What do you think?
Rate this book
Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire: 20 years after 9/11
In this incisive account, leading scholar of Islamophobia Deepa Kumar traces the history of anti-Muslim racism from the early modern era to the "War on Terror." Importantly, Kumar contends that Islamophobia is best understood as racism rather than as religious intolerance. An innovative analysis of anti-Muslim racism and empire, Islamophobia argues that empire creates the conditions for anti-Muslim racism, which in turn sustains empire.This book, now updated to include the end of the Trump's presidency, offers a clear and succinct explanation of how Islamophobia functions in the United States both as a set of coercive policies and as a body of ideas that take various liberal, conservative, and rightwing. The matrix of anti-Muslim racism charts how various institutions-the media, think tanks, the foreign policy establishment, the university, the national security apparatus, and the legal sphere-produce and circulate this particular form of bigotry. Anti-Muslim racism not only has horrific consequences for people in Muslim-majority countries who become the targets of an endless War on Terror, but for Muslims and those who "look Muslim" in the West as well.
305 pages, Kindle Edition
First published August 7, 2012
49 people are currently reading
2764 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 45 reviews
February 8, 2015
This is a good introductory survey of the use of Orientalism to help further the goals of Western imperialism, from the medieval period up to modernity. Every review is necessary somewhat subjective and for me the overwhelming majority of material contained herein I was already familiar with. Having said that there were a few insights - such as the focus on purely textual analysis by Orientalist scholars - which were novel and that I found rang true. Also the disciplining of "terrorism" which had its foundations in a series of international conferences in Israel, and which current Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu had a hand in, was also of note.
It is an easy and relatively quick read which does not go into great detail but which offers a good summary of its major points. The author takes a self-consciously leftist and anti-imperialist view of the issue of Islamophobia, and occasionally employs a polemical style of discourse. I would recommend this book to someone looking to get a cursory understanding of the roots and utility of Islamophobia, and from there look at it as a pathway to further study.
It is an easy and relatively quick read which does not go into great detail but which offers a good summary of its major points. The author takes a self-consciously leftist and anti-imperialist view of the issue of Islamophobia, and occasionally employs a polemical style of discourse. I would recommend this book to someone looking to get a cursory understanding of the roots and utility of Islamophobia, and from there look at it as a pathway to further study.
December 18, 2014
America & Islam: Deepa Kumar’s Cry for Help
On January 8th, 2011 a man by the name of Jared Lee Loughner went on a shooting rampage at a political event where numerous people were killed and wounded and where notable US congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords almost died from a bullet in her head. In the premeditation stage of
this shooting rampage, Mr. Loughner wondered if he would end up being labeled as a terrorist; however, even though the act of what Jared Loughner did can easily be legally defined as terrorism, the label “terrorist” was never applied to him, nor was it part of the public dialogue surrounding the shooting. Mr Loughner was a white Christian fundamentalist, and as Deepa Kumar makes abundantly clear in her book, white Christian fundamentalists do not get the label of terrorist; “terrorist” is a label reserved for muslim males (especially of darker skin color).
Though Deepa Kumar never actually mentions the rampage of Jared Loughner (I believe the book was written prior to the shooting), her book makes it clear that if Jared Loughner’s name was instead Ali, Muhammed, or Sadr, then she would expect the word “terrorist” to be among the first out of the mouths of talk show pundits and law enforcement. In the book, Deepa Kumar analyzes the way Islam is, and has been, interwoven with Western societies for various political purposes. Though she draws heavily on Edward Said's Orientalism for inspiration, she mostly attempts to make the argument that Islam has been and is used as a tool for creating and maintaining hegemony. Indeed, it would actually be more accurate to reorganize the title of the book to “The Politics of Empire and its generation of Islamophobia,” as Mrs. Kumar doesn’t actually get into talking about Islamophobia until around halfway through the book.
She essentially begins at the beginning; at the very founding of Islam itself and its changing historical condition through time to our present day; by detailing the sometimes dichotomous interactions between Islam and the Christian West, Kumar uses historical context to try to explain why Islam is today viewed as “violent” “repressive” “backwards” or otherwise non-western in every way. Deepa Kumar takes great pains to highlight the existence of these perspectives towards Islam today, while trying to systematically debunk their validity.
D. Kumar attempts to take a systematic approach to her argument: she first tries to convince a possibly skeptical reader that such bias and indeed the “phobia” towards muslims actually exists, she then tries to explain why it exists (first through history, then through modern politics). There is a third part to her book however that she does not explicitly categorize: a railing against how unjust this phobia is, and an implied call for her readers to try and make it better (hence, the title I chose for this review). Kumar is not simply trying to pursue historical exploration and political analysis about American foreign policy; she is a writer with an agenda and a call to action. The crux of the argument she makes is that Muslims and Islam are negatively portrayed and treated, especially by the U.S. government, because it is useful for that government to do so in order to maintain dominance, both over other countries as well as its own population. Kumar calls this “Islamophobia,” or, the irrational and manufactured fear of Islam and Muslim people. She claims that this narrative of Muslims being dangerous and a “liberty-hating” backwards people provides the United States government with the justification to exercise control over its own citizens (with things like the Patriot Act and diverting public attention from domestic troubles), as well as providing a casus belli for foreign intervention into Muslim-majority nations in order to realign those nations with the interests of the American government. Of course, the implied purposes of these interventions into foreign Muslim-majority states is control of crude oil supplies and the prevention of other powers becoming global rivals to the United States. She draws a direct line between the arming and training of Al'Qaeda in order to contain the influence of the Soviet Union, and the attack on the world trade center on September, 11.
Though Deepa Kumar attempts to give a very scholarly and leveled criticism and analysis, the book is by no means unbiased, however, and occasionally her agenda of highlighting the existence and hypocrisy
of Islamophobia (noble as an agenda it might be) occasionally gets her into trouble. Kumar has blame enough to go around, regardless of political orientation, but occasionally her blame falls where it is
unjustly deserved, thereby causing her to fall into the same errors of the people she blames. For example, she criticizes the former Pope Benedict for a speech he made regarding a Byzantine Emperor,
and some anti-muslim things that emperor said; she accuses the Pope in this case of Islamophobia fearmongering and the perpetuation of an “orientalist” mindset (the assumption that people from the
middle East are simply inferior to the Classically-rooted West). However, a more thorough examination of the lecture Pope Benedict gave would show that what the Pope said was wildly taken out of context, and the accusation that he was fear-mongering is simply a mis-characterization and false. Deepa Kumar often criticizes people for taking Islamic quotes out of context, but her misrepresentation of Pope Benedict’s speech in the same way erodes the case she is trying to build up, and calls into question the authority of a lot of the other quotes she uses to make her point.
In the same vein, she accuses the late Christopher Hitchens of being anti-muslim and spreading fear of Muslim people. She says he “made frequent appearances on conservative talk shows” and blames him for
warning people against illusory dangers of Islam. What she doesn't really explain though is that Christopher Hitchens was a hardcore Atheist who warned against what he perceived to be the dangers
of all religion. She uses his “frequent appearances on conservative talk shows” as an instrument for tying him to the ideology of white Christian fundamentalists, yet she doesn't say that his “frequent
appearances” were more so he could debate against any theistic belief (usually Christian), rather than him having an agenda of Islamic fearmongering. Kumar’s brief attack on Chris Hitchens for regularly
being on a conservative talk show is tantamount to the guilt by association injustice she is trying to rail against in the rest of her book; just as she would see injustice at tying extremist elements to someone’s muslim beliefs for being on an extremist-friendly radio show, so too should she not tie another person’s beliefs to the conservative Christian T.V. show he might regularly frequent.
Though these small stumbles do open Kumar up to criticism, the general arguments and points she tries to make in the book are overwhelmingly supported by a combination of documentation and anecdotes, and her agenda is extremely compelling and well-delivered. For the readers who want the legal reasoning and burden of proof, Kumar delivers, talking about laws passed, written statements of government agencies, and procedural hypocrisy from a local and smalltown level up to the highest
offices of the United States government. For the readers who are more moved by emotional appeal, Kumar has enough to satisfy them as well; from American Muslims losing their property, to being unjustly imprisoned, to entire families being ripped apart by the State; the tears will flow aplenty.
These two approaches again underscore that Kumar has written a book with a purpose; a purpose of changing things. This is not a book meant to exactly be debated in emotionally-removed academic circles, in fact she has plenty of blame for the academic community in the book as well. Instead, this is a book designed to move people; move them emotionally, for sure, but to ultimately move them to action. The target audience for the book is a little harder to pin down than a lot of other books; she writes at a fairly sophisticated level, and demands that her readers keep up with her as she reasons through all the nuances of the creation and maintenance of Islamophobia both today and in the past. This would suggest that her book is more for an intellectual readership; yet, at the same time the urgency of the agenda of her book, and the criticism she levels at the institutionalized academic establishment, suggest that she is hoping a broad electorate will read her book. An electorate who will ask questions of political candidates on the campaign trail, who might make protestations to their evangelical preachers, and might talk about Muslims and Islam in different ways to their children. With all it’s flaws, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire is a crucially important book for changing the dialogue surrounding Islam and Muslim people; I just wonder if it will be good enough to accomplish the task Deepa Kumar hopes it will.
On January 8th, 2011 a man by the name of Jared Lee Loughner went on a shooting rampage at a political event where numerous people were killed and wounded and where notable US congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords almost died from a bullet in her head. In the premeditation stage of
this shooting rampage, Mr. Loughner wondered if he would end up being labeled as a terrorist; however, even though the act of what Jared Loughner did can easily be legally defined as terrorism, the label “terrorist” was never applied to him, nor was it part of the public dialogue surrounding the shooting. Mr Loughner was a white Christian fundamentalist, and as Deepa Kumar makes abundantly clear in her book, white Christian fundamentalists do not get the label of terrorist; “terrorist” is a label reserved for muslim males (especially of darker skin color).
Though Deepa Kumar never actually mentions the rampage of Jared Loughner (I believe the book was written prior to the shooting), her book makes it clear that if Jared Loughner’s name was instead Ali, Muhammed, or Sadr, then she would expect the word “terrorist” to be among the first out of the mouths of talk show pundits and law enforcement. In the book, Deepa Kumar analyzes the way Islam is, and has been, interwoven with Western societies for various political purposes. Though she draws heavily on Edward Said's Orientalism for inspiration, she mostly attempts to make the argument that Islam has been and is used as a tool for creating and maintaining hegemony. Indeed, it would actually be more accurate to reorganize the title of the book to “The Politics of Empire and its generation of Islamophobia,” as Mrs. Kumar doesn’t actually get into talking about Islamophobia until around halfway through the book.
She essentially begins at the beginning; at the very founding of Islam itself and its changing historical condition through time to our present day; by detailing the sometimes dichotomous interactions between Islam and the Christian West, Kumar uses historical context to try to explain why Islam is today viewed as “violent” “repressive” “backwards” or otherwise non-western in every way. Deepa Kumar takes great pains to highlight the existence of these perspectives towards Islam today, while trying to systematically debunk their validity.
D. Kumar attempts to take a systematic approach to her argument: she first tries to convince a possibly skeptical reader that such bias and indeed the “phobia” towards muslims actually exists, she then tries to explain why it exists (first through history, then through modern politics). There is a third part to her book however that she does not explicitly categorize: a railing against how unjust this phobia is, and an implied call for her readers to try and make it better (hence, the title I chose for this review). Kumar is not simply trying to pursue historical exploration and political analysis about American foreign policy; she is a writer with an agenda and a call to action. The crux of the argument she makes is that Muslims and Islam are negatively portrayed and treated, especially by the U.S. government, because it is useful for that government to do so in order to maintain dominance, both over other countries as well as its own population. Kumar calls this “Islamophobia,” or, the irrational and manufactured fear of Islam and Muslim people. She claims that this narrative of Muslims being dangerous and a “liberty-hating” backwards people provides the United States government with the justification to exercise control over its own citizens (with things like the Patriot Act and diverting public attention from domestic troubles), as well as providing a casus belli for foreign intervention into Muslim-majority nations in order to realign those nations with the interests of the American government. Of course, the implied purposes of these interventions into foreign Muslim-majority states is control of crude oil supplies and the prevention of other powers becoming global rivals to the United States. She draws a direct line between the arming and training of Al'Qaeda in order to contain the influence of the Soviet Union, and the attack on the world trade center on September, 11.
Though Deepa Kumar attempts to give a very scholarly and leveled criticism and analysis, the book is by no means unbiased, however, and occasionally her agenda of highlighting the existence and hypocrisy
of Islamophobia (noble as an agenda it might be) occasionally gets her into trouble. Kumar has blame enough to go around, regardless of political orientation, but occasionally her blame falls where it is
unjustly deserved, thereby causing her to fall into the same errors of the people she blames. For example, she criticizes the former Pope Benedict for a speech he made regarding a Byzantine Emperor,
and some anti-muslim things that emperor said; she accuses the Pope in this case of Islamophobia fearmongering and the perpetuation of an “orientalist” mindset (the assumption that people from the
middle East are simply inferior to the Classically-rooted West). However, a more thorough examination of the lecture Pope Benedict gave would show that what the Pope said was wildly taken out of context, and the accusation that he was fear-mongering is simply a mis-characterization and false. Deepa Kumar often criticizes people for taking Islamic quotes out of context, but her misrepresentation of Pope Benedict’s speech in the same way erodes the case she is trying to build up, and calls into question the authority of a lot of the other quotes she uses to make her point.
In the same vein, she accuses the late Christopher Hitchens of being anti-muslim and spreading fear of Muslim people. She says he “made frequent appearances on conservative talk shows” and blames him for
warning people against illusory dangers of Islam. What she doesn't really explain though is that Christopher Hitchens was a hardcore Atheist who warned against what he perceived to be the dangers
of all religion. She uses his “frequent appearances on conservative talk shows” as an instrument for tying him to the ideology of white Christian fundamentalists, yet she doesn't say that his “frequent
appearances” were more so he could debate against any theistic belief (usually Christian), rather than him having an agenda of Islamic fearmongering. Kumar’s brief attack on Chris Hitchens for regularly
being on a conservative talk show is tantamount to the guilt by association injustice she is trying to rail against in the rest of her book; just as she would see injustice at tying extremist elements to someone’s muslim beliefs for being on an extremist-friendly radio show, so too should she not tie another person’s beliefs to the conservative Christian T.V. show he might regularly frequent.
Though these small stumbles do open Kumar up to criticism, the general arguments and points she tries to make in the book are overwhelmingly supported by a combination of documentation and anecdotes, and her agenda is extremely compelling and well-delivered. For the readers who want the legal reasoning and burden of proof, Kumar delivers, talking about laws passed, written statements of government agencies, and procedural hypocrisy from a local and smalltown level up to the highest
offices of the United States government. For the readers who are more moved by emotional appeal, Kumar has enough to satisfy them as well; from American Muslims losing their property, to being unjustly imprisoned, to entire families being ripped apart by the State; the tears will flow aplenty.
These two approaches again underscore that Kumar has written a book with a purpose; a purpose of changing things. This is not a book meant to exactly be debated in emotionally-removed academic circles, in fact she has plenty of blame for the academic community in the book as well. Instead, this is a book designed to move people; move them emotionally, for sure, but to ultimately move them to action. The target audience for the book is a little harder to pin down than a lot of other books; she writes at a fairly sophisticated level, and demands that her readers keep up with her as she reasons through all the nuances of the creation and maintenance of Islamophobia both today and in the past. This would suggest that her book is more for an intellectual readership; yet, at the same time the urgency of the agenda of her book, and the criticism she levels at the institutionalized academic establishment, suggest that she is hoping a broad electorate will read her book. An electorate who will ask questions of political candidates on the campaign trail, who might make protestations to their evangelical preachers, and might talk about Muslims and Islam in different ways to their children. With all it’s flaws, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire is a crucially important book for changing the dialogue surrounding Islam and Muslim people; I just wonder if it will be good enough to accomplish the task Deepa Kumar hopes it will.
Read
December 4, 2013The history of capitalism is also the history of racism. In the nineteenth century, Karl Marx drew attention to how this mode of production systematically divided the oppressed as one of its principal means of survival. In his exile in Britain, he noted how anti-Irish sentiment was intentionally generated by the ruling elite as an ideological weapon to be used to divide and rule the working class:
The ordinary English worker hates the Irish worker as a competitor who lowers his standard of life. In relation to the Irish worker he regards himself as a member of the ruling nation and consequently he becomes a tool of the English aristocrats and capitalists against Ireland, thus strengthening their domination over himself. He cherishes religious, social, and national prejudices against the Irish worker.
This antagonism is artificially kept alive and intensified by the press, the pulpit, the comic papers, in short, by all the means at the disposal of the ruling classes. This antagonism is the secret of the impotence of the English working class, despite its organisation. It is the secret by which the capitalist class maintains its power.[1]
Later waves of Jewish, Afro-Caribbean, Asian and East European migrants would similarly be subjected to vicious discrimination and stereotyping, as the capitalist class sought out new victims for targeted racism.
Deepa Kumar’s Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire is a comprehensive study of the system’s most recent choice of political scapegoat for its failings; the world’s one billion Muslims. Taking her cue from the ‘red scare’ persecution of the American left in the aftermath of World War One, she labels this latest phase of capitalist paranoia, ‘the green scare’. The title indicates the materialist nature of her analysis of this issue. Islamophobia is best understood as the ideological response of a series of Western empires starting with the Crusader kingdoms of feudal Europe, right up to the exercise of Obama’s so-called soft power today: ‘anti-Muslim racism has been primarily a tool of the elite in various societies.’
read more here...
http://www.counterfire.org/index.php/...
The ordinary English worker hates the Irish worker as a competitor who lowers his standard of life. In relation to the Irish worker he regards himself as a member of the ruling nation and consequently he becomes a tool of the English aristocrats and capitalists against Ireland, thus strengthening their domination over himself. He cherishes religious, social, and national prejudices against the Irish worker.
This antagonism is artificially kept alive and intensified by the press, the pulpit, the comic papers, in short, by all the means at the disposal of the ruling classes. This antagonism is the secret of the impotence of the English working class, despite its organisation. It is the secret by which the capitalist class maintains its power.[1]
Later waves of Jewish, Afro-Caribbean, Asian and East European migrants would similarly be subjected to vicious discrimination and stereotyping, as the capitalist class sought out new victims for targeted racism.
Deepa Kumar’s Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire is a comprehensive study of the system’s most recent choice of political scapegoat for its failings; the world’s one billion Muslims. Taking her cue from the ‘red scare’ persecution of the American left in the aftermath of World War One, she labels this latest phase of capitalist paranoia, ‘the green scare’. The title indicates the materialist nature of her analysis of this issue. Islamophobia is best understood as the ideological response of a series of Western empires starting with the Crusader kingdoms of feudal Europe, right up to the exercise of Obama’s so-called soft power today: ‘anti-Muslim racism has been primarily a tool of the elite in various societies.’
read more here...
http://www.counterfire.org/index.php/...
December 7, 2021
*Note that this is for the second & updated edition of this book, released in September via Verso*
This is one of the best books I have read this year (though it's currently competing against Dr. Byler's Terror Capitalism for this #1 spot). Reading this in conjunction with my grad course articles on political economy complemented each other perfectly. While there is a fair bit of academic language and jargon employed (for those who may not come from this background), I still found Kumar's writing accessible and filled to the brim with recognizable historical details & examples. I have gone nuts tabbing dozens of pages and excerpts from this book, which will come in handy for my course paper on terror capitalism & racial neoliberalism this semester.
Kumar's argument is that anti-Muslim racism is an ideology and set of practices rooted in empire; race is also a construct that emerges from racism. I greatly enjoyed her chapters delving into the both liberal AND conservative forms of Islamophobia.
In one chapter she also outlines common dominant Islamophobic narratives/frames, including the myths that Islam is inherently violent, that Muslim women need to be liberated by the West from sexist Islam, that Islam is anti-modern and cannot separate religion & politics, and more. All of these are disproven throughout her work, which is greatly focused upon identifying the colonial and imperialist tendencies of the West (and many Western thinkers) and the resulting harms that stem from these framings. I also enjoyed the historical walkthrough of the Ottomans, Orientalism, and the British empire as this background set the tone for the rest of the book.
Would also recommend for anyone interested in U.S. imperialism and its ramifications; many many examples throughout this work that are both shocking and informative.
I could go on and on but I would end up doing a lacklustre summary of each chapter, when really, you could just go out and read the book yourself :)
This is one of the best books I have read this year (though it's currently competing against Dr. Byler's Terror Capitalism for this #1 spot). Reading this in conjunction with my grad course articles on political economy complemented each other perfectly. While there is a fair bit of academic language and jargon employed (for those who may not come from this background), I still found Kumar's writing accessible and filled to the brim with recognizable historical details & examples. I have gone nuts tabbing dozens of pages and excerpts from this book, which will come in handy for my course paper on terror capitalism & racial neoliberalism this semester.
Kumar's argument is that anti-Muslim racism is an ideology and set of practices rooted in empire; race is also a construct that emerges from racism. I greatly enjoyed her chapters delving into the both liberal AND conservative forms of Islamophobia.
In one chapter she also outlines common dominant Islamophobic narratives/frames, including the myths that Islam is inherently violent, that Muslim women need to be liberated by the West from sexist Islam, that Islam is anti-modern and cannot separate religion & politics, and more. All of these are disproven throughout her work, which is greatly focused upon identifying the colonial and imperialist tendencies of the West (and many Western thinkers) and the resulting harms that stem from these framings. I also enjoyed the historical walkthrough of the Ottomans, Orientalism, and the British empire as this background set the tone for the rest of the book.
Would also recommend for anyone interested in U.S. imperialism and its ramifications; many many examples throughout this work that are both shocking and informative.
I could go on and on but I would end up doing a lacklustre summary of each chapter, when really, you could just go out and read the book yourself :)
July 31, 2014
All empires throughout history have one thing in common. They try, through hegemony and propaganda, to whip up antipathy and hostility about a particular peoples and their region, which they’d like to invade and occupy. The process by which savage adventurism has been justified in the Middle East is by relying on widely held orientalist myths about Islam that have been propagated for years by pseudo-intellectuals like the lamentable Fouad Ajami and the contemptible Bernard Lewis. Myths like; Islam is inherently violent, sexist, and monolithic and Muslims are incapable of democracy and self-rule and their minds are incapable of rationality and reason. Deepa Kumar – a member of that new school of scholars who have an intellectual and philosophical antecedent in the late Edward Said – has written, perhaps, the best book I’ve read all summer. She sets out to debunk these commonly believed myths in a very lucid and readable way and shows how destructive these myths have been for the peoples of the Middle East and Muslims in America. I particularly thought her argument about the interrelation between Neoliberalism and the vacuum political Islam has filled because of it was legendary. An absolutely essential read for anyone interested in this region!
August 4, 2015
Horrible book that defends Hamas as picking up "the mantle of national resistance against Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands." Has she ever considered that resistance isn't bombing innocent women and children?
November 19, 2021
An absolutely phenomenal intellectual contribution on how "Islamophobia" is actually better understood as "anti-Muslim racism", and the role it plays in upholding U.S. imperial interests. Highly highly recommend.
February 29, 2020
A relatively short and sometimes dense look at what has given rise to modern-day Islamophobia in America. Kumar's analysis spans from the founding of Islam to end of Obama's first term. The book really drives home the point that Islamophobia is not a right or a left issue; rather, it is by this point deeply ingrained in the US political system. Kumar particarly reinforces the ways that Obama continued or even expanded many anti-Muslim policies and rhetoric. I'd highly recommend this book to anyone looking to better understand the whats, hows, and whys of the US's treatment of Muslim-Americans and the Muslim world at large.
June 8, 2023
Impressively thorough and studiously rigorous. historically informed structural analysis and deeply logical without sacrificing readability, urgency and hope. Need to give this a re read at some point. Meticulous with its sourcing, draws from a wide range and variety of fields. Really insightfully lays out dominant ideological frameworks and their development alongside historical accounts to fully contextualise its conclusions. A very clear eye cast on the origins of political movements and forces at play to create current trends and paradigms. By naming and tracing back groups of people and their ideological lineage so to speak, as well as for key texts and events. Just, covers so much ground. Both extremely comprehensive and comprehensible; let it be an introduction to Islamophobia and also a way to deepen understanding of it.
December 8, 2016
Fascinating history of Islam, relations between non and Muslim-majority countries, and political uses of Islamophobia, but the author doesn't seem to acknowledge any reasonable concern about Islam. There are only two groups of people in her mind: Imperialists/Islamophobes and "progressives"
August 1, 2023
This book was a pleasant surprise in many ways, despite some disagreements that I have with the author I appreciate her perspective and her efforts in fighting prejudice and racism. Although, I am quite familiar with the history of the "Muslim World" and its interaction with the west in Andalusia and the Crusades, it never really struck me to frame the issue of Islamophobia in such a political rhetoric. I have read Media Control by Chomsky and other works that highlight the imperial ambitions of the USA and its utilization of fear and hate towards Muslims, but I really didn’t think it went so far to be such a big deal in US politics. I also didn’t know about how deep the hatred goes and the efforts to fight Islam went. Honestly, living in a Muslim-majority Arab country, I was always a bit skeptical of how some people here paint the west as an enemy constantly meddling in our affairs. The amount of ridiculous conspiracy theories sometimes pushes you in the other direction, where you accept that the "US is not that bad" or "they are not trying to get us". Especially, when the idea of fearing the west can be used to mobilize hatred and unity under dictators or radicals. Kumar systematically shows how deeply intertwined Islamophobia is with the US political agenda on both sides of the political spectrum. I didn’t know that there was actually a huge network of Neoconservatives, Zionists, Christian fundamentalists, Ex-Muslims, and others who are united together, and collaborate on painting a certain image of Islam and Muslims.
There is a major point of disagreement, however, between our preferred rhetorical methods and tactics when it comes to fighting Islamophobia. Kumar concludes "Islamophobia is about politics and not religion; it is therefore in the realm of politics that Islamophobia must be fought." I had realized that this was her perspective throughout the book, but she saves me some time by saying it outright. I do agree about the political nature of Islamophobia, especially after Kumar proves this entanglement throughout her book. However, I don’t think we should limit ourselves to fighting it only in the political realm. Kumar is speaking from a leftist perspective, one that she doesn’t really elaborate on. She is clearly anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist and anti-nationalist. Some parts of the book read like a leftist manual on how to deal with Islamists and Islamophobia. She doesn’t really explain what kind of leftist politics she wishes to engage with, does she still want free markets? Is she going for anarcho-syndicalism or for socialist welfarism? Does she think that this should be achieved through the parliamentary and democratic process or through some form of revolution? I know this might be out of the scope of the book, because she is working from the assumption that she needs to convince her audience about the viability of her position first and about the existence and the politicization of Islamophobia. Which brings me back to my disagreement about rhetoric. I don’t think we should dismiss other methods of fighting Islamophobia. I think that a lot of the material out there on the internet dives deep into bad or fundamentalist interpretations, that are sometimes outright fallacious, to paint Islam in a certain way. To dispel these myths a dive into the theology is definitely helpful. When Kumar was dispelling the myths about Islam, she sometimes references scholars and thinkers who do just that but she doesn’t really discuss their arguments in depth. Instead, she chooses to attack Christian fundamentalism or point out the hypocrisy of doing so with the idea of "people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones". I think this prevents interfaith conversations with mainstream Christians who are simply ignorant about the religion and are just parroting things they find in mass media. Pointing our fingers at them and saying your religion has violence and oppresses women too, only antagonizes them and reinforces the idea that Islam does promote these negative values. Instead I think more time should be spent on explaining different interpretations, the lack of good translation, the huge span of traditions, mystical and spiritual Islam that is quite different from the fundamentalist picture that is usually portrayed, etc. Another method that Kumar employs but briefly and mainly just references as well, is the personal or emotional one. I think that stories of hate and prejudice, stories that show real Muslims and how difficult their lives can be, memes, movies, cultural products are a very strong way to fight Islamophobia.
I understand that Kumar wants to focus on the politics, and that she does employ the other tactics I discussed even if briefly and thus probably on some level we do agree on their usefulness. However, I wish she would elaborate on her leftist perspectives, on her actual political agenda or methods for achieving political change, and not dismiss other rhetorical methods of fighting prejudice. Otherwise, this is a robust and interesting read that is certainly eye opening and I would definitely recommend reading it.
There is a major point of disagreement, however, between our preferred rhetorical methods and tactics when it comes to fighting Islamophobia. Kumar concludes "Islamophobia is about politics and not religion; it is therefore in the realm of politics that Islamophobia must be fought." I had realized that this was her perspective throughout the book, but she saves me some time by saying it outright. I do agree about the political nature of Islamophobia, especially after Kumar proves this entanglement throughout her book. However, I don’t think we should limit ourselves to fighting it only in the political realm. Kumar is speaking from a leftist perspective, one that she doesn’t really elaborate on. She is clearly anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist and anti-nationalist. Some parts of the book read like a leftist manual on how to deal with Islamists and Islamophobia. She doesn’t really explain what kind of leftist politics she wishes to engage with, does she still want free markets? Is she going for anarcho-syndicalism or for socialist welfarism? Does she think that this should be achieved through the parliamentary and democratic process or through some form of revolution? I know this might be out of the scope of the book, because she is working from the assumption that she needs to convince her audience about the viability of her position first and about the existence and the politicization of Islamophobia. Which brings me back to my disagreement about rhetoric. I don’t think we should dismiss other methods of fighting Islamophobia. I think that a lot of the material out there on the internet dives deep into bad or fundamentalist interpretations, that are sometimes outright fallacious, to paint Islam in a certain way. To dispel these myths a dive into the theology is definitely helpful. When Kumar was dispelling the myths about Islam, she sometimes references scholars and thinkers who do just that but she doesn’t really discuss their arguments in depth. Instead, she chooses to attack Christian fundamentalism or point out the hypocrisy of doing so with the idea of "people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones". I think this prevents interfaith conversations with mainstream Christians who are simply ignorant about the religion and are just parroting things they find in mass media. Pointing our fingers at them and saying your religion has violence and oppresses women too, only antagonizes them and reinforces the idea that Islam does promote these negative values. Instead I think more time should be spent on explaining different interpretations, the lack of good translation, the huge span of traditions, mystical and spiritual Islam that is quite different from the fundamentalist picture that is usually portrayed, etc. Another method that Kumar employs but briefly and mainly just references as well, is the personal or emotional one. I think that stories of hate and prejudice, stories that show real Muslims and how difficult their lives can be, memes, movies, cultural products are a very strong way to fight Islamophobia.
I understand that Kumar wants to focus on the politics, and that she does employ the other tactics I discussed even if briefly and thus probably on some level we do agree on their usefulness. However, I wish she would elaborate on her leftist perspectives, on her actual political agenda or methods for achieving political change, and not dismiss other rhetorical methods of fighting prejudice. Otherwise, this is a robust and interesting read that is certainly eye opening and I would definitely recommend reading it.
January 18, 2019
If your instinctive response to the phrase “liberal Islamophobia” is something like, “that doesn’t make any sense, its conservatives who are racists,” you should probably read Kumar's book. This is assuming you've already done some reading about the history of Islam and are familiar with imperialism's impact on our history. Without a solid grounding in the history of Islam and of Europe’s imperial ventures in the Islamic world, there’s a lot of information here that might be difficult to follow. This book occupies a very particular niche, and if you’re educating yourself on the social forces that have created this current moment in the fall of the American empire (and you should be), that means you're looking for exactly this, and you’ll be glad you’ve found it.
I myself only finished this book because a friend wanted to talk about it. That was enough to motivate me all the way through, but otherwise I probably would have set it down. The writing quality is functional, not outstanding, and since I’ve been obsessively reading news analysis of America’s wars since 2001, most of the information was completely familiar to me. For my history degree I took several courses that touched on the history of Islam-and-the-West: the Crusades, the Atlantic slave trade, the Russians in Afghanistan, the British in the Middle East and the Americans in Iran. Disillusionment with the Iraq War was a formative part of my young adulthood. I’m old enough to remember all the way back to 2010-2011 and the Arab Spring, how hopeful some of us were and how reluctant the Obama administration was to support Arab democratic revolutionaries.
So when Kumar says, “McCarthyism wasn’t simply about one out-of-control senator, but a political system (including both Democrats and Republicans) that allowed a figure like Joseph McCarthy to set the political agenda. McCarthy was a useful tool in prosecuting the Cold War—particularly in creating a climate of fear where dissent could be punished and neutralized. The right-wing Islamophobic warriors play a similar role during the era of the War on Terror. They are not “alien outsiders” but emerge from within the political establishment, the security apparatus, the academy, the think tank milieu, and the mainstream media. Thus, far from “infiltrating” an otherwise good system the new McCarthyites are a product of, and fit comfortably within, the structures of American empire,” I’m not surprised.
If you are surprised, read this book! If you hear, “anti-Muslim bigotry is about creating a political climate in which the United States can invade other countries at will and suppress dissent at home,” and want to fight about it, read this book! It’s pretty good, and reading it is a much better experience than fighting in the comments under dumb Facebook memes.
n.b. I got this book from my not-so-local public library, downloaded instantly as an ebook. Super convenient.
I myself only finished this book because a friend wanted to talk about it. That was enough to motivate me all the way through, but otherwise I probably would have set it down. The writing quality is functional, not outstanding, and since I’ve been obsessively reading news analysis of America’s wars since 2001, most of the information was completely familiar to me. For my history degree I took several courses that touched on the history of Islam-and-the-West: the Crusades, the Atlantic slave trade, the Russians in Afghanistan, the British in the Middle East and the Americans in Iran. Disillusionment with the Iraq War was a formative part of my young adulthood. I’m old enough to remember all the way back to 2010-2011 and the Arab Spring, how hopeful some of us were and how reluctant the Obama administration was to support Arab democratic revolutionaries.
So when Kumar says, “McCarthyism wasn’t simply about one out-of-control senator, but a political system (including both Democrats and Republicans) that allowed a figure like Joseph McCarthy to set the political agenda. McCarthy was a useful tool in prosecuting the Cold War—particularly in creating a climate of fear where dissent could be punished and neutralized. The right-wing Islamophobic warriors play a similar role during the era of the War on Terror. They are not “alien outsiders” but emerge from within the political establishment, the security apparatus, the academy, the think tank milieu, and the mainstream media. Thus, far from “infiltrating” an otherwise good system the new McCarthyites are a product of, and fit comfortably within, the structures of American empire,” I’m not surprised.
If you are surprised, read this book! If you hear, “anti-Muslim bigotry is about creating a political climate in which the United States can invade other countries at will and suppress dissent at home,” and want to fight about it, read this book! It’s pretty good, and reading it is a much better experience than fighting in the comments under dumb Facebook memes.
n.b. I got this book from my not-so-local public library, downloaded instantly as an ebook. Super convenient.
June 1, 2020
I have always said that those who get to learn their history from books are the ones who are lucky enough to be distant from it. Who are able to look back on events without having to relive them or be reactive to them on a daily basis. I acknowledged that privilege when I picked up this book.
Islamophobia is something I’ve grown up in, and as history was unfolding, I didn’t have the wherewithal to understand the root causes, the political figures in what was a foreign government at the time, or how we lost control of our own narrative. Today, with the help of books like this, I am in a position and have gained enough knowledge to finally understand what’s going on—not just react.
This book, written like a history book (my least favorite subject), spells it all out with names and dates. It provides the political context to all the incidents I experienced first or second hand. I can’t say I followed it all, but it confirmed my suspicion that the issue goes beyond ignorance.
Islamophobia is a politicized movement. That’s a fact I didn’t want to believe until this book spelled it out. Even with America's racist history since inception, I didn’t want to believe people could weaponize me, my family, or my friends.
While I wish this book included personal narratives to add more context to Islamophobia beyond “political strategy”, it did unfold how a few key individuals shifted the entire nation and destroyed millions of lives both directly and indirectly—including figures who painted themselves as allies. This book called out the selfish greed and need for power that has plagued our government. It demystified the White House and pointed fingers at the key culprits.
I’ll likely have to reread this to make sure I grasped all of the touchpoints (there are many considering this is an issue that has persisted for decades). It’s worth a read for the knowledge, or to confirm your suspicions.
Islamophobia is something I’ve grown up in, and as history was unfolding, I didn’t have the wherewithal to understand the root causes, the political figures in what was a foreign government at the time, or how we lost control of our own narrative. Today, with the help of books like this, I am in a position and have gained enough knowledge to finally understand what’s going on—not just react.
This book, written like a history book (my least favorite subject), spells it all out with names and dates. It provides the political context to all the incidents I experienced first or second hand. I can’t say I followed it all, but it confirmed my suspicion that the issue goes beyond ignorance.
Islamophobia is a politicized movement. That’s a fact I didn’t want to believe until this book spelled it out. Even with America's racist history since inception, I didn’t want to believe people could weaponize me, my family, or my friends.
While I wish this book included personal narratives to add more context to Islamophobia beyond “political strategy”, it did unfold how a few key individuals shifted the entire nation and destroyed millions of lives both directly and indirectly—including figures who painted themselves as allies. This book called out the selfish greed and need for power that has plagued our government. It demystified the White House and pointed fingers at the key culprits.
I’ll likely have to reread this to make sure I grasped all of the touchpoints (there are many considering this is an issue that has persisted for decades). It’s worth a read for the knowledge, or to confirm your suspicions.
July 31, 2017
I found the book really easy to follow even though I knew very little both about pre-colonial history and the post-colonial nationalist movements in the Middle East. The author is very clear in signposting her arguments, which made it easier for me to figure out why she was including particular examples. The book is written with someone who has little knowledge of the Middle East or Islam in mind, and the author includes enough explanatory material to follow the argument, without seeming patronising.
Generally, she covers three main sections:
1. The evolution of the ideas behind Islamophobia (from the 7thc. to the 20thc.) and how these ideas persist today. She includes the fluctuating relationship Europe had with Muslims up until the enlightenment, and looks at how colonisation and imperialism shaped the way scholars and thus the West came to understand Muslims.
2. International politics (The US' contradictory stance towards Political Islam during the Cold War; The internal factors behind the fall and rise of Political Islam in the Middle East; The post-Cold War US foreign policy factions and the similarities between the neo-cons and liberals)
3. Domestic US politics (use of the legal system to target Arabs and Muslims; rise of right-wing Islamophobes; rise of the homegrown terrorist scare)
She concludes with suggestions on how to fight and resist Islamophobia.
While this book might contain information that is general knowledge to a lot of people (I'm thinking of people like my dad), I learnt a lot from it and would recommend it to one and all.
Generally, she covers three main sections:
1. The evolution of the ideas behind Islamophobia (from the 7thc. to the 20thc.) and how these ideas persist today. She includes the fluctuating relationship Europe had with Muslims up until the enlightenment, and looks at how colonisation and imperialism shaped the way scholars and thus the West came to understand Muslims.
2. International politics (The US' contradictory stance towards Political Islam during the Cold War; The internal factors behind the fall and rise of Political Islam in the Middle East; The post-Cold War US foreign policy factions and the similarities between the neo-cons and liberals)
3. Domestic US politics (use of the legal system to target Arabs and Muslims; rise of right-wing Islamophobes; rise of the homegrown terrorist scare)
She concludes with suggestions on how to fight and resist Islamophobia.
While this book might contain information that is general knowledge to a lot of people (I'm thinking of people like my dad), I learnt a lot from it and would recommend it to one and all.
March 7, 2023
The premise of the book - linking Islamophobia to Imperialism and the development, strengthening, and expansion of Empire-building (mostly economic but growing more militaristic - is fascinating. Kumar shows how race as a concept was created by newly emerging economic empires (Spain, UK, USofA), and how it was a short move from "othering" non-White people to doing the same for Muslims, especially once the Muslim nations of the world could be controlled and dominated by the ever-increasing global power (economic, political, and military) of the imperialist/influence-seeking nations. Having read quite extensively on the origins and growth of Capitalism, its greedy and never-ending need for more markets, and its infiltration of the military, police and surveillance arms of nations searching for new enemies, I was left unsurprised with the data presented. Still, for those readers with less backgrounding in these fields of study the book has a lot to offer. Islam, Muslims, and any non-White, non-"christian" peoples are just the latest evils manufactured by the USofA and its imperialist allies, weak and hollow justifications for rampant violence, oppression, and control.
January 11, 2018
This is the type of book I was looking for after a lackluster workshop I took about being an ally to the Muslim community. It discusses Islam's intellectual contributions in earlier centuries and talks about modern fundamentalist movements. Most importantly, though, it emphasizes that Islamophobia is about politics and not religion, and that the construction of an ominous enemy only serves to keep the populace in fear.
Some sections are thinly argued, particularly when discussing how dire economic conditions fuel radicalism and when claiming that liberal criticism of human rights violations supports a "white man's burden" imperialism. The latter is frustrating because the author gives no indication of how one might discuss those violations without propping up empire. I also found the discussion of modern fundamentalism a bit hand-wavy. The groups described sound genuinely scary and that section would have benefited from more context, such as more detail on hard-right Christians that bomb abortion clinics (which is mentioned once in passing).
Some sections are thinly argued, particularly when discussing how dire economic conditions fuel radicalism and when claiming that liberal criticism of human rights violations supports a "white man's burden" imperialism. The latter is frustrating because the author gives no indication of how one might discuss those violations without propping up empire. I also found the discussion of modern fundamentalism a bit hand-wavy. The groups described sound genuinely scary and that section would have benefited from more context, such as more detail on hard-right Christians that bomb abortion clinics (which is mentioned once in passing).
March 14, 2020
An interesting read overall. The author starts an interesting discussion, writes in a manner accessible to all, and provides pragmatic suggestions on what one could do to help.
- The author doesn't start talking about islamophobia until one is through a third of the book which gets annoying. But since this is written for a general audience, it is understandable to include the required background.
- Repetition. Often times the same facts are repeated in different chapters.
- The book is much more instructive about how the propaganda model works in the US than islamophobia itself.
- Very US centric. Does not talk much about Islamophobia in Europe or elsewhere.
- Interesting observations on the erosion of civil liberties in the US.
- A bit biased. I felt there was little discussion on Muslim resistance to Islamism. The author does mention a few organization like RAWA, but such mentions were done in passing and not discussed in detail.
- The author doesn't start talking about islamophobia until one is through a third of the book which gets annoying. But since this is written for a general audience, it is understandable to include the required background.
- Repetition. Often times the same facts are repeated in different chapters.
- The book is much more instructive about how the propaganda model works in the US than islamophobia itself.
- Very US centric. Does not talk much about Islamophobia in Europe or elsewhere.
- Interesting observations on the erosion of civil liberties in the US.
- A bit biased. I felt there was little discussion on Muslim resistance to Islamism. The author does mention a few organization like RAWA, but such mentions were done in passing and not discussed in detail.
January 4, 2024
Love how it makes the connection from mercantalist Spain in the 16th century up to the USA's current desired domination (via Israel) of West Asia and North Africa. I wish the author delved deeper into the development of Israeli Islamophobia and how those same tropes migrated to the USA. Both Israel and the USA view the 'bad muslims' in resistance orgs and Iran as threats so I'm sure their conceptions share similar tropes. That's not to say Deepa Kumar doesn't make the connection between Israel, the USA, and Islamophobia. Very insightful book! Makes me wanna read Orientalism by Edward Said since she references it so much.
April 29, 2025
Really great book. Fascinating, clear, and strongly argued. As someone who was born in 2001, I feel that this book really deepened my understanding of how Islamophobia functioned, both domestically and abroad, to strengthen America's imperial/state power in the first decade after 9/11. As a kid, I wasn't aware of these political happenings -- as an adult, books like these are essential reads as I work to understand the fight for Palestinian liberation and against US imperialism in a broader historical context.
August 11, 2025
A great overview on the roots of Islamophobia and how it ties into Western capitalist dynamics. This book doesn't go into detail regarding every single bit of American/NATO/EU policy, yet doesn't leave you hanging with the most important issues. I find that this book is a good starting point for your studies and can lead you to other texts that delve into this issue deeper.
I would ignore the low-rated reviews. It seems that they came into this book with their own biases and could not drop them, even with a very well-sourced and empirical book.
I would ignore the low-rated reviews. It seems that they came into this book with their own biases and could not drop them, even with a very well-sourced and empirical book.
January 13, 2022
Overall super informative book. I would recommend this to anyone who would like a high level overview about Islamophobia and how it has been perpetrated by rich empires. I appreciated the historical context as well as the discussion about present-day issues surrounding Islamophobia. The author does a great job in her analysis and shows that Islamophobia is neither a left or right issue while also debunking myths surrounding Islam.
February 2, 2025
The work provides crucial insights and perspectives that significantly enhance one’s understanding of the insidious nature of Islamophobia. However, while the content itself is of great importance, the writing style can feel cumbersome at times, reminiscent of an early university student still refining their academic voice. This occasionally makes for a more laborious reading experience, though it does not diminish the overall value of the work
December 17, 2025
I had too high expectations going in. Insightful in some aspects, it annoys the reader by distorting numbers. For example, it places the Iraqis killed by the sanction regime at a million. While the humanitarian impact is undeniable, these kinds of ahistorical facts ultimately undercut the message more than they strengthen it. Generally, you are better off just reading Said and combining him with a few peer reviewed papers/historical accounts
November 21, 2018
Not very scholarly. Has valid points to make, but as biased and sensationalized as the cited books she is against. Good capitalist move to sell books and get paid lecture opportunities. She's making her money while getting to expose anti-Islamic viewpoints. The basic message is good but the style of the presentation is a little offputting, to me.
April 1, 2021
very important read, highly recommend everyone reads this. a bit dense esp towards the middle, and generally very academic but i can’t think of another book i’ve read recently that i’ve learned more from. i also don’t know any other book that discusses the history and modern contextualizations of islamophobia in a single piece. i hate imperialism. again highly recommend to everyone !!
October 16, 2025
4.25: a great introductory book on addressing the complexity of Islamophobia throughout history and into current times; somewhat redundant, but it should be taken into consideration that the format is of multiple short essays written w one overarching topic in mind !
July 27, 2018
Quite similar to Contending Visions of the Middle East but less academic and more focused on real stories of people oppressed by the empire
November 2, 2020
Best book on debunking Islamophobic myths about Islam.
March 24, 2017
I can't recommend this enough. Not exactly light reading and took me over a month to finish but there's so much great information here.
March 11, 2017
3 1/2 stars
Displaying 1 - 30 of 45 reviews