She is a member of the Workers Communist Party of Iran
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker-communist_Party_of_Iran
Some writings of their founder and mentor
https://www.marxists.org/archive/hekmat-mansoor/index.htm
They define their socialism as:
She was recently centre of an attempt to ban her from speaking at a secular /atheist students meeting in Warwick university by its Students Union but i believe they have eventually relented to let her speak.
Read more at
https://tendancecoatesy.wordpress.com/2015/09/26/warwick-university-student-union-bans-feminist-marxist-secularist-maryam-namazie/
She upsets the SWP and their ilk on the Left by not ascribing to the theory that our enemy's enemy is our friend.
Black Badger
[quote=Black Badger]
Because Anti-Imperialism. See for example:
Judith Butler:
“Ok, well, I would just briefly say: I think its imperative to figure out what the mechanisms are of the various lobbies in the US – the American Jewish Congress, the American Jewish Committee, the Anti-Defamation League – how they work to help to formulate US foreign policy toward Israel. I think there’s no question we need an honest, rigorous appraisal. I think there are some versions of it that strike me as perhaps a little too easily subscribing to conspiracy theories, and I think that there can be an antisemitic version, and there can be a really useful, critical version as well. I have no doubt it’s a very powerful lobby – I actually think of it as multifaceted – and I think we need more careful, rigorous analyses of it.
So you know the short answer is: one neither has to dispute the existence of such a lobby, or its power, to prove that one is not antisemitic; but neither does one have to accept every version of that, given that some versions are, I think, problematically bound up with conspiracy theories.
Similarly, I think: Yes, understanding Hamas, Hezbollah as social movements that are progressive, that are on the Left, that are part of a global Left, is extremely important. That does not stop us from being critical of certain dimensions of both movements. It doesn’t stop those of us who are interested in non-violent politics from raising the question of whether there are other options besides violence. So again, a critical, important engagement. I mean, I certainly think it should be entered into the conversation on the Left. I similarly think boycotts and divestment procedures are, again, an essential component of any resistance movement.”[/quote]
Sorry, I am confused, is this your position or Judith Butler's? I take it you don't hold this position or regard hamas as progressive.
Hi Recke410, welcome to
Hi Recke410, welcome to Libcom. Why'd you chose a white Valknut for your avatar?
Flint wrote: Hi Recke410,
Flint
I love reading history books, ever since I was young the Germanic tribes were my favourite, I liked their Pagan religion compared to Christianity and how when most of them finally did convert they turned jesus into a warrior god, they carved him into stone holding a spear naked. I also love tattoo's and my favourite style is the all black full body Norse pattern.
I also like German culture, sports, heavy beer, tube shaped meats and what not. I assume you saw it and thought I must be a racist? I always use it as my avatar.
Recke410 wrote: I assume you
Recke410
I didn't assume anything. I asked.
radicalgraffiti
radicalgraffiti
I think the main culprit on the left would be the "we're all hamas and all hezbollah" SWP/STW/UAF wankers. This is hardly what most people on libcom would term "far left/communist" however. Possible reasons for their dislike of people like Namazie may be: a) my enemy's enemy silliness b) broad left anti imperialism / left nationalism sympathies c) to distance themselves as broad anti racists from those horrible right wing bigots who are always banging on about the hijab, halal meat and the new mosque on the block and d) to cynically recruit people from what they erroneously call the "muslim community" to UAF, STW and the SWP parent organisation.
It's shit politics. The left constantly conflates muslims or people connected in some way with cultures or parts of the world where islam has or had some clout and with islam as a belief system or islamism. Also, I suspect solidarity with Namazie or defending an LGBT person from somewhere where same sex practices are a capital offence may be unpopular with the target recruitment audience.
Serge Forward
Serge Forward
I feel obligated to point out left coms and Anarchists are much much less guilty of this than as Serge said, the SWP/UAF types are. George Galloway seems to be pretty into it too, along with most of his "socialist" followers, who glorify Iran, Cuba and "glorious martyrdom operation" where a bunch of power hungry old men trick gullable kids into blowing themselves up and Galloway creams in his pants.
Anyone remember when he was running in Bradford and he was posting leaflets saying he didn't drink alcohol or eat pork and called his election run the Bradford spring? I usually hate Jeremy Paxman but he was pretty funny when he pulled him on it. Galloway is such an opportunist twit.
On
On Saudi:
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=9465095&fileId=S0020859014000455
Quote: Sorry, I am confused,
That's pure Butler. I don't find anything progressive or leftist about Hamas or Hezbollah; they are religious obscurantists, and as such, hold no views I find compatible with self-organized resistance to capitalism, the state, or any other type of institutionalized domination/exploitation.
Interview with Maryam
Interview with Maryam Namazie
http://thecircleda.com/2015/10/09/show-120-maryam-namazie/
the Youtube channel run by
the Youtube channel run by her and her comrade Fariborz Pooya: https://www.youtube.com/user/BreadandRosesTV/videos
there was some valid criticism of her and the WP Iran's activities being focused too much on atheist propaganda and high-profile conferences with (sometimes dodgy) bourgeois secularists/atheists and critics of Islam which led e.g. to a split in the WP Iran in 2007/08 (among them Azar Majedi, Mansoor Hekmat's widow and leading speaker on women's issues of the org) but I think that they've learned the lesson e.g. when they did organize together with a few other groups the 2nd "Critical Islam Conference" in Germany in 2013 ... and their "Third Campism" is far less problematic than e.g. the one of the AWL
Flint wrote: Hi Recke410,
Flint
Because they're either fash or a fash sympathiser.
Im a lurker and i made this account purely to call Recke410 out. He was recently banned from Revleft for spouting EDL propaganda in this thread: http://www.revleft.com/vb/so-we-fucked-t194181/index.html
He was blaming muslims for vandal attacks despite having no fucking evidence...
Recke410 wrote: Quote: How is
Recke410 wrote:
Because she is seen as more of a competitor than they are, I suppose. For a start she is in the UK, which is where these organisations have their constituency.
While I would agree with the
While I would agree with the main thrust of the OP blog, i.e. the despicable "anti-imperialist" my-enemies-enemy-is-my-friend politics of the SWP and their alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood and footsie with Hamas, etc, etc, there are still problems with Namazie and the Hekmatiarists in general. In essence the problem is that the very thing they start off denouncing - i.e. the equation of Muslim and Islamist, is the one thing they themselves do repeatedly, and, I would argue, for rather cynical, mercenary motives.
The first para here is correct. The second para rather symptomatically omits any mention of non-Islamist believing or practicing muslims from the "included" list. And the third paragraph is misleading. Actually there is such as thing as Islamophobia, even if the term is abused by the likes of Respect, SWP, etc. That is the creation of an undifferentiated mass "muslim menace" that amalgamates ordinary muslims and jihadis and conflates Islam and Islamism (the two terms are usually conjoined in the Hekmatiarist discourse.
The reasons for this stance are to be found in Mansoor Hekmat's turn towards considering Islamism as the "main contradiction" and Islam as being a special case in world religions, as being uniquely reactionary in the contemporary era. This "Islamic exceptionalism" lies behind the Hekmatiarist discourse which, for example, suggests there is no discernible difference between Shia and Sunni islamists, such as the militias of Hizbollah and regime-loyal Alawites on the one hand and those of Al Nusra and Daesh on the other.
From the Hekmat piece I quoted in the Charlie Hebdo thread (translated by Namazie)
If "deep-seated hatred of Islam" is a precondition for progressive politics, then, sure enough, differentiating between jihadism and islamism on the one hand, and the religion itself, is a waste of time. And if you take it that Islam is responsible for FGM, forced marriages and "honour" killings , as Namazie repeatedly - and falsely - claims, then it is easy to hire yourself out to the various Western (and Israeli) sources of funding for groups promoting Huntingdon's "clash of civilisations" so beloved of neocons and their repellant apologists like Bernard Henri Levy (with who Namazie signed the infamous "Manifeste des douze").
None of which makes Namzie's criticism of the SWP and those fools who think that Hamas or Hezbollah are somehow "on the Left" (I mean, seriously? wtf..). But it does mean that her feminism and her socialism take a back seat to the main strategy of painting Islam as the source of all evil in the Middle East. Patriarchy in the Middle East, and social institutions such as "Namus" (inadequately translated as honour), have been around since long before the major monotheistic religions arose. The community most aflicted with honour-killings in Egypt, for e.g., are the Christian copts. Every middle eastern feminist knows this, including Namazie, she just pretends otherwise in the pursuit of her political agenda. That's cynicism in my book. And it's not her hobby, it's her income, her job.
I think you are being far too
I think you are being far too harsh on Maryam, ocelot. She has been one of the few voices to make a real effort to distinguish between Islamists and ordinary Muslims. I worked with her on many campaigns. She is a much needed voice in this debate.
Hassan Radwan.
rudo wrote: Flint wrote: Hi
rudo
Yep, it's pretty clear that he is. And a lot of us thinks that he is another poster, who like Recke also has fascist sympathise and only seem to care about immigration and Islam and fuck all else.
Admin, when are you going to ban that fucker?
Hassan, it's a pleasure and
Hassan, it's a pleasure and privilege to see you here on Libcom. One of your kutbah's helped me out with something just yesterday!
The ex Muslim scenes around e.g. CEMB and Faith to Faithless, from what I can see, far from building a firewall between atheism and Islam, are actually opening up spaces for dialogue, debate, agnosticism, pluralism, anti-fundamentalism, and spirituality and all sorts of other good things that people need to breathe and live. Thank you.
Sorry we have to share this thread with a fascist/anti-Muslim bigot.
hassanradwan wrote: I think
hassanradwan
Well I've never even met her or heard her speak. And working with people on campaigns is the only real way to find out whether you can trust someone or not, so I defer to your experience. But I still have problems with some of the stuff she says about Islam being the source of patriarchy in MENA, FGM, forced marriages, etc, because it's just not the whole truth.
Maryam Namazie's response to
Maryam Namazie's response to a critical Guardian cif article
http://freethoughtblogs.com/maryamnamazie/2015/10/13/the-guardian-through-islamist-eyes/
ocelot wrote: Well I've never
ocelot
No it's not the whole truth but neither does that mean that islam, like pretty much all major religions, isn't a patriarchal ideology that's often linked to oppressive and misogynistic practices. The fact that bigots like Recke410 happen to selectively support some of Namazie's comments doesn't make her a bigot as well. Ocelot, you really should go and hear her speak and have a chat with her.
Maryam Namazie speaking at
Maryam Namazie speaking at Goldsmiths
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-1ZiZdz5nao&feature=youtu.be
And the support by Goldsmiths
And the support by Goldsmiths Feminist Society and Goldsmiths LGBT society posting in solidarity not with maryam namazie but these arrogant dicks, speaks volumes for the state of student politics, tbh.
How depressing. A shower of
How depressing. A shower of islamist wankers in the meeting, a shower of trendy lefty wankers boycotting it. I take my hat off to Namazie for standing her ground with them nobheads in attendance.
Just read this now: good
Just read this now: good article, although worth bearing ocelot's comments in mind
. Mark could you please post this to the library? In future please feel free to use your discretion to post stuff which would be of interest to libcom readers: we trust your taste.
FYI, the racist has been banned.
Steven, it's worth watching
Steven, it's worth watching the video if you haven't. It's v long but useful to see.
One of the many disturbing things is that after the femsoc and lgbtsoc put out their statements in solidarity with the Isoc, they have been deleting critical comments from their FB including those by queer and feminist Muslim and ex Muslim people.
I never wanted to join in the 'aren't students reactionary' chorus but...it is worrying how comfortable they seem with the idea that you can just make opinions you disagree with go away.
Students are very active in campaigning against the new Prevent duty. How do these students think they are they going to fight controls on pro jihadists and Islamist speakers if they try to block freethinkers and apostates from speaking?
Will Maryam Namazie be
Will Maryam Namazie be talking and discussing this in any working class venues, pubs, clubs, trade union centres etc?
I suspect she hasn't been
I suspect she hasn't been invited and would be more than happy to speak to different audiences if asked.
Edit: I should probably add that there may be security issues for her speaking at open public meetings that wouldn't be there giving a talk to students.
Steven wrote: Just read this
Steven
Yes, I'll do this at some point.
Rachel wrote: One of the
Rachel
A blog post about this: The student left's broken moral compass
I suspect she would be well
I suspect she would be well out out of her comfort zone and I'm not convinced that she's not just selling Islam by another method. As a WPI member she's certainly an authoritarian.
Mark.
She's an atheist and a
She's an atheist and a refugee from the Islamic regime in Iran. What makes you think she's 'selling Islam by another method'?
Perhaps there needs to be a
Perhaps there needs to be a definition of "pro-Islamist Left" right in the beginning because right off the bat I'm thinking "I'm not inclined to stop supporting Muslims even if I'm an anarchist". But soon enough I'm realizing that this post is referring to a very specific thing relating to "Islamist law", and the differentiation between "Islam" and "Islamism".
Tell you what Mark let's see
Tell you what Mark let's see how this whole CEMB - Council of Ex- Muslims of Britain thing pans out. It just stinks to me but we'll see eh.
Mark.
Lbcom wrote: Perhaps there
Lbcom
Looking back at the original post on her blog I see that in the OP I cut out the intro as it was dealing mainly with the publication of a specific report. I think I cut out some of the context as well though including this:
So maybe it's my fault rather than Maryam Namazie's if the start of the OP doesn't really work.
Mark. wrote: Steven
Mark.
Easiest thing would be to edit the OP and change the content type to "library"
^It doesn't give me the
^It doesn't give me the option of changing it to a non-forum post so I guess I don't have the right permissions to do this.
i changed it to library. try
i changed it to library. try to edit now
Thanks Khawaga. I've edited
Thanks Khawaga. I've edited it to add an introduction.
A very good new - and short -
A very good new - and short - contribution on the topic of the 'Pro-Islamist left', discussing a particularly vile panel at the 2015 Historical Materialism Conference.
https://journals.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/feministdissent/article/view/13
Yeah, that was a decent
Yeah, that was a decent article. A short read too. Not surprised to read that the pro-islamist left refer to SWP and their compatriots and front groups (although I am sure these views run deeper among the left than just the swappies). It's sort of a version of the "anti-imperialism of fools" argument.
Deeyah Khan's documentary on
Deeyah Khan's documentary on ex-Muslims
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bupBgmtsNWU
Ongoing twitter thread which
Ongoing twitter thread which is more or less related:
https://mobile.twitter.com/libcomorg/status/828184171675865089
Really great job by Libcom
Really great job by Libcom Twitter in standing up for SBS on that thread.
This thread is an offshoot of an argument about the call from Owen Jones and others not to work with Stand up to Racism (organisers of yesterday’s anti Trump rally) over the SWP rape scandal. Someone gets involved to attack one of the groups - Southall Black Sisters - who signed an open letter saying they wouldn’t work with the SWP. This tweeter makes dishonest claims about SBS that may be worth unpicking.
SBS is an advocacy group working on domestic violence, forced marriage, and other issues affecting Black and migrant women in the UK. They have an amazing history in the anti racist and migrant rights struggle. Their work led them to criticise the growing power of religious leaders, who work sometimes with and sometimes against the state to define and manage minority communities and the place of women within them. They don’t single out Islam, and have been active in campaigns confronting the religious right in Hindu, Sikh, Jewish, Christian and Catholic communities, but they also don’t make an exemption for Islam, as some Muslims and some leftists demand.
They have recently supported the campaign started by Maryam Namazie against normalising Sharia and other religious arbitration courts in the UK. SBS service users are mostly Muslim women and SBS has seen the growing power of these councils or courts and the poor outcomes they offer women and children. The government under Theresa May, far from opposing Sharia councils as some on the left might suppose, is seeking to regulate them. This may be part of the state’s ‘multi-faith’ agenda which seeks to define minority groups along religious lines then outsources some government responsibilities to religious community groups, either as a money saving measure or for ideological reasons.
In all religions there are some women who want to live under God’s law (as interpreted by men) and others who don’t. Many of us think that, while we have to live under a state, one secular law for all provides better protection for women. The Sharia debate is a controversial thing to be involved in right now, for obvious reasons, but SBS and others working with them haven’t stopped. Perhaps they feel that now more than ever it’s important to stand up to the religious right.
The attack on secularists (especially secular feminists) from the left is now much broader than it was when Namazie wrote the article that started this thread. It’s unfortunately found in both academic and activist scenes.
Here is a recent article by SBS about the Sharia campaign, and there are other articles on the same website about it
https://www.opendemocracy.net/5050/pragna-patel/sharia-debate-who-will-listen-to-us