Reactionary Historiography: Post 9/11 Muslim Communities and Immigrants

العربية: الجمعية الاسلامية الامريكية - مسجد ديربورن, 9945 West Vernor Highway, Dearborn, Michigan English: American Moslem Society Dearborn Mosque, 9945 West Vernor Highway, Dearborn, Michigan

(Featured image of American Moslem Society Dearborn Mosque by Dwight Burdette)

The following is a historiography that reviews literature covering Muslim immigration and communities in the United States after the events of September 11th, 2001 in New York City, NY, USA. Because of how cut & paste into WordPress from a Word file works, you’ll find all the footnotes at the end of the page.

Books Reviewed

Abdo, Geneive Abdo. 2006. Mecca and Main Street: Muslim Life in America After 9/11. New York: Oxford University Press.

Bilici, Mucahit. 2012. How Islam Is Becoming an American Religion: Finding Mecca in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Curtis IV, Edward E. 2009. Muslims in America: A Short History. New York: Oxford University Press.

Haddad, Yvonne Yazbeck. 2011. Becoming American? The Forging of Arab and Muslim Identity in Pluralist America. Waco: Baylor University Press.

Hussain, Amir. 2016. Muslims and the Making of America. Waco: Baylor University Press.

McCloud, Aminah Beverly. 2006. Transnational Muslims in American Society. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.

When the World Trade Center (the “Twin Towers”) in New York City was attacked on September 11th, 2001, many Americans were understandably shocked and angry, but they also found themselves asking, what is a Muslim? Why would they want to attack us?[1] Setting aside the problem of conflating all Muslims with terrorists, these questions revealed a vacuum of knowledge about Muslims and Islam in the United States. Further, there was a lack of understanding that Muslims were and had been a part of American society since before the United States was founded. The rhetoric that flooded popular media painted a picture of Islam vs the West[2] and reinforced the idea that there was a hard dichotomy between the two.[3] One could not be American and be Muslim, one could only be Muslim in America. Scholars from multiple disciplines saw this as an opportunity to produce literature on Muslim immigration and Muslim communities living within the United States to correct the narrative being constructed around Muslims and Islam. Because of this, much of the recent scholarship on Islam has been defensive and apologetic in nature, presenting Muslims in a way that normalizes them and introduces them as typical Americans to the rest of society. Recent scholarship has focused primarily on establishing a Muslim American identity, rather than on placing Muslim immigrants and immigration in a historical context.

According to Kambiz GhaneaBassiri, a scholar on the history of Islam in America, this type of scholarship is not new. Writing in 2010, he indicates that both before and after September 11th, 2001, scholarship on Muslims in the United States has been primarily anthropological and sociological, dealing with questions of assimilation and identity formation.[4] He goes on to say that the historical studies that do exist focus primarily on African American Muslims and on how non-Muslim Americans perceive Islam.[5] Further, because of the positioning of Islam as being opposed to the West, most scholarship on Muslims in the United States has focused on how they are faring in a “foreign” society rather than on how they are actively participating in American history.[6] Much scholarship on Muslims in the US also aims to teach non-Muslim Americans about Islam to counter xenophobia and to reposition Muslims as being a part of “us”.[7] However, this focus on Muslim voices excludes the voices of other groups that have interacted with them. What I mean by this is that ethnic identity formation is both an external and internal process.[8] Muslim American identity formation occurred and continues to occur within a wider American social context. Without adding the voices of non-Muslims to the narrative, as GhaneaBassiri writes, scholars “[dim] the signifiance of the larger American Islamic socio-historical context [in] which American Muslims have [acted] for nearly four centuries.”[9] Many of the books reviewed in this paper, including Hussain’s Muslims and the Making of America, which was published in 2016, fit GhaneaBassiri’s analysis of recent scholarship as being primarily focused on identity formation and assimilation. The two exceptions are McCloud and Curtis’s books.

Continue reading “Reactionary Historiography: Post 9/11 Muslim Communities and Immigrants”

Don’t Use Sprint if You Want to Own Your iPhone

Just an FYI. Don’t get #Sprint.

When you finish your 2 year contract, they won’t unlock your iPhone 4s for domestic use on other networks. They also won’t lower your bill after your phone is paid off and you by all rights own it completely. And they’ll tell you some bogus story about how it’s because you don’t really own it. They do, because you got it at a subsidized rate, even though common sense tells you that the cost of the phone is included in the higher rate, which is why #TMobile has separated plan cost from phone cost in their new offerings.

They’ll also try to spin some web of garbage about how even if the iPhone 4S were unlocked it wouldn’t work on US GSM networks, even though it’s the same hardware that is used by AT&T and Verizon and T-Mobile and it has GSM radios and CDMA and works on Canadian frequencies which are the same as US frequencies.

So basically I pumped about 2400+ bucks into Sprint over two years and now I can’t even use my phone the way I want, where I want, despite being the legal owner. Why? Because there is no law to compel Sprint to unlock these phones yet. The other big 3 do it voluntarily and legislation is unfolding that would compel unlocking, but I can’t wait that long and continue to pay the same rate I was paying when I was paying off the phone. Basically, Sprint is a greedy sack of crap company that won’t unlock phones for customers because they’d rather trap you and keep sucking the money out of your pocket while offering you subpar service at an inflated rate.

Well guess what? There are better options. One of them is the one I mentioned above: T-Mobile. They have a great plan set up. 50 bucks a month for data/text/talk + phone cost, and phone cost goes away after 24 months when you own your hardware. Unlike Sprint. Who keeps you at the same rate, even though you paid off your hardware.

But, I don’t trust plans anymore. I don’t want to deal with it.

I’m so through with Sprint that I just ordered a 5S from Virgin Mobile cash up front. I’ll use their prepaid plan and be locked in at that rate for the rest of my life if I want, 35 bucks a month unlimited talk/text/data. And you know what? I still may not be able to take my phone with me when (or if I ever) leave Virgin, but I’ll know what I’m getting up front. And the cost savings over time are more than worth it to me. 93 a month on Sprint versus 35 a month on Virgin plus the up front cost of the phone is still a savings of almost 1200 dollars over 24 months.

Suck it, Sprint.