Donald Trump: Politics of Islam

Islamic politics can be described as the practices associated with Muslim governance. In the vast majority of attacks around the world, the perpetrators are thought to be or are Muslims. Muslims are known to carry out such murderous attacks for a number of purposes, ranging from retribution for US deaths on their grounds to enforcing the ideology of jihad, which is a war against enemies of Islam. A take on the political aspect of Islamic terrorist activities has been done by Eland in the article “Trump Ban on Muslims is Unconstitutional and Obscures Real Solution” while Mamdani’s “Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: A Political Perspective on Culture and Terrorism” looks on a variety of elements that since time could have unfolded to what is experienced in present times.

Main argument of the newspaper.

The newspaper article talks about Donald Trump’s temporary ban on Muslims based on fear of terrorism attacks (Eland). With a population of 1.6 billion, Muslims are therefore not expected to enter the United States. However, this poses as discrimination over the Muslims and is unconstitutional. Though with its manifestation as a good thing to protect people from terrorism, the ban denies Muslims equal protection under the law.

The Congress strong arms the courts into making this decision which is not a first time for such a case. During World War II, Franklin D. Roosevelt incarcerated and forced relocation of Japanese-Americans after Imperial Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor. The Supreme Court however remained reluctant on this matter even with its importance on the rights of the people with Japanese ancestry. Bearing in mind they did not pose any security threat and their loyalty to the United States, the Japanese residents and Japanese-Americans were deprived of life, liberty and property of which are protected under the Fifth Amendment. Similarities of this incident to temporary bans of Muslims is the fact that military and political leaders believed that Japanese were preparing a full-scale attack on the United States, particularly its West Coast. The ban on entry of Muslims is a blanket law based on attack by few terrorists.

In 1800s under the Chinese Exclusion Act, Chinese laborers were prohibited to enter into the United States. Reasons being that they seemed to be racially unassimilable and that they could work faster compare to Americans. Many believe Trump’s ban to be unconstitutional due to the tremendous amount of discretion on who can enter the United States of America and the fact that the protections are given to citizens only, leaving out the rest (Eland). Trump as the president has this authority through his constitutional power to protect national security and immigration laws passed by the Congress.

Even though the move by Trump to ban immigration is believed to be the solution to a terrorism-free United States, truth of the matter is terrorism occurs as a result of attacks against the Middle East. Therefore, a solution to this would be ceasing to strike the Middle East. This in turn would leave Muslims with no reason to pose terrorism threats on United States soil.

Social-political theory

The rift between United States occupied by Americans and Middle East majorly composed of Muslims can be explained as being a result of their political relationship. After the terrorist attack on September 11, George Bush ordered to fight Muslims in Middle East so that they would not necessarily have to do so in the United States. Since then treatment on Muslims in the United States has changed to the point they are banned to immigrate.

As seen in the newspaper article, Christians do not suffer a similar judgment even after an incident such as the attack on Planned Parenthood facility which took place in Colorado Springs (Eland). Instead it is Muslims who are banned due to their culture. All terrorists are believed to be terrorists and therefore a ban on their entry is believed to have a ‘terrorism-free’ United States. However, Islam as a culture has nothing in itself to show for the terrorism act.

Therefore, the argument remains that acts of terrorism by Muslims are as a result of responding to attacks. Acts by the United States government during cold war have led to the cultivation of terrorists.

Green and Mamdani Reactions to the Newspaper

Green and Mamdani would agree to the article since they hold on that it is impossible to read someone’s political behavior from their religion. He states that the jihad, an important notion within Islam, explains of struggles against external enemies of Islam and also struggle of the soul in contaminated word (Mamdani 767). This excludes terrorism therefore contradicting people’s notion that Islam is a religion based on such facts.

Eland clearly would mostly get it right as he shows how the history of United States has evolved with treatment its enemies. Also, he appreciates that the Islamist terrorism problem a result of their extreme minority interpretations. From the Chinese laborers to people of Japanese ancestry and now the Muslims, all have faced an immigration ban due to acts they committed against the United States. Eland, Green and Mamdani hold to the same theory that terrorism is a result of culture or that terrorists take part in such acts as a result of being prisons to their culture (Mamdani 768). Of commonality to their thoughts, is that a whole group should not be condemned because of few who are astray in that group.

Eland shies off from the aspect of culture as being the cause of Islamic terrorism acts. The article doesn’t state how ideas, customs and social behavior of Muslims could result in attacks such as the San Bernadino shootings.

Conclusion

Clearly, the issue on the ban of Muslims to enter the United States is dependent on the power of Congress to limit entry of people and the courts position in enacting the Constitution.

From the newspaper article, an observation can be made on the Eland’s view that United States has attacked many Middle Eastern Muslims than acts of terrorism by the latter against them. Therefore, the West would be a great subject to study on the perspective of cultural talk or social- political theory. As a result, the attacks by the West could be concluded to be as a result of both cultural aspects and political that influence them.

Terrorism should be viewed as acts that result from relations and conflicts. However, this does not mean that culture and politics should not be taken into consideration when investigating the matter. Taking either perspective on its own blind sides one into thinking that terrorism is in itself as a result of modern culture or pre-modern context.

Read also: Where to get the best online essay writing service?

Works Cited

Eland, Ivan “Trump’s Ban on Muslims Is Unconstitutional and Obscures Real Solution”. The World Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ivan-eland/trumps-ban-on-muslims-is_b_8804284.html Accessed 28 Oct. 2017

Mamdhani, Mahmood. “Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: A Political Perspective on Culture and Terrorism,” Political Islam: A Critical Reader, New York: Routledge, 2011.