First Published: 2009-01-27

 
Anti-Arab racism prevails even in US 'liberal' press
 

Book shows lack of truly critical liberal moral thought within US when dealing with Arabs, Muslims.

 

Middle East Online

Book review of: "The Uncultured Wars Arabs, Muslims, and the Poverty of Liberal Thought" by Steven Salaita (Zed Books, New York, 2008).

Reviewed by Jim Miles

The Uncultured Wars comprises an excellent series of thought provoking essays, the excellence deriving from their ability to provoke thought that should be one of the hallmarks of academic works. As such Steven Salaita writes as an advocate of a position rather than pretending dispassionate objectivity, or myth of disinterest in Salaitas own words. I will return to that idea later as for my own personal interests it is contained in one of his more interesting essays. Generally, these essays are well constructed, leading the reader to consider how subtle and yet how obvious racism is in the US, Arab/Muslim racism in particular.



Salaitas introduction discusses the medium of the essay as a format to represent ideas and helps define what I have always thought, but perhaps not with the same clarity: most newspaper columnists are corporate exhibitionists, not essayists. Or, to be fair, most of them are simply bad essayists. Salaitas essays are mostly highly academic, using language that would be difficult for many readers, yet I would estimate that the targeted audience is that of academia, the liberal press, and others that are or should be discussing the ideas of liberal thought within the context of racism, terrorism, culture, and morality. Whether they would recognize themselves within that context is open to their own interpretations.



The introductory essay, Anti-Arab racism, American liberals, and the new civilian terrorists looks at the defining features of Arab racism through a critique of media and their view of current events. Current events at the time of writing were the Israeli attacks against the Lebanese population - and unfortunately every place where Lebanon came into this argument, Gaza could be readily inserted without changing the argument or the descriptors of events. Salaita starts with a couple of exemplars of anti-Arab racism, using Dershowitzs writing in The Nation, Ruth Conniff in The Progressive, and Richard Cohen in the Washington Post. He arrives at his definition with the most consistent feature of anti-Arab racism being the incessant equation of Arabs with ruthless, innate violence devoid of the context invariably granted every instance of American or Israeli aggression.



The corollary is also true if one takes American or Israeli aggression as being ruthless, innate violence as it too is always removed from the context that it is to protect the elites holding on to the privileges of power. The latter leads to Salaitas definition of being anti-racist as being willing to sacrifice privilege to the benefits of all humans. A short simple statement but it carries significant truth. He then exorcises the liberal position of tolerance, recognizing that tolerance does not equate to equality or anti-racism, but rather, "reflects their unwillingness to undertake what is necessary to eliminate racism.



The other essays extend his thoughts, developed from a combination of personal experiences and academic thought, creating a picture of some subtle some not so subtle moments of liberal racism, apart from the obvious in your face racism of the jingoistic neocons and their purely ignorant followers. In indispensably expendable he criticizes attacks liberal morality, using an incident involving Jerry Falwell and a black boy (thats a teaser, go read the essay).



Next, in I was called up to commit genocide he discusses how the descriptor Arab-Christian is used to present arguments on Islam and Palestine. In essence, he puts forth two positions: first that he should not have to be labelled as Christian for his beliefs and statements to be acknowledged and accepted; and secondly, that the Muslim voice should not be dismissed and Americansshould take Muslims and their grievances seriously. Arab Christians should not be privileged to speak for all Muslims, at the same time as Palestinians they do represent a Palestinian nation to the point of reject[ing] Christian Zionist doctrine as false teaching that corrupts the biblical message of love, justice, and reconciliation. After presenting a series of arguments to support his view, the same Christian Zionists are described as not intellectually disposed to nuance. He highlights the false use of statistics taken out of context the emigration of Palestinian Christians, Christians who suffered the same fate as their Muslim brethren, with tens of thousands of Palestinian Christiansdisplaced at various points since 1948, and to classify this displacement as emigration would be a gross bastardization of history.



In two essays, the popular culture media come under criticism. In Michael Moore does it again the critique is directed at Moores simplistic juxtaposition of events to highlight his arguments, providing the example of the wonderfulness of Canadian universal healthcare (it is good, better than many, but slowly becoming more strongly two tiered) and the problems with US healthcare provision, of which there are many. As Moores film Sicko is devoted to the sensationalizing of the health care crisis, Salaita takes exception to Moores presentation of the 9/11 heroes healthcare juxtaposed to the inmates of Guantanamo healthcare without providing the context of the inmates being tortured and captive, Muslim, held without recourse to any normal judicial rights.



The second media event Is Jackass unjustifiable? questions the role of using a highly caricatured Arab in one of the skits ultimately intended to embarrass the actor playing the Arab. While he does not personally have trouble with the skit, he does impart blame to the cultural paradigms to which the jackasses merely responded. I havent seen the movie and do not intend to, but it makes me wonder more broadly jackasses as ironic caricature statements on all US culture?



The essays continue, with journeys to Virginia Techs incidence of terror, Michael Lerners obviously biased liberal Zionist (an oxymoron for sure) views, Mahmoud Ahmadinejads visit to Columbia, and the zealotry of atheism. The most powerful essay personally is The perils and profits of doing comparative work.



In Perils and Profits Salaita discusses ideas surrounding the establishment of Native or Indigenous studies as a field of work. In sum, he works through to the idea that Indigenous scholarshipis fundamentally seditious, and it is intrinsically comparative. Seditious as in its true form it questions the position of indigenous cultures within the usually over-riding cultures, whether it is the recognition of native cultures arising from genocidal activities in both North and South America or Palestinians being dispossessed or ethnically cleansed in Israel/Palestine.



One of the few points where I was not sure what Salaita really meant was his discussion of comparative approaches to indigenous studies. He asks, Does acknowledging difference among peoples doom comparative approaches or does it sharpen their foci? A true comparison is not just similarities, but similarities and differences: every similarity can generate a difference; every difference will contain within it the seed of commonality. Comparative studies will create a list of similarities and differences. If the differences are ignored the study becomes superficial and possibly too much of the feel good tolerance he does not like elsewhere in his essays. Perhaps I simply have not understood his arguments within this section.



An argument that he does present and that I support fully is his stand against the so-called objective, dispassionate, disinterested neutral academic representation. There truly are no objective articles written anywhere as even if an article purports to work only with the facts the choice of which facts are chosen reveals a bias. In particular for native studies, he argues they should be activist and proactive leading to the desirable outcome of undermin[ing] colonial systems and restor[ing] better ways of living. He describes the idea of an objective and disengaged scholar as a traditional and entrenched notion (ironically perhaps with some truth considering how disengaging and boring many university level lectures are but it also reeks of another form of elitism). A later description uses the words of traditional academic ethos, which maintains the erstwhile myth of disinterest, underlining perhaps how uninfluential the academic world truly is except for their self-supporting compatriots.



This feigned aloofness becomes a prop in the protection of the academic role of self-replication. It is the epitome of proper culture, a deception of objectivity. It becomes a prop of authority and authenticity which tries to deny any real criticism, to remove any morality for decisions based on the ideas, without allowing any real comparison between the academics actions and thought, thus truly supporting the status quo of that group.



Salaita uses the word advocate as in I advocate comparative work most avidly, as every position truly advocates ones own personal point of view, pretence of disinterest not withstanding. Any good writer, any thinker willing to share and discuss ideas will advocate a position, but further will be able to modify and correct their viewpoint according to new information and informed arguments both for and against the original viewpoint.



As an advocate, Salaitas work provides strong support to his idea of Arab racism and the lack of truly critical liberal moral thought within the US. However, according to his definitions I would have to give up my own self definition as a member of the liberal left, as those terms as usurped by US media and within Salaitas own writing as part of that culture - mean something different than what the Oxford dictionary provides. Salaitas advocacy is towards an ever increasing awareness of the Arab racism that is dominant in current US and extended globally to all indigenous cultures - academic, political, and media thought. It provides valuable discussion and many scenarios that should be examined and discussed by all liberal arts program students, all academics who work towards a fully egalitarian system of society around the world.

The book is available at Amazon.com.

Jim Miles is a Canadian educator and a regular contributor/columnist of opinion pieces and book reviews for The Palestine Chronicle. Miles work is also presented globally through other alternative websites and news publications.

 

Syrian rebels agree to leave new area outside Damascus

Family accuses Israel of killing Palestinian in Malaysia

Rouhani slams officials' 'vow of silence' in face of protests

US has 'concerns' about Turkey holding fair vote under state of emergency

Cinema makes return to Saudi Arabia

UN Security Council meets over Syria in Sweden

Turkish government rejects criticism of election campaign

Condemnation after Gaza teenager killed by Israeli soldiers

Natalie Portman says backed out of Israel prize over Netanyahu

Morocco, EU start talks on new fisheries deal

FIFA to return to Morocco to check hotels, stadiums

Turkey in shock after violent Istanbul derby

Iraq pays first war reparations to Kuwait since 2014

Fiery kites adopted as new tactic by Gaza protesters

Romanian president slams plan to move Israel embassy

Western strikes on Syria bring no change whatsoever

Trump criticises OPEC for high oil prices

Syria says rebels south of capital surrender

Market has capacity to absorb higher oil prices: Saudi minister

Putin 'ready' for Trump summit

Saudi Arabia to host first public film screening

HRW criticises Lebanon for evicting Syria refugees

Saudi says intercepted ballistic missile from Yemen

Russia mulls supplying S-300 missile systems to Syria

Bashir fires Sudan foreign minister

Washington: Assad still has 'limited' chemical capability

European MPs urge US not to scrap Iran deal

Oil price soars to highest level in years

Two more pro-Kurdish MPs stripped of Turkey seats

Oil theft 'costing Libya over $750 million annually'

Turkey's snap polls: bold gambit or checkmate for Erdogan?

Iran arrests senior official over public concert

Bahrain sentences 24 to jail, strips citizenship

UN experts urge Iran to cancel Kurd's death sentence

Moderate quake strikes near Iran nuclear power plant

Syria regime forces caught in surprise IS attack

Turkey sentences 18 to life for killing ‘hero’ coup soldier

Exxon faces setback in Iraq as oil and water mix

Libya to clamp down on fuel smuggling

Yemen to arrest colonel for overlooking African migrant rape

Erdogan sends Turkey to snap polls on June 24

Qatar joins Gulf military exercise in apparent compromise

Saudi-Russia oil alliance likely to undercut OPEC

UN in security talks with Syria on chemical probe

Riyadh says two al Qaeda militants killed in Yemen