H. Karim

Imagining the Other

The relationship of “Judeo-Christian” and Muslim civilizations is like that of amnesic siblings: both have trouble remembering the Self’s kinship with the Other. Memories of their shared Abrahamic parentage appear to be lost in a foggy haze; yet, they persist in an old sibling rivalry. Ironically, each imagines the Other to be alien in values, even though Judaism, Christianity, and Islam share a fundamentally core vision about humanity’s relationship with God and about the necessity of universal ethics to order human relationships (e.g., Arkoun, 2006; Armstrong, 1994; Chandler, 2007; Gopin, 2009; Volf, 2011). There are significant differences between the Abrahamic traditions in theology and ritual practice; however, no other three religions “form so intimate a narrative relationship as do the successive revelations of monotheism” telling “a single continuous story” (Neuser, Chilton & Graham, 2002, p. viii) that runs from the Old Testament to the New Testament and from the Bible to the Qur’an.

Re-viewing the ‘national’ in ‘international communication’

I have lived that moment of the scattering of the people that in other times and other places, in the nations of others, becomes a time of gathering. Homi Bhabha, ‘DissemiNation’ (1990)

Re-Imagining the Other

The Other is not inherently alien to the Self, but is often imagined as such. Whereas Western and Muslim societies have had intermittent clashes for over a millennium, there is overwhelming evidence of them engaging productively with each other for most of this time. However, this knowledge is overshadowed by the dominant discourses that accentuate conflict. The news media are the major vehicles disseminating such discourses (e.g., Hafez, 2000; Karim, 2003; Perigoe & Eid, 2014; Poole, 2002), but other cultural forms such as children’s toys, bedtime stories, educational materials, paintings, songs, plays, novels, film, television entertainment programs, and computer games also play a significant role (e.g., Karim, 2003; 2012; Shaheen, 2009). Some voices in Western and Muslim societies have sought to revive memories of long-standing collaboration, but the dominant discourses in both emphasize the adversarial aspects of the relationship with the Other. This has tended to encourage forms of thinking that promote terrorism and war, both of which have seen an intensification in the twenty-first century. Richard Bulliet urges for “a fundamental reconsideration … of the long-term sibling relationship” between Christians and Muslims; without a reappraisal, the future of their relations “will be thorny and unpredictable, haunted by dashed hopes and missed opportunities” (2004, p. 133). Given the scale of death, destruction, and expense resulting from Western-Muslim conflicts, it is imperative that the Other be re-imagined in the broader context of the mutually beneficial intersections that have occurred in the long term.

Public Policy and the Clash of Ignorance

Due to the contemporary social and political climate in the world, it is more important than ever to acknowledge and investigate both Eastern and Western contributions to civilization. This may allow for the creation of insight and enlightenment that can instigate building bridges of appreciation and understanding among people of various cultures and ideologies (AbuSulayman, 2011). It may be possible to reduce conflict between “the East” and “the West” by acknowledging the ways in which these two entities have interacted in the past. Rather than the focus on the grim realities of current conflict and destruction, it is suggested that a reflective process take place, striving to pay homage to the individually unique legacies of both Islam and Christianity. There is vast evidence that demonstrates the ways in which people of various religious backgrounds have worked together to share knowledge and further the development of humanity throughout history (Morgan, 2007). This process can encourage humans to understand critically the true elements of interaction. In this, we must ignore a history of ignorance that forgets, misunderstands, suppresses, and rewrites the truths of our existence.

Muslim Civil Society in Eastern and Western Contexts

Contemporary political discourses are replete with references to civil society, which is generally perceived to be a key element of modern society. However, there are varying views on what constitutes civil society. The rule of law— ensuring the equal treatment of all—is generally considered to be a necessary condition for its successful operation. In some opinions, civil society is integral to ideas of liberalism historically emanating from the Enlightenment and cannot be separated from dominant Western views of liberty, individualism, and citizenship (Chambers & Kymlicka, 2002). Such a notion of civil society has led some theorists to declare that it is alien to Islamic values and cannot be adopted into Muslim societies (e.g., Mardin, 1995). However, others disagree with this position (e.g., Hanafi, 2002; Sachedina, 2001; Sajoo, 2004).1

Migration, Diaspora and Communication

Migrants to Europe find themselves in a continent that is undergoing considerable shifts in its political and cultural character. The dominant tendency of Europeans is to view their countries as constituted by sedentary indigenous populations. An informed understanding of history reveals that both Europe and European states are cultural constructions that have shifted over time and continue to change. The arrival of migrants is not an anomaly but an ongoing unfolding of the historical patterns of the movements of people across the world. European ventures in other continents during the colonial period and in the present have a lot to do with the contemporary arrival of formerly colonized peoples in Europe. These are the contexts of the contemporary media discourses of migrants in which they are negotiating their identities both as European and as African, Asian or American.

Engaging the Other

Conflict is endemic in human interaction, but it is not inevitable. Some clashes tend to result from the placing of relationships within a zero-sum framework in which the Self sees itself as losing when the Other makes a gain, and vice versa. When opposing parties view each other as a danger they feed on mutually induced fears and produce a rising spiral of conflict. Such adversarial conceptualizations tend to disregard the possibilities for fruitful engagements with the Other.