Conclusion

Author(s):  
Edward E. Curtis
Keyword(s):  

The destiny of US democracy is tied to what some have called “the Muslim question,” that is, the question of whether Muslims will be allowed to become full social and political citizens. This chapter analyzes the activism of Linda Sarsour as an example of how Muslim Americans might challenge some of the most powerful, conventional bipartisan platforms of contemporary US politics while also pledging their allegiance to the country and its liberal ideals. It suggests that the normalization of loyal dissent is necessary to the survival of liberalism.

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 185-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Moyer-Gusé ◽  
Katherine R. Dale ◽  
Michelle Ortiz

Abstract. Recent extensions to the contact hypothesis reveal that different forms of contact, such as mediated intergroup contact, can reduce intergroup anxiety and improve attitudes toward the outgroup. This study draws on existing research to further consider the role of identification with an ingroup character within a narrative depicting intergroup contact between Muslim and non-Muslim Americans. Results reveal that identification with the non-Muslim (ingroup) model facilitated liking the Muslim (outgroup) model, which reduced prejudice toward Muslims more generally. Identification with the ingroup model also increased conversational self-efficacy and reduced anxiety about future intergroup interactions – both important aspects of improving intergroup relations.


Author(s):  
Christopher A. Bail

In July 2010, Terry Jones, the pastor of a small fundamentalist church in Florida, announced plans to burn two hundred Qur'ans on the anniversary of the September 11 attacks. Though he ended up canceling the stunt in the face of widespread public backlash, his threat sparked violent protests across the Muslim world that left at least twenty people dead. This book demonstrates how the beliefs of fanatics like Jones are inspired by a rapidly expanding network of anti-Muslim organizations that exert profound influence on American understanding of Islam. The book traces how the anti-Muslim narrative of the political fringe has captivated large segments of the American media, government, and general public, validating the views of extremists who argue that the United States is at war with Islam and marginalizing mainstream Muslim-Americans who are uniquely positioned to discredit such claims. Drawing on cultural sociology, social network theory, and social psychology, the book shows how anti-Muslim organizations gained visibility in the public sphere, commandeered a sense of legitimacy, and redefined the contours of contemporary debate, shifting it ever outward toward the fringe. The book illustrates the author's pioneering theoretical argument through a big-data analysis of more than one hundred organizations struggling to shape public discourse about Islam, tracing their impact on hundreds of thousands of newspaper articles, television transcripts, legislative debates, and social media messages produced since the September 11 attacks. The book also features in-depth interviews with the leaders of these organizations, providing a rare look at how anti-Muslim organizations entered the American mainstream.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 179-187
Author(s):  
D. Alex Hughes ◽  
Micah Gell-Redman ◽  
Charles Crabtree ◽  
Natarajan Krishnaswami ◽  
Diana Rodenberger ◽  
...  

AbstractResults of an audit study conducted during the 2016 election cycle demonstrate that bias toward Latinos observed during the 2012 election has persisted. In addition to replicating previous results, we show that Arab/Muslim Americans face an even greater barrier to communicating with local election officials, but we find no evidence of bias toward blacks. An innovation of our design allows us to measure whether e-mails were opened by recipients, which we argue provides a direct test of implicit discrimination. We find evidence of implicit bias toward Arab/Muslim senders only.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document