Terrorism in the Homeland: Islam begets the radicalism of terrorism
Since Those who abhor the burden of taking a clear stance on issues of importance are often fond of the "agnostic's fallacy." The fallacy goes like this: Two options are both technically possible; therefore, they are equally probable and no distinction can be made between them. So we get the agnostic, who thinks the existence and nonexistence of the supernatural are equally probable despite the absence of evidence for the former.
That same line of non-thinking inevitably appears whenever the topic of "profiling" is in any way broached. Can any reasonable distinction be made by airport security between a 21-year-old Saudi male traveling on a student visa and a 95-year-old Belgian woman on a tourist visa? Oh, certainly not - who knows, she could be carrying a bomb for some reason.
Neither, it seems, can there be any distinction between Islam and any other religion as a source of organized sadists and murderers. After all, non-Muslims can definitely do the same kinds of violent things too, and every once in a great while, actually try.
Very well: grandma could be carrying a bomb, just as the followers of other religions could engage in the same wanton cruelty. But the more salient consideration is how likely these things are to be true. To treat these possibilities as if they were equally probable is something even the slowest of people should recognize as nonsense.
Those who caution against the use of one's critical faculties claim that criticism will alienate Muslims and drive them into the clutches of "extremists." Well, in the first place, this really is little more than a threat (Don't criticize what I think or I'll kill you), and in the second place, it rests upon the tremendously condescending premise that Muslims are so innately explosive that any criticism may set them off. (Try to remember the last time you were called upon to tiptoe around the "Christian community" in this way.)
And what do these people propose instead? "Engagement" with the "Muslim community" through programs coordinated with mosques - in other words, reinforcing the idea that people are first and foremost Muslims and sending them back to the religious in supplication (precisely the conditions under which these same people tell us that "radicalization" will occur). This is lunacy.
Criticism and suspicion of Islam do not beget violence; Islam's many wicked and backward doctrines beget violence. The wonderful thing about the Quran is that even when it doesn't directly enjoin the faithful to acts of barbarism, it does at least remind them that god despises all non-Muslims and will in due course crush them like the miserable little vermin they are. (Tolerance, indeed!) To deny the danger and savagery of such things, let alone their existence, can only give the tyrannically superstitious the cover they need to operate.
In response to this, one is constantly reminded that most Muslims do not engage in violence. This says much about them as human beings but nothing about Islam itself. Indeed, it at least implies that most of the faithful know instinctively that the behaviors to which they are supposedly directed by God are vile and immoral. To suppress this instinct with the euphemisms of those who treat Islam as if it were a race is to suppress progress, and in so doing to deny those raised as Muslims the chance for enlightenment.
Nuts to that. Let the confrontation with Islamic backwardness go on, and let those who - in pallid imitation of real struggles against maltreatment - regard criticism of Islam as if it were a form of racism whine if they will. Progress does not stop for those who don't want to be made to think.
Eric Harrison is a Wiess College alumnus.
More from The Rice Thresher
Before you attend a counseling session at the Rice counseling center, you will be told that “the RCC maintains strict standards regarding privacy.” You will find statements from the university that your mental health record will not be shared with anyone outside of extreme situations of imminent harm, and only then that your information will be shared with only the necessary officials. This sounds great, except that these assurances bear no teeth whatsoever — no enforcement agency ensures that Rice follows its public confidentiality promises, and there are no penalties for Rice if they break them. The Wellbeing and Counseling Centers should more directly communicate the limits of their confidentiality policies when compared to unaffiliated counseling centers, and students in sensitive situations should take the necessary precautions to protect their information.
This week marks the last issue of the Thresher for the year, and for the seniors like myself, our last issue ever. I have been a part of the Thresher since freshman year. And it would not be an exaggeration to say it has defined my Rice experience. As someone pursuing a career in journalism after graduation, there has been no better place to learn than at this paper.
In January, the Rice Board of Trustees announced plans to move the Founder’s memorial to another area of the academic quad as part of a whole redesign, adding additional context of his “entanglement” with slavery. This comes despite continual calls from the student body to not have the enslaver displayed in the quad regardless of the context provided. It would be just for these calls to action and the majority of the Task Force Committee who voted to not keep it there that the Board of Trustees decide to not keep the memorial prominently displayed in the quad at all.