Islamophobia, a Phenomenon Enforced by Influential Members of Society

Terrorist, radical and extremist, are words often used to describe the so-called Muslims
who commit atrocities in the name of the religion of Islam. Perhaps the most significant of these
barbaric acts to the western world was carried out in the United States of America on September
11 2001, where the World Trade Centers were brought down by two full passenger planes. After
this incident carried out by the terrorist group al-Qaeda, and the recent insurgence of groups like
Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) Islamophobia, defined as the fear, hate and prejudice
towards Muslims, dramatically increased (Defining Islamophobia). This phenomenon is
proven to be unfounded however, as over a million Muslims around the world condemn these
acts and organizations.
The presence of Islamophobia in modern western societies is continuing to spread, as
societies begin to condemn some discriminatory government policies and beliefs towards
Aboriginals and African Americans, much of their ethnocentrism is shifting focus towards
Muslims. This condemnation of previous policies and values is the result of the protests done by
many enlightened individuals whose voices were previously silenced by those who promote the
propagation of hatred. Unless similar voices are raised to eradicate Islamophobia, the trend of the
public vilification of Islam via government policies and media will increase, resulting in many
adverse consequences for Muslims.
In order to analyze the spread of Islamophobia and its implications to society as a whole,
a sociological perspective can provide considerable insight. Although this phobia can be assessed
using many disciplines of sociology, symbolic interactionism is the most appropriate. This

methodology posits that individuals act in response to the meanings attached with certain things,
which are gained from social interactions. The meanings are then handled with an interpretative
process used by the person in dealing with the things he (or she) encounters (Blumer 2).
Additionally, concepts from Max Weber, viewed to be one of the most influential
theorists in the discipline can be helpful in identifying the origin of this spreading phobia.
According to Weber, determinants of ethnicity or ethnic markers, including common descent,
tribe, culture religion, and nationality can lead to the basis upon which people choose to trust
and accept others, also known as soft primordialism (Liodakis 251). This implies that groups
with varying ethnic markers can be a major factor in the creation of irrational hate and fear. In
the case of Islamophobia, those belonging to western societies could identify certain ethnic
markers as belonging to a Muslim, which could result in unfounded fear and contempt, as
Muslims may be viewed as oppressive and violent to them. This view could be the result of some
government officials and members of the media, whom they trust due to a similarity of ethnic
markers, criticizing Islam.
Since western societies structurally operate on the basis of democracy, in which citizens
entrust many the decisions to be made by individuals of their choosing, government policies are
ultimately the result of a societys actions. In turn these policies and officials they have elected
prove to be influential in their daily lives. Unbeknownst to many however, are the discriminatory
laws either in place, soon to be implemented, in their country. Many discriminatory laws have
been removed, albeit equally discriminatory policies may replace them. Following the
colonization of Canada by the British and French, there were many attempts to increase the
population by increasing immigrants from different countries. However, European immigrants

were greatly favoured, as many individuals were prevented from entering the country due to
xenophobic immigration acts.
Chinese and Indians were prevented from immigrating entirely, as they were viewed to be
impossible to assimilate and therefore unqualifiable for permanent residence in the country
(Liodakis 253). This is no longer the case due to the implementation of the points system more
than 50 years later, introduced to eliminate discrimination based on countries of origin. This
period of 50 years contributed to the integration of certain discriminatory values within Canadian
society, as the belief that there are cultural and physical differences between societies instilled in
many generations results in the creation of a consciousness of kind which serves as the basis
for monopolistic closure (Weber 386). This refers to institutionalized processes, including
governments, where members of the dominant group, in this case the Europeans, have access to
certain resources while others are excluded. A more recent and commonly studied concept,
which varies slightly is racialization, where structures are made in societies on the basis of race,
the biological identifiers of people.
Although Chinese and Indian people are no longer legally discriminated in the
immigration process, this concept of monopolizing certain resources has reappeared, most
notably in the form of recent laws implemented in the Canadian province of Quebec. In the
provinces new charter of values, so called ostentatious religious symbols are banned for
employees of the public sector. One of these symbols is the hijab, a head covering worn by
millions of Muslim women as is prescribed by their faith. Due to the outrage of many in response
to the charter, it was quickly altered to exempt previous public employees from the ban.
However, this is still an example of monopolistic closure, as many Muslim women who wear a
hijab would be unable to enter her desired field as a result of a government policy that attempts

to assimilate Muslims (Authier, Quebec Values). This policy violates the fundamental
freedoms provided in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom, which includes the freedom
of conscience and religion and expression (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s 2).
In addition to Quebecs new ethnocentric law, anti-Islamic remarks and policies are being
made on the federal level of government as well. On March 10 2015, in spite of accusations of
being Islamophobic by Canadian Liberal party leader Justin Trudeau, Canadian Prime Minister
Stephen Harper described the practice of wearing a niqab (a hijab that also covers the face with a
veil), as being rooted in a culture that is anti-women (Chase, Niqabs rooted). This could
potentially be another case of monopolistic closure in Canada, on the federal level, where if
Harpers views become law, then Muslim women who refuse to remove their veil will become
excluded from the resource that is Canadian citizenship.
Furthermore, this is evidence of ethnocentric beliefs towards Muslims, as it implies that
Islam creates a culture that is oppressive and one that has no place in Canada, as he goes on to
state it is not only unacceptable to Canadian women but also to Canadians in general (Chase).
This view mirrors that of the policies in effect prior to the implementation of the points system,
where Indians and Chinese were thought to have cultures that would be unacceptable in
Canadian society. Among the plethora of issues this implies, including lack of tolerance, respect
and understanding of Islamic culture, it also violates the fundamental right of freedom of
religious expression. Therefore, the resurgence of discriminatory policies that exclude certain
peoples demonstrates that society is repeating its past ethnocentric policies, now targeting
Muslims.
In addition to efforts being made to prohibit the hijab and niqab, which many view as
teachings integral to the religion of Islam, other laws are being made to effectively increase the

policing of Muslims in particular. Bill C-51, a new anti-terror law that will be in effect in Canada
shortly, has been the result of great controversy as it allows for government officials to
essentially increase surveillance of Canadians, and enable them to arrest suspects they believe
are about to commit an act of terror or sympathize with those who do, without notice. In addition
to this, the criteria for punishing this is unclear, as the definition of terror provided is noted to be
vague by many critics (Alexander, Bill C-51). Along with the unclear definition of terror,
this increased surveillance then brings into question whether this increase in monitoring is
intended to be primarily towards Muslims, as many individuals including government members,
have the tendency to conflate terrorism with Muslim criminal organizations. The distinction
between the two should be understood by all members of society, government officials in
particular, as groups like ISIS do not represent Islam, in the same way that the Ku Klux Klan
(KKK) does not represent Christianity.
Perhaps the largest factor behind the word terrorism being affiliated with Muslims is the
media. Headlines of newspapers, news channels often reserve the word terrorist for an act
committed by deranged individuals who do so in the name of Islam. Similarly, the use of
Muslims as antagonists in Movies and television shows often generalizes them as such, as in
movies like American Sniper, and shows like Homeland. But these references in the
entertainment industry can be credited to the aforementioned media coverage. For example,
networks like Fox News frequently run headlines on television and the internet like this one,
reporting on the attack on the French satire magazine Charlie Hebdo headquarters after they
published cartoons depicting Prophet Muhammad: At least 12 dead in Islamist terror attack at
satirical French publication (FoxNews.com, At least 12). Meanwhile, when a gunman
entered a Colorado movie theatre and similarly killed innocent people watching a film, the same

network ran the following headline: At least 12 dead, 59 injured in Colorado theater shooting
during 'Dark Knight Rises' (FoxNews.com, At least 12 dead, 59 injured).
Both incidents resulted in 12 fatalities while the Colorado shooting left an additional 59
injured, yet the word terror is notably absent. Although the intent for the attacks varied, the
former being carried out by delusional men convinced they were defending the Islam, both
resulted in fear among people. According to an executive of Warner Bros., the production
company of the film being seen, the shooting was directly attributable to a decrease in sales
during opening week, indicating that people were hesitant to attend in fear of another shooting
(Goldstein qtd. in Ryan, No Question). Even a Google search of the word terrorist results
in hundreds of pictures of Men holding automatic rifles and what appear to be Holy Qurans, the
holy book of Muslims. This reservation of the term terror brings into question whether
terrorism has become an exclusive term used for those with ethnic markers typically exhibited by
Muslims.
Aside from the medias tendency to categorize certain attacks to be terrorism based on
attackers calling themselves Muslims, many influential people in the media have spoken against
the religion publicly, using rhetoric to motivate society to hate the faith. There have been a large
number of political shows both online and on television that have massive audiences and feature
hosts and guests who criticize Islam. Bill Maher, Bill OReilly and Megyn Kelly are popular
hosts of political news and debate shows where they often criticize Islam and spread
misconceptions, as they regularly assume extremist organizations correctly follow the religion.
These assumptions and the propagation of them to the audience in turn enforces Islamophobia.
One such guest on Mahers show, Real Time with Bill Maher, in the October of 2014 was
Sam Harris, whose sentiments resonated strongly with audience members, who would cheer

emphatically when anti-Islam remarks were made. One of such remarks was made by Harris,
who called the religion the mother-load of bad ideas, to which guest panelist, actor and director
Ben Affleck became furious, saying its gross, its racist, likening it to false stereotypes made
regarding Jews. Maher and Harris argued that Islamophobia is not a real phenomenon, rather it is
one created to stop the critique of the religion. This brings into question the intents of the
statements being made by the duo, as Maher said Islam is the only religion that will kill you if
you say the wrong thing. Insinuating that a religion can kill someone is clearly a rhetoric device
used to persuade the audience of millions to criticize that religion. To counter Afflecks
arguments, they stated that the majority of Muslims hold radical values, to Afflecks great
disagreement. He accurately replied to say the majority of Muslims in the world practice the
religion and are peaceful people, as extremist values are un-Islamic (Real Time with Bill Maher).
The repercussions of this could be significant, as many could view Muslims as the
enemy, or the out-group, as described by Weber to be the group different from ones own, as
they would be lead to believe all share destructive values. Despite his efforts to change the views
of the audience, applause was clearly greater for arguments against Islam, in essence silencing
him, as many people who are vocal against discrimination are similarly silenced and unable to be
given the opportunity of being heard by the general public. Reactions from social media were
also mixed, with many supporting Afflecks view and many criticizing it. Ultimately, a
considerable group of people view Islam to be inherently evil and a religion to fear and hate,
largely due to various forms of media.
Throughout history, societies have had the tendency to view themselves as superior to
others, as seen during colonization and when introduced to other cultures through other means,
the response is usually one of hostility. This was seen with the Indigenous peoples of Canada

after Europeans colonized it, and immigrants from countries like China and India, where they
were discriminated for their cultures. Although the majority of people believe such
ethnocentrism is non-existent in the western world, it still has a considerable presence, with the
apprehension of Muslims increasing rapidly. This fear and hate towards Muslims is enforced by
the implementation of certain government policies and officials whom the public trust criticizing
Islam, news broadcasters reserving the use of the word terror towards those who call themselves
Muslims and popular television shows on which the religion is repeatedly slandered based on the
actions of a minority. There is however, hope as to prevent the irrational spread of hate and fear
towards Islam, as many individuals accurately distinguish between the extremist views that
deviate greatly from Islam, and those who practice the religion based on the true peaceful
teachings, which is in part a result of activists whose voices are beginning to be heard.

Works Cited
Alexander, Julia. "Bill C-51: What It Is and Controversy behind It." The Toronto Sun. Canoe Sun
Media, 18 Mar. 2015. Web. 12 Apr. 2015.

"At Least 12 Dead in Islamist Terror Attack at Satirical French Publication." FoxNews.com. Fox
News Network, 7 Jan. 2015. Web. 13 Apr. 2015.

"At Least 12 Dead, 59 Injured in Colorado Theater Shooting during 'Dark Knight Rises'"
FoxNews.com. Fox News Network, 20 July 2012. Web. 13 Apr. 2015.

Authier, Philip. "Quebec Values Charter 2.0: Ban against Crosses, Hijabs Would Only Apply to
New Public Employees." National Post. Postmedia Network Inc., 16 Jan. 2015. Web. 11
Apr. 2015.

Blumer, Herbert. "The Methodological Position of Symbolic Interactionism." Symbolic

Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1969. 2. Print.

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s 2, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, Web.

Chase, Steve. "Niqabs rooted in a Culture That Is Anti-women, Harper Says." The Globe and
Mail. The Globe and Mail Inc., 10 Mar. 2015. Web. 12 Apr. 2015.

Defining Islamophobia. Center for Race & Gender. University of California, Berkely, n.d.
Web. 12 Apr. 2015.

Liodakis, Nikolaos. "Ethnic and Race Relations." Sociology: A Canadian Perspective. Ed. Lorne
Tepperman, Patrizia Albanese, and Jim Curtis. 3rd ed. Toronto: Oxford UP, 2012. 251253. Print.
Real Time with Bill Maher. Real Time with Bill Maher: Ben Affleck, Sam Harris and Bill
Maher Debate Radical Islam (HBO). Online video clip. YouTube. YouTube, 6 Oct. 2015.
Web. 13 Apr. 2015

Weber, Max. "Ethnic Groups." Economy and Society. Trans. Ephraim Fischoff. Ed. Guenther
Roth and Claus Wittich. Los Angeles: U of California, 1978. 386. Print.