Is Your Professor an Islamophobe?

[Violet_Crumble]

Satoshi Kanazawa is an evolutionary psychologist and professor at the London School of Economics. Although his research as a scientist has ruffled some feathers in the past, his attempts as a "public intellectual" are indisputably inflammatory. In a recent article entitled, "What's Wrong with Muslims" published in his blog hosted by Psychology Today, Kanazawa wrote:

"Major Nidal Malik Hasan is a native-born American citizen, trained military officer, and educated MD and psychiatrist. Yet none of these things matters for him; first and foremost, he is a Muslim...They are all united in their values and goals by their singular identity of being Muslims. It's tempting to dismiss these observations by saying that are all 'extremists' or 'Jihadists.' That would be politically correct and comforting, but factually inaccurate."

In his very next article he boasts:

"No, not all Muslims are terrorists, but...half of Muslims worldwide are terrorists and active supporters of terrorism, who would encourage their sons, brothers, and nephews to blow themselves up in an airplane or in a crowded market."

Kanazawa is just one in a growing number of academics using his intellectual identity to promote intolerance and xenophobia against Islam and Muslims. In a recent article entitled "Going Muslim", Tunku Varadarajan, professor at the Stern School of Business at New York University and graduate from my current institution, Oxford University, describes what "Going Muslim" might mean:

"This phrase would describe the turn of events where a seemingly integrated Muslim-American--a friendly donut vendor in New York, say, or an officer in the U.S. Army at Fort Hood--discards his apparent integration into American society and elects to vindicate his religion in an act of messianic violence against his fellow Americans."

Academics engaged in public discourse have long enjoyed an air of objectivity, a level of sophistication and nuance that raises the stature of their commentary above that of the average talking head in the corporate media. A reflection of years of study and trained intellectual rigor, academics who lend their thought to the public debate often bring with them the same measured reserve and unemotional tone that characterizes the academic literature. Used sparingly and decisively, academic perspectives on public debates have turned the tide on important issues in history, from Jonathan Swift and his pamphlets against the Duke of Marlborough during the early 18th century to stunning critiques of modern economic and social policies such as The Three Trillion Dollar War, estimating the true costs of the Iraq war, by Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/abdulrahman-m-elsayed/phds-promote-xenophobia-a_b_443510.html

[MisterP]

1. it's part of the "mainstreaming" of Islamophobia and the histrionic "clash of cultures"

stuff that one would expect from that "Obsession" DVD or Hal Lindsey are appearing in the mouths of the Dawkinses and Sam Harrises and Chiracs: collective guilt, torture, insistence that THEY're so fanatical they can't be reasoned with and only killed, that THEY can never be "integrated," THEY want to ruin or take over "secular civilization," THEY are filled with hate, THEY cannot be tolerated because their religion is bad and necessarily intolerant, etc., etc.