Islamophobia in non Muslim states is no longer based on a case by case basis. It's not a matter of a few disgruntled young men (and occasionally women) who commit acts of religiously inspired terrorism for communal-theological-political reasons. The root cause of the fear is the "ticking time bomb" factor of the entire religious order and the communities that practice it because of the sheer unpredictability and magnitude of potential fall outs.
Currently in the non Muslim world (and perhaps even the Islamic world itself), the general understanding of the distinction between conservative Islam and radical Islam is poor; also, it is very difficult to predict who/how/when people gravitate towards radicalism. It's fairly evident that the pattern is highly unpredictable. You could have a liberal Muslim who makes that journey, a conservative who steps over, or just random non committal individuals (not even necessarily from an Islamic background) who experience an "awakening" and decide to take up fundamentalistic Jihad (John Lind or Aukai Collins types). This clearly is something that is not limited to Islam, however the volume, the general scope and the politicized/globalized nature of radical Islamism certainly brings the focus on itself. What makes matters worse is that there isn't a powerful movement within the Islamic world that is countering this phenomenon. Obviously there are a fair share of moderate Muslims and clerics who are against all of this. However their voices aren't being heard and their movements are nowhere nearly as proactive as the fundamentalist/radical one. Hence the feeling is that the (non-radical) Islamic community at large is silently accepting or maybe even secretly endorsing the virulent ideology which is openly hostile to and inherently incompatible with the non Muslim world in which Muslims are either migrating or have migrated to voluntarily in significant numbers.
Excellent post Energon. You've expressed the complexity of the issue very well.
The other thing that seems to irk westerners is that there is no direct link between Islamist radicalism and socioeconomics (the most important scale in the developed world). It is not possible to reason why educated and financially secure individuals who should be more enlightened still tend to get drawn into violent radicalism. This I feel creates a lot of panic in the western society.
I think the answer to all this lies not in western society, but in the real homeland of radical islam.
The Taliban, for example, are a radical cult, inspired by Wahhabis and fine-tuned by their own tribalism, nurtured by centuries of warfare.
We have discussed how very often, muslims in western countries feel alienated from their adopted society. I'm guessing that in the search for their roots, they unwittingly get drawn into extremist ideology.
IMO, any muslim who turns to religion, would in most cases, turn to the homeland of islam, and therfore to wahabbism.
As you mentioned, this phenomenon of seemingly well-adjusted individuals turning radical does create distrust towards muslims in the west.
Edit: I was just looking up the Deobandi Movement, and it appears that the Taliban has been heavily influenced by it, along with the wahhabis.
Read this:
Our followers ‘must live in peace until strong enough to wage jihad’ -Times Online
And this:
A movement fostered by the fear of ‘imperial’ rule -Times Online
I think the spineless Indian "Secular" government has contributed more than its fair share in the development of radical islam.
It is clear that every immigrant group maintains some level of isolation initially (for many understandable reasons); it is also clear that migrants face some level of hostility from the "indigenous" majorities. However the ability of various immigrant groups to integrate into the society of their migratory destinations and the negative reactions they experience are inherently different (for a multitude of reasons) and hence incomparable for the sake of generalizations.
It depends on how the receiving population perceives these immigrants. Indians for example, who emigrate to the US, are seen in a very positive light in american society.
The Chinese immigrants, not so much. (because of class differences), and Mexicans are seen very negatively.
The Italians were seen very negatively till the early sixties I believe.
