A pattern of bloody terror targeting places of worship is depressingly becoming a familiar reality. After last year’s devastating attack that killed 11 congregants at Three of Life synagogue in Pittsburg, we were confronted with yet another sad and tragic episode in Christchurch, witnessing this time innocent victims as young as three having to pay the deadly price of the 'invasion of migrants' rhetoric and its close associate, Islamophobia. The aftermath of the New Zealand terror still hangs heavily over us when a series of coordinated explosions in Sri Lanka that took place on Easter weekend recently claimed the lives of more than 300 people, injuring over 400 others.
Much has been exemplified to draw similarities between militant Islamic fighters and White supremacists. While Islamic radicalism yearns for an imagined past of their Islamic caliphates, the White extremist/nationalist ideology alludes to the besiegement of the West and the threat of ethnic replacement. This parallel worldview finds strong expression in the belief of 'lost Europe' resulting from non-white immigration and low birth rates among white Europeans. The North American continent, New Zealand and Australia could be viewed as the last bastion of a glorified “White homeland” to salvage the future of the White race and identity. The latest Christchurch massacres clearly show how such alt-right-manufactured and populist-emboldened conspiracies of stigmatization and fearmongering appeal to both charismatically ideological perverts and seemingly dormant bigots rallying behind the murderous cause of flushing out their archnemesis, the so-called ‘infiltrators’.
Both forms of radicalisms polarize, destabilize and kill. However, the continued undisguised antipathy towards the rise of white extremism is beginning to be openly acknowledged in major media sections and discourses. As shall be canvassed, the rapid growth of this cancerous far-right propaganda and its carnage appears to be aided and accommodated by the commonalities of the right-wing politics embracing political tribalism and a limited vision of a homogenized population and identity, aptly demonstrated in the United States and Canada.
The Anti-Defamation League in the United States reported that deadly fatalities caused by white supremacists are the key contributor to the majority of domestic lethal terrorism, accounting to 73.3 percent of killings by white extremists between 2009-2018. In murder cases involving ideologically motivated extremists that claimed the lives of 50 individuals in the U.S. last year, all but one of them had connections to right-wing extremism. Dismissed as a problem of a small group of people that should not spark a panic, the nativist predisposition that transpires from US politics breeds and legitimizes an apologist mindset and attitude.
Essential to Trump’s popular ideological framings of ‘America First’ and ‘Make America Great Again’ is the idea of the ‘White race’ as ‘us’. A priori unequal ‘others’, particularly, the Black, Muslims, non-white immigrants and refugees are not only excluded, but their dignity and identity are demonized by populist firebrands ready to manufacture and exploit the fear of the public for political gains. The racist platform underlying Trump’s Muslim ban, zero-tolerance immigration, and border wall project, all strategically feed into the political norm of America’s largest demographic group.
Regardless of the spike in hate crimes and violence committed by white extremists, including three of the worst mass shootings in the U.S. history within Trump’s short tenure, there are no similar demands for racial profiling, surveillance and counterterrorism strategy on groups and individuals associated with right-wing ideologies. To the forces of conservatism and their figurehead, white extremists belonging to their group are individual criminals, while non-white extremists are representative of their respective minority groups, worthy of collective censure and condemnation. According to P.W. Singer, a national-security strategist and fellow at the New America think tank, even prior to the Trump administration, only Muslim extremism merited attention and conversations among senior administration officials as there were 'real political costs' to addressing white supremacy.
In Canada, recent statistics paint a disturbing picture of entrenched prejudice driven by Islamophobia. In 2017, almost 50 percent of Canadians surveyed viewed the presence of Islam as being the most 'damaging'' religion in their public life, compared to 13 percent being in favour of the religion as benefiting society. Last year, radical Islamic terrorism was considered more threatening than violence posed by white supremacists. While most participants associate religion/culture and feelings of marginalization as highly contributing to radicalization or homegrown terrorism, perspectives that inform the polling data collected by Angus Reid Institute vary across several indicators. In terms of gender, men below the age 55 were found to be less concerned on the question of white supremacy compared to women in the same category. Region-wise, Quebec residents were the largest group to express ‘a great deal of concern’ about radical Islam. Across the political divide, past Conservative (Party) voters expressed greater anxiety about Islamic terrorism than white supremacy.
Just days after the Christchurch tragedy, an event known as 'All-Day National Teach-In' was organized in Toronto by a group called Canadians for the Rule of Law, featuring controversial figures at the forefront of anti-Muslim campaigns. The gathering highlighted the narrative that Canada is being swamped by ‘Islamists’ trying to impose sharia law in this country. The thriving and spreading of virulent essence of bigotry and radicalized ideologies via the media, think tanks, organizations and politicians appear to become dangerously normalized and tolerated in the name of free speech. Right-wing organizations such as Yellow Vests Canada, Worldwide Coalition against Islam, La Meute, and Atalante, together with self-professed white nationalists galvanize their base not through covert platforms but within a growing echo-chamber empowered by mainstream conservative politicians championing anti-migrant and refugee manifestos to court votes.
In Quebec, the anti-Islam messaging explicitly or implicitly present in the province’s long-standing laïcité debate and the Islamophobia that it unleashes risk amplifying the climate of tension and resentment. Reinforcing the sense of anger against the Muslim minority, such toxic discourse was reanimated by politicians advocating to introduce a law barring the wearing of religious symbols by public servants just a week after the Quebec mosque shooting in 2017 that killed six Muslims. Last month, the acrimonious debate was renewed once more with the tabling of Bill 21 by the Government of Quebec proposing to ban religious symbolism in the public job sector that affects a long list of positions in authority, ranging from judges to prison guards and teachers. Such instrument is a false bulwark against extremism that faultily conflates religious identity with a vicious ideology that can inspire violence. Equally fatal and damaging is the inherent narrative of victimization that the measure fuels, echoing one that has been peddled by nefarious movements like the Islamic State to seduce and radicalize the young, especially those who are marginalized and experiencing a lack of belonging to a certain society and system.
The unequivocal stand and course of decisions and actions taken by the New Zealand’s Prime Minister constitute an aberration and departure from a reductionist mindset and willful indifference in dealing with the kinds of threat and potential gruesome cataclysm resulting from the Islamophobia-driven white supremacist ideology. Keeping a level head and clear vision, Jacinda Ardern’s response to the dark event that befell her country and people unflinchingly challenges the normalized western hypocrisy, anomalies and double standard. The white extremist’s deadly violence was immediately declared an outright act of terrorism. With an impressive effectiveness, a string of bans were imposed on assault rifles, semi-automatics and high capacity magazines, a 74-page manifesto written by the accused, and a number of websites that hosted the mass-shooting video.
Two weeks after the tragedy, Ardern announced that her cabinet had agreed to the setting up of an independent royal commission of inquiry to investigate “what could have or should have been done to prevent the attack.” Beyond the domestic sphere, she calls on the providers of internet and social-media platforms to assume more responsibility for terrorist and hate-speech content, prompting mobilization of the giant tech players to collectively rein in hate speech more effectively, and the greater demands for centralization of accountability, including from mainstream media.
The unifying message that Ardern conveyed potently defends the fabric of identity and values that New Zealanders profoundly hold to, even in the ruthless face of extremism. Ardern said:
“…We represent diversity, kindness, compassion. A home for those who share our values. Refuge for those who need it. And those values will not and cannot be shaken by this attack”.
The hijab worn by the New Zealand Prime Minister and the country's local women in the aftermath and in conjunction with the one-week anniversary of the attacks, is not only a powerful symbolic representation of their solidarity for the victims and Muslims around the world, but also an explicit recognition of respect for religious freedom and inclusion of the minority, and nuancedly, the rich layers of Muslim identity and traditions itself. The sheer hubris of some campaigners crassly demonizing the hijab and the act of donning it as a symbol of women disempowerment unjustly casts all Muslim women who freely choose to wear it for various reasons as an utter object of oppression and in the same breath, vilifies the benevolence of the leader and people of New Zealand.
Explicit racism and Islamophobia incentivizing both mainstream and fringe alt-groups can no longer be ignored and downplayed when their perpetuated threats and violent extremism are becoming rampant and more global in their reach. The unfolding of the Christchurch aftermath has shown the requirements for the containment of radicalization and Islamophobia in the name of public good. It embodies the antithesis to chip away at the divisive agenda of othering and discrimination based on one’s faith as currently demonstrated by the latest move to pass Québec’s Bill 21, destructive incendiary blame-game, as well as hawkish reactions.
Simultaneously, it is a wake-up call that those in power take stock of the adequacy and effectiveness of existing resources and actions to stem and act upon such menace and atrocity that could easily emerge from stoked hatred and racism. Regrettably, in the case of New Zealand, the lack of a central record to gather data on complaints and crimes associated with hatred and racism has been identified as one of the missed signs that could have helped effectively point to where specific strategies and actions could be directed to better protect the targeted minorities.
Going forward, the lessons must trigger each and every one of us to ask ourselves a very honest question: to what extent have we tried to understand, learn, respect and celebrate diversity and differences in our everyday experiences and reality?
Creating an ecosystem that enables rather than undermines this learning and appreciation necessitates us listening to those whose lives have been negatively impacted by discrimination and exclusion, as well as hearing ideas about how to fight prejudices and in turn, build bridges between our communities. Effective measures to change the narrative include committing ourselves to public discourses and policy debates that emphasize more on the thread of our shared experiences and common values that bind rather than set us apart. Promoting and strengthening our interethnic and interreligious friendship through community-collaboration programs and population-specific initiatives, such as those targeting the more suburban and rural communities is worth investing in order to tackle much of the problem at its roots.
Better still, moral courage is needed on the part of political parties and all stakeholders to rethink laïcité in favor of shaping a secular pluralist society that is open and capable of assimilating a wide range of diversity while equitably upholding the dignity and constitutional right of every person. Eventually, the intolerance and hatred that are buried deep below the undercurrents will only truly dissipate when 'they are us' means everyone feels included and belonging to their country, nation and society.
About the author
Rodziana M. Razali is attached to McGill's Centre for Human Rights and Legal Pluralism as a Steinberg Post-Doctoral Fellow in International Migration Law. She holds a PhD from the National University of Malaysia and an LLM from the University of Melbourne. Rodziana previously served in the Malaysian Judicial and Legal Service, and currently is a senior lecturer at the Islamic Science University of Malaysia, an Advocate and Solicitor of the High Court of Malaya (Non-practicing) and a member of Statelessness Network Asia Pacific (SNAP). Her research interests focus on the intersection between birth registration, legal identity, prevention of statelessness and protection of rights of the minorities, in particular, children of refugees and migrants. She can be contacted at rodziana [at] usim.edu.my.