Dear Mr. Khan,
Thank you for taking the time to try to respond to my piece. I am glad that you mention straw man arguments, as I believe you are generating a few yourself. Although my initial blog piece is short, I think you spend too much time on the title, rather than understanding the basis of the argument. Let me attempt to re-cap:
1. The AMC had a series of op-eds and a big ad buy.
2. The way the op-eds and website were argued implied that the AMC were good Muslims and the rest of the community was bad because of certain markers defined by these pieces.
3. The logical conclusion of such a construction is that there is a power-play involved.
You will note that I never, in my piece, make categorical accusations. I cannot speak to the intentionality of the pieces, but only the appearances of the pieces. Nor did I ever attack the Ahmadi community and the role they play in the Muslim community or decry their message. My concern revolves around the structure of the argument presented in the pieces I quote.
To address your specific concerns:
1. You are conflating two separate issues. The AMC has an important voice and contribution to make to the American landscape. When institutions are silent there must a voice. You can see I have done something similar here on RD with respect to torture. I am not denying that. I am focused on the framing of your argument as described above.
2. The Ahmadi community is not the only group ignored by polling and mosque counting data. Many Shi’ah and Sufi groups are also ignored. It is because the large organizations cannot handle the diversity, or questions relating to diversity. It is not a facile explanation, it is fact. Their inability to manage that diversity results in exclusion. However, many excluded groups continue to participate in these organizations to try to change these perceptions. Your very formulation that nothing is stopping other American Muslims from pushing for peace implies they have not. It is this formulation to which I am objecting. Other American Muslims, and American Muslim organizations have done so.
3. At no point do I suggest that you are insensitive to other Muslims and I link directly to the “Muslims for Peace” campaign.
4. Regarding your point that neither of the op-ed authors were speaking on behalf of the community is a valid. I did indicate that in my piece and I should have known better. It appeared to me that with the op-eds appearing so closely together, with similar structural elements, that there was a community push. It was an assumption on my part. The “good Muslim/bad Muslim” dichotomy is never explicitly stated, and it never is. That is the insidious nature of the structure, as it is implied and creates an “us” and “them” mentality. See my point in #2 above to see how you are constructing it in your response.
5. Please see my initial remarks on your focus of my conclusion, and not the actual concern: the structure of the argument that the AMC is doing things that other Muslims are not. I will tell you that I am also personally appalled that you suggest that I am saying the AMC is not Muslim or that I would support takfiris. It is this sloppy type of construction that I find objectionable.
Nor am I trying to silence the community as you imply. If you actually read to the end, my suggestion is
“The AMC may be intent on writing op-eds, taking out bus ads, and meeting with lawmakers on the Hill, but they should do so working with the rest of the Muslim community. There can and should be disagreement.”
I am interested in strengthening the American Muslim community by making sure we are all talking to each other and testing and challenging each other’s ideas.
Once more, thank you for attempting to deal with my argument in a serious way.
