What's new

Self-Hating Muslims

Winchester

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
4,412
Reaction score
8
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
This is an article from 2009 but is as or even more relevant today

In discussions among Muslims this new breed is very apparent. In most situations it is not the ultra-conservative or extremely literalistic Muslim that is the problem. Our communities are plagued more and more with men and women who are at war with themselves, primarily for not fitting. Their square- pegs-in-round-holes situation has begun to cause friction within communities

9/11 led to the development of a whole new genre of Muslim - the kind that despises its own skin. In the humdrum of life the issues generated by them do not really matter, it is only when earth-shattering events occur like the tragedy at Fort Hood that they become difficult tragedy at Fort Hood that they become difficult to deal with.
"O you who believe! Testify to the truth even if it goes against yourselves, your parents or your relatives" (Qur'an, Surah Nisa 4:135). This is a tall order, no doubt, and the human psyche is for certain the reason for its revelation. We are all tilted toward our families and the prevailing opinion. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was confronted with this in preIslamic Arabia and after the most persuasive arguments about Islam, people refused to consider it just because their fathers and grandfathers had worshipped gods of their own making, Laat, Manaat and their ilk for generations.

As we grow and mature it is vital that we examine our belief system with an un-jaundiced eye, religion and culture included, choose, and then be comfortable with our choice.

The various permutations of pathology would not really matter had there not been a 9/11 and thereafter tragedies like the one recently at Fort Hood in which a Muslim psychiatrist while chanting "Allaho-Akbar" opened fire on a large number of soldiers, causing the deaths of 13.

Reaction to such events is when one has to deal with the self-hating Muslims and fend off their ire. There are various kinds of these haters. One is the "coconut": people who are entirely Westernized, patterning their lives on their perception of the successful Western contemporary. Unfortunately they are white on the inside, but the outside, despite the most affected of accents and the greatest shades from the sun remain deeply brown; and if not in the physical sense, the perception in the observer is one of foreignness.

Then you have the "nerve-grater": blames all ills of the world on Muslims, staunch supporter of the melting-pot theory, believer in blending in seamlessly, Muhammad is shortened to Mo, talks incessantly about mosques functioning more like churches.
There is not too much of a difference between the "coconut" and the "nerve-grater", there can be many areas of overlap, but they can totally distinct as well.

The "moderate" Muslim, a gift from George W. Bush is as dysfunctional a term as he was dyslexic. What is a moderate Muslim, pray? One who believes but not too much or all the way? One who prays once, maybe twice but not five times a day?
A man who goes to the mosque one Friday out of the month rather than all Fridays?
There are also the "moderate-fundos"; the ones that harass, pursue, question and wear down those Muslims that they see as "fundamentalist," another misnomer, for by definition every Muslim by virtue of believing in the articles or fundamentals of faith is a fundamentalist.

Events like the tragedy at Fort Hood instead of galvanizing and uniting Muslims, has shown the cracks in our ranks. All the varieties of self-hating Muslims described above have indulged in a collective defense mechanism of transference. Their anger at Nidal Malik Hasan has not caused them to write to the media and get it to cover accurately and not stir up sentiment, they have turned their guns so-to-speak on those Muslims that they call "fundos", "jihadis" etc. The "fundo" may well be a peace-loving Muslim, who is as bewildered with this new insult as anyone else.

In Surah Hujarat in the Quran (49:11) God says: "O you who have attained to faith! No men shall deride [other] men: it may well be that those [whom they deride] are better than themselves; and no women [shall deride other] women: it may well be that those [whom they deride] are better than themselves. And neither shall you defame one another, nor insult one another by [opprobrious] epithets: evil is all imputation of iniquity after [one has attained to] faith; and they who [become guilty thereof and] do not repent - it is they, they who are evildoers!" In discussions among Muslims this new breed is very apparent. In most situations it is not the ultra-conservative or extremely literalistic Muslim that is the problem. Our communities are plagued more and more with men and women who are at war with themselves, primarily for not fitting. Their squarepegs-in-round-holes situation has begun to cause friction within communities and the disillusionment even of those that are not directly involved. Their anger and agenda has become more and more directed toward those fellow Muslims that seem in their opinion to be comfortable and even proud of their culture and religion. This reverse-fundamentalism is really a manifestation of transference and an innocent Muslim can be the victim of some heavy verbal and emotional abuse.

It appears that Nidal Malik Hasan was a deeply disturbed individual who acted alone, but the media tried to put Islam on trial again. Soon thereafter Jason Rodriguez killed a person and injured several in Miami and no one cared to ask about his religion. In the effort to be "fair and unbiased" we cross the lines into frank injustice.

Muslims ought to believe in Islam being above attack; if they do not they ought to calm that reluctance and convert out.
The rest of us must correct misconceptions and misportrayals and the wholesale hijacking of Islam, be it by a Muslim or the media.

Transferring our anger to another Muslim and indulging in finger-pointing does not just weaken the Muslim fraternity, it is one of the worst exercises in futility and, if I may, stupidity.

Mahjabeen Islam
 
from above post:
''The "moderate" Muslim, a gift from George W. Bush is as dysfunctional a term as he was dyslexic.''

:lol:
 
Last edited:
The "moderate" Muslim

Is a fact. One who denies this, is arguing against the sun. Not all people agree with "extremist interpretation" of shoving his (and for accuracy's sake her) version of religion down everyone's throat, conquering his/her own lands and avenging Muslims by killing Muslims. The existence of moderates is conditional with the existence of extremists, if the latter exists (there isn't a slight shadow of doubt there) the former does too. Come on! Not all people would buy the "Oh Muslims dont do this, its not in Islam" lemonade after every terrorist attack or extremism related incidents in society, even though the involvement of the hyper-religious Muslims is more than evident everytime in committing atrocities on their own religious brothers (and sisters), mostly for being not on right path. Case in point, the hanged terrorists (once termed as foreign agents and not-Muslims) being accorded the facility of funeral prayers and it being attended by the masses recently. By doing this. YOU ESTABLISHED THEIR IDENTITY AS MUSLIMS FOR THERE IS NO BETTER PROOF THAN THIS! Non Muslims/Seculars/Western agents/Martians, you said I remember? And whilst you are pondering over that one, check the names of the last five Mujahids striving for "true religion" in this country, all would begin with a Qari-Mullah-Moulvi-Hafiz-Mufti-any other fancy term, so whom do you attempt to fool, terrorists apologist and all those in direct/indirect/explicit/implicit support of these animals? Believe what you wish to believe, live in whatever fool's paradise you find solace in, just dont insult our intelligence.
 
Last edited:
Religious people are hypocrites irrespective of the religion they belong to, and their level of hypocrisy is directly proportional to how strong their beliefs are in their respective religion.
 
Is a fact. One who denies this, is arguing against the sun. Not all people agree with "extremist interpretation" of shoving his version of religion down everyone's throat, conquering his own lands and avenging Muslims by killing Muslims.

Sir, what is the point. Preaching to the Choir, the rest are on could 9.
 
Sir, what is the point. Preaching to the Choir, the rest are on could 9.

Read it again, mon ami, I was just editing it. I dont understand the obsession of trying to blur the lines between extremists and moderates, even though the former routinely kills the former for being "not on the right path" and "infidel". There is no point, either dont kill me or dont ask for my support for the delusional one Ummah where all are just "Muslims", you cant have it both ways.
 
Read it again, mon ami, I was just editing it. I dont understand the obsession of trying to blur the lines between extremists and moderates, even though the former routinely kills the former for being "not on the right path" and "infidel". There is no point, either dont kill me or dont ask for my support for the delusional one Ummah where all are just "Muslims", you cant have it both ways.

Beautifully put.
 
Is a fact. One who denies this, is arguing against the sun. Not all people agree with "extremist interpretation" of shoving his (and for accuracy's sake her) version of religion down everyone's throat, conquering his/her own lands and avenging Muslims by killing Muslims. The existence of moderates is conditional with the existence of extremists, if the latter exists (there isn't a slight shadow of doubt there) the former does too. Come on! Not all people would buy the "Oh Muslims dont do this, its not in Islam" lemonade after every terrorist attack or extremism in society, even though the involvement of the hyper-religious Muslims is more than evident everytime in committing atrocities on their own religious brothers (and sisters). Case in point, the hanged terrorists (once termed as foreign agents and not-Muslims) being accorded the facility of funeral prayers and it being attended by the masses. Non Muslims/Seculars/Western agents/Martians, you said?
The problem is the labeling
Case in point the attendees of the funeral for that terrorist
now i wouldn't have attended it hell if it was upto me i wouldn't have even awarded him a proper burial but it was held in a small village....now people in our villages do tend to take part in funerals
This doesn't mean all who were their subscribed to those same views
And by that one action it seems they have lost their right to enter the Moderate Club
.
.
.
Secondly i feel as a Pakistani Muslim i don't have to owe anyone any explanation on what kind of Muslim i am because of the actions of french citizens thousands of miles away in France

I hope i made sense here getting my point across its almost 4 am here and i just logged in to give you a reply
 
The problem is the labeling
Case in point the attendees of the funeral for that terrorist
now i wouldn't have attended it hell if it was upto me i wouldn't have even awarded him a proper burial but it was held in a small village....now people in our villages do tend to take part in funerals
This doesn't mean all who were their subscribed to those same views
And by that one action it seems they have lost their right to enter the Moderate Club
.
.
.
Secondly i feel as a Pakistani Muslim i don't have to owe anyone any explanation on what kind of Muslim i am because of the actions of french citizens thousands of miles away in France

I hope i made sense here getting my point across its almost 4 am here and i just logged in to give you a reply

Winchester, you would be left bamboozled if you could gauge the extent of support for these extremists. The arguments of "few thousand" rented terrorists and " The problem isn't labeling, its the terrorist acts of a few (relative) extremists and the silent/vocal support from a lot of Muslims. Case in point, a few thousands, look at the pictures in the morning. The new ones will be out too at a later date, we have hanged a lot of bastards in the last week too. The excuse of "village people taking part in funerals" isn't good enough, for if I hate/dislike a person (a terrorist here) I wouldn't attend his funeral. Regardless of any freaking rituals/custom/culture. No, it doesn't mean that all those present had essentially the same thought pattern as the dead terrorist, it does however mean that the people did sympathasize with him, even if a little. There is no membership and there is no accountability for the past thought patterns/ideas/words, just the present ones. And unlike the other side, we dont kill whoever we disagree with and we aren't trying to convince anyone of our separate identity.

No, you dont and I didn't talk about the latest happening in France, but since you are interested. Pakistanis have started protesting and damaging their country for what happened thousands of miles away, so whilst you may not find any reason to offer anyone any explanation, some people consider it fine to damage their own country for the deeds of French citizens. Ironic. Me too, clearly showing signs of cognitive impairment now :D
 
You're wrong. They don't hate themselves, they hate religion itself but since they're not allowed to say anything about it directly, it's easy to misunderstand them as self-hating.
 
dont know.. I just copied the funny bit that caught my eye .. but I would imagine some newspaper/magazine would have come up with the word first to describe some muslims.

The mantra of the approved form of enlightenment to create the moderate Muslim was yet another failed gem from Gen Mushi.
 
Back
Top Bottom