Extreme liberal
Here we go again – the UK government appoints a liberal feminist Muslim woman to head a counter-extremism campaign and news media on the right and left rush to say oh noes she’s a liberal, that will never do. The Guardian for instance:
The government has been criticised for appointing a divisive counter-extremism campaigner to lead a fresh campaign to stamp out radicalism in Muslim communities.
Sara Khan will lead the new Commission for Countering Extremism, the home secretary, Amber Rudd, announced, adding that Khan was “expertly qualified”.
The move was welcomed by some, including the former terror watchdog David Anderson QC.
However, the appointment of Khan, who is seen as being supportive of the government’s controversial Prevent programme, was immediately criticised by some, including from within the Conservative party.
The former Tory chairwoman Sayeeda Warsi described it as “a deeply disturbing appointment”.
Because Sara’s too liberal and secular and feminist, yet the Guardian doesn’t defend her.
Harun Khan, the secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: “The fight against terrorism requires equal partnership between all parties, including Muslim communities.
“This appointment risks sending a clear and alarming message that the government has no intention of doing so. Sadly it will be seen as a move to placate those small sections of society who see Muslims as foreign, alien, rather than as equal citizens in this country.”
Of course the head of the MCB said that, because the MCB is very religious and conservative and male-dominated. The MCB speaks for very conservative Muslim men, not Muslims in general.
Naz Shah talked crap about her on the Today program, but Amina Lone defended her:
“It’s quite incredible we have elected officials decrying an appointment which should be welcomed – which is of a young British woman, Muslim woman, when we say there aren’t enough women in leadership.”
A young British woman, Muslim woman, liberal woman, who thinks Islam too can be liberal and tolerant and non-patriarchal. Wouldn’t you think the Guardian would welcome that?
Khan, who describes herself as a counter-extremism and women’s rights activist, said she was “honoured and humbled”. She added: “I recognise the scale of the challenge we face in confronting extremism and I am deeply committed to this role.
“I will create a commission that is forthright in challenging extremism in the name of our shared values, fundamental freedoms and human rights. To those in our country who recognise the harm and threat extremism continues to pose in our society, I am eager to collaborate and engage.”
Khan, whose official title will be lead commissioner, is co-founder of the counter-extremism organisation Inspire. Her website describes her as “one of the UK’s leading Muslim female voices on countering Islamist extremism and promoting human rights”.
Yet here’s the Guardian saying ewww she’s not conservative enough.
Downing Street has insisted Ms Khan is “expertly qualified” for the new role – but a number of Muslim organisations are understood to be calling for her to be sacked and saying they will not work with her.
A petition by anti-Islamophobia campaign MEND, saying her appointment “will further damage relations between the government and Muslim communities,” is being circulated, the BBC understands.
See what they did there? Implied Sara is “Islamophobic.”
Nice job of making her job harder from the outset.
It does demonstrate that extremism tapers off gently into “mere” traditionalist misogyny as far from the right end of the political spectrum as the Guardian, that is overlaps in there with excessive concern for the feelings of the extremists from some places on the left, and that she’s a reasonable appointment for a position to counter that extremism. Opposition is to be expected, as repulsive as it will be.
What the fuck. Counter-extremism is divisive? Are they suggesting we should find a middle position with extremism??
‘…who thinks Islam too can be liberal and tolerant and non-patriarchal.’
Well, that might indicate poor judgment right there.
But here’s a perfect example of Western Decadence. We’ll invite Bin Laden to tea rather than risk association with racist, anti-immigrant nutjobs. And the ‘hard line anti-terrorists’ will throw women and civil rights under the bus for the sake of ‘community leaders’ and ‘sincerely held beliefs.’
With this in the background, is it surprising that, say, Hirsi Ali might land in the American Enterprise Inst. Or Majid Nawaz be labelled a hate group leader?
They aren’t the only ones. There is a frighteningly large number of leftist politicians who are calling for an end to “identity politics” in the hopes of winning elections. This means, stop suggesting that women and non-white citizens are entitled to equal protection, because that makes the average Joe ordinary American heartland voter feel ignored and repressed.
There is such a thing as being too tolerant.
Ask me, I think “identity politics” thinking is to blame for coddling Islamists.
But then I distinguish between “identity politics” and liberation movements (which fight for marginalized groups, but don’t center “identity.”) I realize that not everyone does, and that for some politicians, being against “identity politics” really means, Shut up brown people and all you women.