For Elizabeth Moon - with respect.

[dreamer_easy]

I want to make this posting out of respect for Elizabeth Moon. Why respect? Because I've met her and was inspired by her; because she's published lots of original SF novels and I'm still trying to get there; because it's her country and not mine; because, although I haven't the heart to check Google, I'll bet right now she is being dragged through the mud all over the place - not her posting about Park51; her. Online fandom, and indeed the net in general, don't know how to attack opinions - only how to attack people. (ETA: That's an overstatement. It's just woefully typical!)

You'll know, from my postings on the subject here and elsewhere, that Ms Moon and I have very different views on Park51 and on Islam generally. What's more, as an Anglo-Australian, I'm very aware that I'm not affected by the issues of discrimination and assimilation that her posting raises.

Rather than address either of those issues, then, what I want to do is question some of the statements in Ms Moon's posting, statements I believe to be factually incorrect.

Ms Moon states:

"When an Islamic group decided to build a memorial center at/near the site of the 9/11 attack, they should have been able to predict that this would upset a lot of people."

Firstly, the posting refers repeatedly to a "memorial center", which I don't think accurately describes the project: it's a community centre, which will include a memorial to the victims of 9/11, but also a swimming pool and gym, classrooms, a restaurant, an auditorium (and of course the prayer room which opponents call a "mosque").

But more importantly, in my opinion, Ms Moon is wrong in her belief that the planners of Park51 were hoping to provoke controversy - or that at least, they should have expected it.

For one thing, in the prayer room at the Pentagon, built on the very site of the 9/11 attack, hundreds of American Muslims have prayed every day since 2002 without anyone objecting.

For another - and for me, this is the clincher - the announcement of Park51 did not create a controversy. It had official and popular approval and minimal media attention. There was no to-do until months later, when anti-Islamic pundits made it into an Issue - and politicans jumped on board.

In my opinion, they are responsible for the angry arguments which are dividing Americans right now - not the planners of Park51. If anyone is neglecting their duty as citizens, it's the media figures and politicians using the community centre for their own cynical ends - especially those spreading suspicion, hate, and lies.

As Mayor Michael Bloomberg stated:

"We may not always agree with every one of our neighbors. That's life. And it's part of living in such a diverse and dense city. But we also recognize that part of being a New Yorker is living with your neighbors in mutual respect and tolerance. It was exactly that spirit of openness and acceptance that was attacked on 9/11."

tl;dr With respect, Ms Moon is incorrect: the planners of Park51 did not intend to provoke controversy; nor should they have expected it. There was no controversy until right-wing pundits invented one.

Comments

[whochick.livejournal.com]

As you already know, I'm not a Muslim. But let me just say, that if I were, I'd most likely be one of the most emotionally conflicted people in my little monkey-sphere because there is so much misinformation, uninformed opinion-slinging and general idiocy surrounding Islam out there in the world.

I heartily agree with your point of view. With all due respect to Ms. Moon, she's got it a little twisted, to my way of thinking. It's far too easy to fall into the trap of viewing the Islamic world as one united people, when really, it's as divided and diverse as any other faith.

While people continue to view moderate, passionate and intelligent Muslims as the same 'type' of people as those who perpetrated 9/11, we're just asking for the world's next religious war. I really hope that common sense and logic win out.

[catsparx.livejournal.com]

Thank you for exercising such respect, Kate. Moon might be less well informed than she could be but she doesn't deserve the tsunami of boiling vitriol she's copping for posting an opinion that doesn't sit well with others.

[svilleficrecs.livejournal.com]

I've got one word for you. Mid-terms.

[bemused-leftist.livejournal.com]

Oh, very sensible! Here is a good New Yorker article making that same point.
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2010/09/20/100920taco_talk_wright

I have considerable material supporting Park51 at my LJ.

[bodlon.livejournal.com]

It's frustrating, because the beginning of her post is hard to disagree with. Being engaged and giving back are both such obvious social goods that by the time she gets to the bits where she seems to assume that all Muslims are members of immigrant populations and that Park51's developers are Bad Citizens who should have known better, I just stare at the screen wondering what just happened. It's like somebody flipped a rocker switch halfway down the page.

I just want to say, "Wait, no! Go back! All of that was good stuff (if a bit preachy) up until you veered out into the land of bad information!"

[judiang.livejournal.com]

I've spent all day thinking about this post, wondering why I felt both in agreement, but yet disturbed.

You listed facts which are all true, but in this current climate of unreason, facts are not allowed to get in the way of the real problem: bigotry. The cognitive dissonance in Moon's post was caused by an astounding degree of ignorant white Christian privilege regarding assimilation and Islam. Her unreasoning were all talking points spewed by ultra right extremists used to promote Islamophobia and xenophobia. It was appalling.

I've watched you spend the last three years researching bigotry. Now comes indefensible subjective commentary from a writer you respect. Here was your opportunity to talk about bigotry. If Moon were to agree with every single one of these facts, it still would not address the bigotry which is what the uproar is about.

I imagine you felt uncomfortable deciding how to approach the debate. But in the interest of avoiding personal attacks and vitriol against her, you don't talk about the bigotry but manage to sidestep the issue.

Moon's comments are what real insidious bigotry looks like. It comes from people you know, people you respect, people you brush elbows with every day. Sure, it's easy to criticize strangers, even harshly so; it's more difficult to deal with those you respect. But you still must address it; you cannot deal with prejudice by not talking about prejudice. Fondness doesn't mitigate it in any way. Use the tools you've learned over the last three years to address her bigotry, or else, what has all your research been for?

I'm not surprised she was personally lambasted. As a PoC and a non-Christian, I believe bigotry is essentially integral to character. It colors everything a person thinks and does. I cannot feel dispassionate. If after extensive discussion, a person demonstrates she really don't care, then I must seriously reassess their character downwards.

[hnpcc]

I thought you mind find this article relevant: Catholics, Muslims and the Mosque Controversy.

Seriously there's a huge amount of deja vu happening here, at least for me.

The sentence:

Most worrisome, Catholics seemed insufficiently grateful for their ability to build churches and worship in a democracy, rights sometimes denied to Protestants and Jews in Catholic countries, notably Italy.

Sounded suspiciously like what Moon was saying in the last part of her post (and a lot like the "we shouldn't let mosques be built because Saudi Arabia doesn't allow churches!" arguments I've seen online elsewhere.) Weird.

[lydiabell.livejournal.com]

With due respect to you, I feel I should point out that this:

Online fandom, and indeed the net in general, don't know how to attack opinions - only how to attack people.

is unfair. Many people wrote intelligent comments on Moon's post respectfully disagreeing with her. Unfortunately, she deleted all of them. Before deleting them, her response was essentially "you're reading my post wrong."

If you want to keep the focus on people's words and actions, you shouldn't misrepresent them.