The basic problem I have with the so-called "progressive" muslim movement is the deep infatuation it has with "progressive" American political leftism. The very fact that a contributor to PI.org would choose the name "muslim hedonist" is in some sense indicative of the general "salad bar" attitude towards faith that makes a mockery of the very concept of Islam - asubmission to truth. Verily I will support the right of any muslim to define and interpret the truth as they see fit; but there is an engrained hostility towards faith - and particularly those who take a less "hedonistic" and more traditional interpretation of faith - that undermines their very claim to diversity. As with leftist groups in general, diversity is a thing in the abstract, whereas the reality is a strict code of orthodoxy not that different from the uber-religious muslims; yin and yang, on the surface different as night and day, yet in true shape completely alike.
Good luck to ProgressiveIslam.org, but they do not speak for me, I speak for myself. And I respect genuine defenders of the right to have faith - a freedom that I have never felt that PI.org or their supporters ever acknowledged - such as Thabet and Haroon far more than I do the narcissistic essays of Michael Muhammad Knight or Muslim Hedonist or Amina Wadud.
On this blog I strive to integrate modernity with faith and I succeed. I will not give up either; both are precious to me. That is my heritage and I am not ashamed to express it - with brass.
UPDATE: Mohja Kahf, writing at MWU:
The lazier among the progressives in the U.S. and Canada tend to act like House Slave Muslims. Too much reliance on what is pc in left-liberal Western discourse and what is au courrant in postmodern thought as the basis for their critique rather than a truly independent grounding in alternative spiritual paths. Here they should take a cue from the South African progressives & others abroad. If only the U.S. progs had experience with any sort of extra-systemic thought, with environmentalist thought, black radical thought, anything that would give them some backbone, some honest-to-goodness principles of their own. Instead, they run the other way wringing their hands abjectly whenever the nasty Field Slave Muslims say something Not Nice to Massa. Hey proggies, sometimes the Field Slave Muslims get it right, you know, even when one disagrees with their brute violence.
jazakallah!
Salaams, I think you say something right about leftist orientation of progressives. Sometimes, I think it gets in the way of fixing our communities and making them more livable for everyone. But, a civil society is constructed of multiple lines of effort.
ReplyDeleteLastly, I objected to Mohja's above comment when she first wrote it. I noted that it was odd for an Arab immigrant woman of privelage to appropriate slave terminology. She, and all the other immigrants do not possess the heritage the having slave ancestors. For full disclosure, I am white, but I would never imagine myself (mis)appropriating the sorrowful legacy of slavery to make a political point, especially as one who does not have to live with that legacy. Appropriating that lexicon only seemed to reinforce my impression of how poorly immigrant Muslims relate to thier Black american Muslim brothers and sisters.
She, and all the other immigrants do not possess the heritage the having slave ancestors.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry but I don't really agree that having distant slave ancestors gives anyone more perspective on slavery than someone who doesn't.
Frankly I think it is unseemly to suggest that black americans have specific issues (within the context of being muslim) that other muslims don't. Black issues are one thing, muslim issues another, but black muslim issues? It doesn't make sense to me.
Perhaps if some muslims relate poorly to other muslims who happen to be black, then it's partly because not enough emphasis is being made on the shared muslim identity. That's a two way street.