What the H**k is Cultural Relativism?
You are well educated, good with words and regard yourself a bit of intellectual. So what you do with your talent? Do you explore variety of things, spread positivity through your talents or do you limit your talents to spread poison and hatred. Unfortunately some people do limit their talents to attacking everything, which doesn’t fit into their small minded view of the world. They use their talent to attack and bully people who have a wider perspective, principals and opinions based on their experiences.
One such person writes and tweets anonymously under the name of Unrepentant Jacobin, thereafter referred to as UJ. We don’t know if the person is a she, he or it (an alien). This person's blog is headed “Poison Pamphleteer”. UJ's main subjects include Islam, Multiculturalism (mainly related to Muslims) & criticism of mainstream left (for opposing Islamophobia).The twitter profile of UJ states, I defend the West including Israel. Previously UJ's profile included Zionist, although UJ says he is non Jewish. UJ doesn't clarify, what does defending West mean and from what?. However, its clear that UJ's form of defence is to attack.
On 9th January 2014, I spotted UJ attacking someone from The Feminist wire, on twitter. UJ had tagged in couple of people for reinforcement or to show off, just like a bully in playground. As usual some troll accounts joined in too. I am not saying UJ was a bully at school; chances are he was a victim of bullying. It’s not unusual to come across such behaviour by UJ and his twitter buddies. I rarely intervene as more often than not UJ and co would try to shut people down, by labelling and name calling. However, on this occasion I did and was immediately labelled “racist”.
As I said it’s not uncommon for UJ and co. to attack and ridicule people who have a differing point of view, particularly on issues to do with Muslims/ Islam and Islamophobia. I remember the tirade of abuse from UJ and Clique, against Victoria Coren, for writing "My veil epiphany" .Then there was Priyamvada Gopal for writing this article criticising the activities of "Student Rights" an offshoot of Henry Jackson Society. Another victim of their attack was the Writers of Colour for publishing Shohana Khan's article on their website. Then there was attack on Laurie Penny for writing this article .This is just a sample of their victims but what is concerning is that, they not only target people who stand against Islamophobia.
I was shocked to be labelled racist by UJ so I decided to check what was going on between him and the Feminist wire. I learned that the Feminist Wire is a multi ethnic and inclusive website . Here is an extract from their Mission statement:
"The mission of The Feminist Wire is to provide socio-political and cultural critique of anti-feminist, racist, and imperialist politics pervasive in all forms and spaces of private and public lives of individuals globally".
It turns out that some 21 months ago in April 2012 Adele Wilde-Blavatsky had a written an article titled 'To be Anti-Racist is to Feminist: The Hoodie and the Hijab are not Equals'. The article was published on the Feminist Wire website. Adele had written the article in response to the united protest held, under the banner of ‘1 million Hoodie and Hijab March’ held across America. The protest was held to show solidarity with the victims of allegedly racially and islamophobic murders of Trayvon Martin, a 17 year old African American boy and Shamim Alawadi and Iraqi American woman.
Adele's article proved to be controversial and received criticism from a wide ranging feminist community and attracted abusive comments from the readership. After careful consideration and consultation, the Feminist wire decided to remove Adele's article and also decided to part with Adele. I should point out that the Feminist wire is run by a collective of writers who voluntarily donate their time on part time basis.
Let us examine what was so controversial about the article that nearly 80 feminists wrote a joint letter criticising the article.
The article was written and published when emotions were running high and black and white Americans were united against the alleged racial and Islamophobic motives behind the murders. Adele wrote:
A `One Million Hoodies' march was organised to demand justice for Martin. As Brendan O'Neill argued, this use of the hoodie is questionable enough. The wearing of `One million hijabs' to show public solidarity and outrage at the murder of Alawadi? I cannot think of anything more ironic and counter-productive.
I searched, without success, for the above quote attributed to of Brandan O’Neill. I did, however, find this article . The article was criticised by Ophilia Benson who wrote Vile Brandan O'Neill. However, the same Ophilia Benson later came out in support of Adele.
Adele also wrote:
What I take issue with here is the equating of the hoodie and the hijab as sources of ethnic identity and pride. The hijab, which is discriminatory and rooted in men's desire to control women's appearance and sexuality, is not a choice for the majority of women who wear it. The hoodie, on the other hand, is a choice for everyone who wears it. The history and origin of these two items of clothing and what they represent could not be more different; like comparing the crippling footbindings of Chinese women with a `Made in China' Nike trainer.
Adele’s comparison of a harmless piece of clothing to footbindings in ancient china, is this the kind of exaggerated analogy we should expect from today’s intellectuals. Despite the evidence to the contrary, even if you accept her premise that hijab is mainly worn by women, because of men’s desire to control women, aren’t those women entitled to protection from violence. Is it wrong to show solidarity with those who suffer abuse, threats and violence because they wear hijab. Adel's understanding of both the Hoodie and Hijab is nothing more than stereotypical prejudice.
She doesn’t know that the origins of both forms of head gear are in Africa and the Middle East. She doesn’t understand that headgear is worn by men and women all around the world. As well as being practical and religious, headwear is a symbol of fashion, status and prosperity. It is also part of culture and is symbol of national dress and pride of many nations.
The point is neither the hoodie is exclusively worn by black Americans nor is hijab an exclusive head wear of Muslims. It’s all about other people's perceptions. Question is why hoodie has become symbol of black men and why Hijab has become symbol of pride of Muslim women. In my view the answer lies in the wrong perceptions of wider society to link hoodies and black men crime and disorder. Similarly, hijab is maliciously being symbolised as oppression. The fact is that Muslim girls and women are making it a symbol of their identity and respect for their beliefs. They are standing up to the false propaganda that they are oppressed by their fathers, brothers and sons. They have the confidence to stand up to the bigots and say, we are Muslim, we are here, deal with it.
Why do some feminists feel they can ignore views of Muslim feminists like Camillia Khan who wrote this The 'Segregation' Debate and Muslim Female Empowerment |. Why do they generalise that hijab is forced on women but offer no evidence to support their claims. The findings of a study survey report on the opinions of people in seven, predominantly Muslim countries can be found here . The survey shows 85% support for hijab across a sample made up of men and women. These are just two examples of differing view ignored by feminists like Adele Wilde-Balavatsky and UJ and co. They forget that most young women of today, both in the west and the east, are better educated than their mothers. They make their own choices and they do not need someone else telling them how to live their lives.
On the issue of race hate crimes Adele wrote:
Racism is not skin-deep: white vs. non-white. If that were the case, then Why has there been centuries of caste discrimination and violence in countries like India? Why are Muslim women beaten and murdered by Muslim men for refusing to wear the hijab? How did both these deaths occur in a country that is led by a black male President? How does it explain the fact that about 150 black men are killed every week in the U.S. - and 94 percent of them by other black men?
UJ's explanation of the above is:
What was needed, she argued, was a reframing of the whole conversation about the defence of women's rights and the need for a feminism that was, if not blind to cultural difference, then at least not subordinate to it.
Neither the above extract from Adele Wilde-Blawatsky's piece nor the explanation of UJ makes makes any sense. Are they saying that victims of caste system, women murdered by men and black on black violence, while there is a black president, are all victims of racism.If that is what they are saying then in one swoop they have changed the definition of racism and racist violence. The other explanation could be that, all of the above violence is cultural. In other words non white races are culturally prone to violence. I, however, fail to see the connection between black male president and Murders of Martin Trayvon and Shamim Alawadi.
It seems to me that this is an attempt to link violent, race hate and ani-muslim crimes to culture of minorities and not real factors. To dismiss these crimes as result of patriarchal power, is ignoring the real factors. It’s an attempt to exempt western societies from any culpability. It suggests that if minorities do not wish to suffer racial violence, they should change and accept western culture/ dress, this race hate will stop. Therefore, it implies, that minorities should not protest as their problems are of their own making.
In light of the above, I am not surprised that the Feminist Wire collective made an entirely rational decision to remove Adele’s article and abusive comments from their website. They had no choice but to part company with her, they could not afford to associate with someone who was judgemental, exaggerator and who acted against unity and sowed seeds of division. Their side of story can be found here .
Adele seems to be unable to comprehend the reasons for the removal of her article and her removal from the collective. The matter continues to cloud her judgements and she has failed to see the motives of people, like UJ and Maryam Namazie, who are using her to pursue their own agenda. Furthermore, Two weeks after her removal from the TFW collective she wrote, an article titled "When Anti-Racism becomes Anti-Women: The 'Privileging' of Race above Gender, which you can read it here .
If Adele and UJ wish to promote unity among feminists then why continue to write about it. Some 21 months later Adele wrote, 'Stop bashing White Women in the name of Beyonce': We need unity not division' . You can read this here . Both articles show her inability to forget the incident with feminist wire and to move on.
She wrote:
Sadly, this is not the first time I have come across such a 'white women bashing' message from women in the media. Last year, the Feminist Wire collective published an article I wrote on the burqa and hijab in the wake of the tragic killing of Trayvon Martin: 'To Be Anti-Racist Is To Be Feminist: The Hoodie and the Hijab Are Not Equals'. The FW collective then backtracked after a backlash from their readership and after publishing a letter signed by over 80 feminists denouncing it. I subsequently published a follow up to the article 'When Anti-Racism becomes Anti-Woman'. I and other women who tried to defend the article online (including women of colour from Third World countries) were attacked as either white imperialist racists or suffering from false consciousness. The clear message was that if you're white you cannot criticise anything that is done or said by non-white people unless it follows a certain kind of left liberal 'post-colonial' strain of thought. In any case, white women cannot win on this issue. As Swati Parahsar stated in 'Where are the feminists to defend Indian women?' if white women do not speak up about the oppression of women of colour they are accused of white indifference, if they do they are accused of white imperialism. We're damned if we do damned if we don't.
Note the absence of mention of Shamim Alawadi’s murder. It is true that some seven month after her death, her husband was arrested in connection with the matter. However, at the time of her death everyone believed it to be a racist and Islamophobic murder. Even if the murder was not a hate crime, Shamim Alawadi was still a victim of heinous crime. As a feminist shouldn’t Adele be concerned about the number of women killed by their partners in the United States. Has Shamim Alawadi death just become a statistic, which is not worth commenting. Shouldn’t feminists like Adele be concerned about the high number of women killed in US by their partners, the figure could be as high as 1000 a year, and highlighting it in their writings? May be they don’t want to acknowledge that the anti women violence is as prevalent in the global north as it is in the global south.
What I found particularly distasteful was, after learning about the arrest of Shamim's huband in connection of her murder, the smugness and gloating in the exchange of tweets between Adele and her supporters.
When Adel says that she received support from women of colour, from third world countries, she is actually talking about women mainly resident in the west. She doesn’t know that in today’s global world terms like “third world” are offensive and are not used. Furthermore, all of these supporters seem to belong to one organisation with a specific agenda. One of the people who supported her is Maryam Namazie. One of the "feminists" listed in his article is Maryam Namazie. Her identity is really confusing as she wears so many hats:
1. Humanist; 2. Human rights worker; 3. Secularist; 4. Liberal; 5. Communist; 6. Head of One law for all; 7. Head of Ex-Muslims; 8. Editor of Fitna; 9. Editor of free thoughts website; 10. Women living under Islamic Law; 11. Atheist; 12. Immigration Advisor;
I am sure I missed a few. She is either a control freak or it's just a one women show. She recently published a report titled "Political and Legal Status of Apostates in Islam". The report is supported and sponsored by none other than Richard Dawkins, once a man of reason and science, who noadys spends his time tweeting news about criminal acts in far flung countries and links them to Islam. He also considers himself a satrist. The report by Maryam Namazie researched laws and prosecutions for apostasy in 29 Muslim majority countries. It did not find a single case of prosecution under so called apostasy law. However, this didn’t stop the author from inferring that, because these countries were Islamic and regarded Islamic law as superior, any one leaving Islam in all 29 countries faced death penalty. This shows that people like Maryam Namazie, Richard Dawkins and their fellow Islamophobes will not let facts stop their hateful propaganda. A recently declared ex-Muslim, summed up motives behind such reports as muslimphobic propaganda. You can read her tweet below:
 |
| Layla Murad Tweet |
I can understand why Unrepentant Jacobin decided to exploit the dispute between the Feminist Wire and Adele Wilde-Blavatsky and wrote this article titled "Racism, Censorship, Disunity, on the hounding of Adele Wilde-Blavatsky". It fits neatly into the narrow narrative he and his clique are pursuing. The article has been hailed as an intellectual piece by his clique but I will leave that others to judge.
Unrepentant Jacobin picked up the baton from Adele and questions the very definition of racism. UJ feels that the minority communities, living in the west, have been exempted from the norms of the western behaviour/ culture. He quotes the following from a speech by Martin Luther King :
"I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."
First of all I am surprised that UJ, as an atheist, quoted something which contains the word “created”. Secondly, UJ doesn’t believe that Muslims are equal to the westerners unless they have an x before their belief. Thirdly, a question, why the anti Muslim community (Islamophobia is not recognised by UJ and co) feel, they have the right to use these symbols and icons, of the civil rights, human rights and anti-apartheid movements, as tools of oppression of the minorities in the west. Furthermore, what right they have to argue that the minority communities should be denied rights under the equality, diversity and human rights legislation. They forget that it was the minority groups including Muslims who had campaigned and fought to get these legislation enacted. To deny people rights is akin to fascism than freedom and democracy.
While I agree with UJ that humans of all colours and creed are capable of being racists, but to say that power and supremacy ideologies do not play a role is just denying the historic facts. Take slavery, why is it that the westerners only took Africans as slaves, why not Europeans. It’s not that there was no rivalry between European countries or that there a shortage of people in Europe. This trend continues today, as modern slavery and human trafficking mainly targets non Europeans. This superiority complex of some westerners is still the cause of racism at home and abroad. When was the last time you heard stories of non westerners waving their passports abroad and saying they can’t be touched. Same people readily flout and criticise local laws, while advocating that western laws should apply everywhere in the world. They abduct people from their homes, rendition them, torture them and keep them in interned camps, without charge or trial.
The undeniable fact is that racism in the west mainly affects the minority and non white communities. To deny this is to deny the Lord Scarman's report and findings and every subsequent report confirming the existence of institutional racism.
If there is doubt then I suggest UJ and Adele should read this article in the Independent, which shows that children of minority communities, experience racism and racial & Islamophobic abuse at an early age. We are all aware of the increase in anti Muslim hate crimes in the UK, including Murder and arson, as shown in this report in the Guardian . Increasing trends in anti Muslim attacks are highlighted in this report published by the FBI , the report shows 50% increase in anti muslim attacks in the US. This Al-Jazeerah report show disturbing trends of attacks on people who look like a Muslims. In other words people who may not be Muslims but they fit the stereo typical image, because of their Asian and Arab descent. If this doesn’t show link between racism and Islamophobia then I don’t know what will.
While I agree with both UJ and Adele that feminists, black or white, on the left or the right , should be able to raise issues affecting women both in the global north & global south. What I don’t agree with is, that there is an hierarchy of violence against women and children based on who is doing it or who the victims are. Victims of violence whether in Pakistan, Afghanistan, India, Palestine, Syria, Iraqi etc. are all victims. Violence through arms and ammunition is as bad as violent rape on a Delhi bus. Furthermore, violence against women is not just a global South Issue, it is global North issue too. There may be different factors, causes and forms in the global North than global south but outcomes are the same.
Challenging so called crimes of passion and child sex abuse and paedophilia in the global North is as important as child marriages, honour killings in the global south. We need to challenge sexual abuse associated with the cult of celebrity in the global north as much as feudalism in the global south. Bonded labour is as bad as human trafficking for sex industry. Tackling gun and gang crime (in the last ten years more lives have been lost in the US through gun crime than terrorism and soldiers killed in action together) is as important as tackling terrorism. It is a shameful day when you see 4 grandees of British media appearing in the court, all on the same day, on charges of sexual abuse and sexual harassment. At the same time two senior politicians were suspended from their Political Party for alleged sexual misconduct. This doesn’t bode well for advances in tackling sexual harassment in our society.
Feminists shouldn’t just highlight the problems, they should also look at the causes and possible solutions and strategies to tackle . Lack of education, poverty, suppression by powerful and culture, all play their part. Wars often affects education, increases poverty and dependency on the powerful which leads to exploitation. Government policies such as one child policy in China and forced sterilisation in India has also lead to the gap in male female ration in these countries. Recently, media and feminists have been making a big hoo-ha,, without any substantive evidence, about foetus selection and abortions in the UK. The media and feminists, however, have failed to criticise these practices prevalent in India. Instead what we find is that they are demonising minority communities with pre-formed prejudices.
Intellect and intelligent are closely linked, you can’t be a great thinker and producer of reasoned arguments without the intelligence. You also need to be well informed and be able to process the information available and use facts to support your arguments. If you don’t have the information then you must seek it, before commenting and making ignorant remarks. However, modern intellectuals seem to think that because they are famous, they don’t need to follow this rule. They feel that their opinion, no matter how flawed, be accepted as intellectually reasoned statement.
This, flawed 21st century phenomenon, is not limited to certain academics, it has spread to the Journalistic, Political and other sectors. It has become the bases of creating so called think tanks, institutes and various other organisations. These organisations have names which are opposite to their activity, e.g. Centre for Community Cohesion, Human Rights Watch, Foundation for Science and Reason, Quilliam Foundation, English Defence League, Free Thoughts, Student Rights, etc. You might wonder why I have included EDL in the list, well it is to show the depravity of intellectual claims by these organisations. Most of them have the same Islamophobic and ignorant views and a shared agenda. They use the same arguments, same thread in their tweets and retweets. They have the same message with the same aims and impact.
We must expose such ignorance, wherever it exists, and restore the integrity of real intellectuals.
I admit that I do not understand in what context these people are using the phrase "cultural relativism". So what is culture? As there are no written rules which defines culture and because it is ever changing, we need to use our imagination. Although from time to there is revival of culture, as we have seen it on British Isles. especially in Wales. Different people interpret culture differently, however, in my humble opinion culture is all about life, living and lifestyle. It encompasses food, clothing, fashion, art, language, literature, music, sport, pastimes, relationships, to list the few items which may come under culture. As humanity develops and grows culture develop and evolve too. In today's global world cultures are global too. As we travel and emigrate our culture travels with us but it doesn't stay the same. For example Tea drinking was important tradition in ancient china but today it is linked to the English Culture. However, with the invasion of American coffee firms, this is under threat.
Sometimes, however, custom and Prentice and tradition is mistaken as culture. While culture continues to evolve, customs and traditional practices developed over long periods remain static. Therefore, opponents of the concept of multiculturalism should reflect on their position. While culture often travels with people, custom and traditional practises are often left behind. People also try to link culture to the belief systems when nothing could be further from the truth. However, this topic is for another day.
As far as the UK is concerned, Multi culturalism means understanding and celebrating diversity, which not only includes racial minorities but also other minority groups. These groups include Travellers, mainland European communities, Disabled and LGBT. Even before the arrival of the minority communities from the non white countries, the United Kingdom was a diverse and multi cultural country. England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland had their own cultures, values and languages. Furthermore, there were regional variation within England and other parts. Cultural festivals celebrating this diversity continue to be held. Only difference is that such cultural events are now enhanced with colour, spice, music, different foods and tastes of new comers.
To suggest that the non white communities should absorb themselves fully and become invisible is a laughable idea. Non white communities will always remain visible to racists and bigots.
Those opposing the multiculturalism are mainly Islamophobic and Racist groups. It will be a great shame if they succeed in creating divisions because of their narrow minded views of the world and humanity.
Cartoon by Operation Black Vote 