“Fighting racism and Oppression”
“I am a Muslim”, a line that has been very hard for me to say due to its negative connotation ever since the 9/11 attacks and beyond that. Ever since the day of 9/11, I have been in fear to show who I am, what ethnicity I am, and what religion I practice. Due to the cause of the attacks, people had the wrong perception to what being a Muslim really is, for people thought it was battle against Muslims and not a battle against terrorists. In Zayn Kassam,” Can a Muslim be a Terrorist?” He answers, “Sure, why not, I wonder, for so can a Jew, a Hindu, a Sikh, a Catholic, or, indeed, a member of any faith (776).” Another example of unfair assumption that is portrayed is in George Orwell’s, “Shooting an Elephant,” for in his essay he was a white British police officer that was hated by the Burmese people, because of the British rule over Burma, and the assumption that white people are violent and hateful. In addition, because of the British rule the Burmese people assumed that all British officers and British were alike due to their unfair ruling. In this essay the narrator George Orwell was assigned to go kill and what it seems to be an untamed Elephant, but due to his conscience he would feel resentment if he was to kill an Elephant, because of his non-violent and none hateful nature. Furthermore, he is in a situation where the people of Burma expect white man to do rampant, but on the contrary he does not feel that there is a need to kill the elephant. With this pressure that George Orwell felt and how he does not want to embarrass himself, he felt obligated to kill the elephant for he wanted to in a sense be accepted or at least someone liked by the Burmese people. Moreover, one of the ways in order to combat racism and oppression according to Mohandas K. Gandhi, “Satygraha”, which mean holding on to Truth and it, means, therefore, truth force, and I is a particular philosophy and practice within he broader overall category generally known as nonviolent resistance. If terrorists, the U.S. the British Empire, the Burmese, have had followed this philosophy perhaps the tensions between whomever there was tension with, might have been prevented or gone away in a more peaceful manner. Also by holding truth to one’s own kind, and expressing the fact that not everyone is the same just because they are a same race, religion or culture. Additionally, to prevent what I think is the biggest reasons to racism and oppression is the assumption of just because you are that particular ethnicity, from a different culture, religion or race does that mean it comes with a presumable attachment to that. Therefore, with this philosophy we can prevent or subdue racism and oppression.
Growing up in a Muslim family, my parents have always taught me that violence is never the answer and when violence is involved to stay away from it. Also the same could be said in a Jewish, Hindu, and Christian family. First, people must understand as Obama has said, “This isn’t a war against Islam but a war against terror.” But ever since the 9/11 attacks the media has portrayed it in such a sense that is seemed the otherwise. Additionally, to whoever does not know the teachings of the Quran, the Islam ideology is a nonviolent one. Pursuing this further, some may ponder or may ask, “Then in the name of what why did Osama or Hussein kill people?” To answer this Zayn Kassam states,” While all Islamists are Muslim, all Muslims are not Islamists (780).” Moreover people like Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein are in fact Muslims, but indeed are not Islamists, for they have different views and ideology on Islam. Nevertheless, these men committed heinous crimes that are beyond belief, but one shouldn’t make the assumption that is Muslims think the same, act the same, and violently the same. Consequently, in my experience growing up due to the negative connotations that Sadam or Osama have perceive themselves to be, it has been hard for me to say that I am a Muslim without people associating me with terrorists and such, and much of this is because what the media made it seem to be. In relation to me, due to this unfortunate case, I didn’t really have many friends up until high school, as to my many fellow brothers and sisters that share my religious view. But as 10 years passed since the tragic day of 9/11 I think people are starting to understand the difference between a terrorist and a Muslim Islamist. It may have taken a decade understand what the difference is of the two, but it can be shown through non-violence and proper media portrayal that we are not all the same, and those who are real Islamists come in peace.
In, George Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant,” he finds himself hated by Burmese people due to the British rule. But his position as a British police officer contradicts his feelings of how he really feels with the people of Burma. As a British police officer he is often jeered by the people of Burma even though he has not done anything to them. However, the Burmese people have a reason to be angry, and that is because of the British rule and the assumption that all white men are the same. Consequently, he finds himself in a difficult situation where a rampaging elephant is seen and killed a coolie, and he is forced to kill it. But as an officer he is forced to make a decision to kill and so he does, so that the Burmese people don’t laugh at him for not killing it. In Orwell’s essay he says, “I perceived in this moment that when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys (192).” To further clarify what Orwell is saying is that it is our own freedom to make our decision to either destroy or to get rid of. The concept can be said towards racism, with racism when we become tyrant, we hate those that have destroyed us, but those who have been destroyed have the tendency to blame someone, and those who are blamed or hated on are the ones who seemingly are the same to those have destroyed. The Burmese people hated the British for they ruled their land without hesitation and the British hated the Burmese for further mocking them and thinking them as their beneath. From what we can learn in this essay as it also compares to Zayn Kassam’s essay is that we can’t make the assumption that man or woman from the same society, ethnicity, or culture are the same and we cannot use violence to solve all our problems.
Violence is not the answer, but peace is the solution, that is the teaching of Ghandhis “Satyagaha”. But for centuries, violence leading to war has been the standard to keeping peace, but does that mean violence equals peace? On the contrary, with the teaching of Stayagraha we can resist without being violent, and if followed we’d probably have a lot less wars. This teaching may not prevent racism and oppression entirely, but it can certainly prevent escalation of racism and oppression. With the principles of Satyagraha, the Burmese could have resisted against the British by turning against rather than being violent against and if Orwell was fearless, non-violent, and truthful with himself he wouldn’t have felt forced to kill an elephant. The same can also be said with America and the Muslim countries. With this teaching of Satyagraha, one must be non-violent, have courage and discipline to stand up for what’s right and to have civil disobedience to when a law has nothing to do to how a society should live. All things considered, with the form of non-violent acts of retaliation with can further progress prevents racism and oppression.
Conclusively, racism and oppression will probably be around us for a long time. But as human have the potential to learn and understand, we can educate ourselves, not assume all people are the same, and being non-violent to when things come to is worse, we can combat racism and oppression. Moreover, history tells us we have progressed long way from slavery, to segregated bathrooms, and now a more unified society. Furthermore, with the teachings of Satyagraha we can understand violence is not the answer. In addition to Satyagraha, without violence we can prevent hatred and without hatred we will not hate those have not harm us, and for the people who do harm us only they will be looked down upon them, and not the ones who seemingly resemble them. Also people must understand that a fight is never between two races but there is only a fight between two men. But if we prevent violence with the teachings of Satyagraha we can prevent further racism and oppression and not make the assumption that all people are the same of certain races and/or religion.
Orwell, George,” Shooting an Elephant”(192)
Ghandhi,” Satyagraha”
Zayn Kassam,” Can Muslim be a terrorist?”(774)
“Writing About the World”
Eds. S. Mcleaud, Y. Jarvis, S.Spear, Boston: