Neo-traditional Salafis in the West: Agents of (Self)-Exclusion
In Samina Yasmeen, Muslims in the West and Social Exclusion, Ashgate, forthcoming. 2014
Adis Duderija
This chapter examines how the context of belonging to a new immigrant minority religion group can contribute to the process of facilitation and (re)-enforcement of exclusionary social orientations among some Muslims residing in western liberal democracies.[1] In the first part of the chapter I note that the concepts of religion-based identity and the erection of socio-religious boundaries between the Self (new Muslim religious minority immigrant ) and the Other ( broader society) which emphasize certain markers of difference between the Self and the Other ( as exemplified by a veiled Muslim woman ) can contribute to the engendering of socially exclusivist orientations among western Muslims. In the second and the third parts of the chapter I demonstrate these forces at play by taking as an example one contemporary Muslim movement present among western Muslims that I term Neo-traditional Salafism ( NTS).
1. Identity construction in the context of being a new immigrant religious minority, the Veiled Muslim Woman Image and Social Exclusion
The majority of Muslims residing in western liberal democracies belong to a religious minority and are of recent ( post 1965 ) immigrant background .[2] These Muslims come from very different ethnic and cultural backgrounds and include as diverse people as Bosnians, Iraqis, Somalis, Pakistanis , Iranians and Arabs. This perculiar status of belonging to a new immigrant religious minority has important implications on how western Muslims construct their sense of identity ( The Self) as well as their social oritentation toward the broader society ( The Other).[3] One such important implication is that religion becomes an overdetermining locus of Muslim immigrants' identity . Their identity , in other words, becomes religion based. This is not to say that western Muslims necessarily become more ‘religious ‘ i.e. religiously observant, but that western Muslims construct their identity increasingly through the lens of their religious affiliation.[4] The work of Roy and others confirm this view.[5] Namely, Roy observes that for western Muslim immigrants tensions between four levels of identities exist, namely: identity based on geography and/or kingship; the larger ethnic or national identity based on common language and culture; Muslim identity exclusively based on religious patterns with no specific reference to language or culture; and, identity based on acculturation along western patterns. Immigration to the West and the associated transition from a majority to minority religion/cultural setting conforms with the last two of the four levels of identity identified above. This is especially the case for western-born Muslims whose common defining factor is the mere reference to Islam as a religion, as western Muslims in their totality cannot claim common cultural or linguistic heritage.[6] This has given rise to Muslim identify dynamics which have, paradoxically, resulted in both individualization or privatization of Islamic faith and practice as well as the emphasis on ‘collective identities’ that often seeks to ‘purify’ Islam from the inherited ethno-cultural elements.[7]
Apart from religion- based identity another analytical tools which can assist us in understanding social orientation dynamics among contemporary Muslims residing in the West are concepts of socio-religious boundaries and the inclusivity-exclusivity dichotomy. These conceptual tools take central importance in sociological approaches to religion, especially in the context of immigrant communities.[8] Hence, the construction of socio-religious boundaries between the Self ( the Immigrant) and the Other ( Broader Society) can be particularly applicable to how some new immigrant Muslim minorities residing in western liberal democracies construct their sense of identity as Muslims. [9] In this context it is important to note that the erection of socio-religious boundaries between the Self and the Other can be generated by means of particular markers, such as physical appearances (including dress), shared belief/s , particular interpretations of sacred texts and history all of which can act as powerful loci of differentiation between the new immigrant religious minority Self and the Other (the broader society).[10] In this chapter the discussion will focus on how the construction of a veiled Muslim woman in the West interpreted as a marker of difference between the Self and Other can contribute to social exclusion of western Muslims.
The idea that Muslims residing in western liberal democracies are often constructed as the “Other” and vice versa is well described, among others, by Warrensburg who in this context asserts the following:
in relation to the identity of Muslims in Europe ,there is[however] an aspect of “the condition of otherness” that seems particularly relevant [here], namely the effect of marginalization, discrimination and exclusion in relation to the apprehension of the self and the non-self. In principle Muslims are “the Other” for non-Muslims and vice-versa. [11]
As we briefly noted above one important mechanism through which a mutually antagonistic, exclusivist and oppositional Self-Other identity can be constructed in the context of Muslims forming a new immigrant minority religion group is the emphasis on notions of difference and distinction between the Self and the Other.[12] This is because in the transplanted context of immigration, religion for immigrants can become a powerful vehicle of difference, distinctiveness and categorisation between the Self and the Other.[13] Certain religious identity markers such as a particular way of dressing, communicating /interacting or the adoption of certain religious symbols can act as means of creating difference, categorisation and distinction.[14] This is especially so in the case of the veil worn by some Muslim women.[15] For example, Meshal in the context of investigating the dynamics surrounding the Muslim minority in Canada argues that women who wear the veil, amid social climate controversies over immigration and multiculturalism, are identified by Canadians of established stock as the “Other.”[16] Based on these considerations the question of “normative” female Muslim gender construction and her role in the broader society becomes relevant to our discussion.
At a more general level of analysis it ought to be noted that representations of Muslim women are central to political debates on cultural[17] identity, relationship between Muslim societies and the West, tradition and authenticity and cultural specificity and globalism.”[18] Furthermore, women in Islamic discourses play a vital role in the (re)-construction of Muslim religio-cultural identity[19] and even more so in the context of an immigrant minority group.[20] Women, moreover, on the basis of the traditional interpretation of religious precepts, are often considered as cultural carriers, transmitters and bearers of identity in the subsequent generations of immigrants (across different and not just Muslim cultures).[21] This centrality of women in Muslim communities in terms of identity reconstruction and preservation, argues Mohammad:
Intensifies collective interest in the regulation of women's bodies and sexualities through measures, which focus on both the body and the psyche, visually, spatially and temporally. It is also expressed in Islamic concepts of family life, which are construed as pivotal in the maintenance of social order and in the resolution of wider socio-economic problems.[22]
Additionally, young Muslim women living in western societies are usually represented in terms of the conflict between “traditional” (i.e. “authentic”) and “western” (i.e. foreign/alien) values which facilitates an exclusivist Self-Other mutual identity construction .[23] Further re-enforcing this is the presence of “the racist environment [evident in some spheres of western societies ] which contributes to a return to religion which generate stereotypical biases reinforced within Orientalist discourses.”[24] Moreover, the socially prevalent Orientalist and Islamist rhetoric on issues pertaining to (women in) Islam put pressure on the Muslim woman to become a symbol of Islamic authenticity and as such a signifier of the exterior/interior space, the them/us dichotomy.[25] The similarities in Orientalist and Islamist discourses of knowledge construction as argued by, among others, Zine and Mahmoud are representative of how dominant Western stereotypes and Islamist visions of authority intersect,[26] and thus further contribute towards an antagonistic Self-Other mutual identity construction.
Relevant literature also points to a link between an increased attractiveness of the Islamist vision of the “Muslim Woman” construct based on the emphasis of difference and distinction through adoption of certain practices such as veiling and the context of immigrant minority cultures in multicultural societies of the West. This also applies to even to some professionally educated Muslim women living in the West. [27] Additionally, studies suggest that the context of living in a plural, western liberal democracy as a member of an immigrant minority religion can also contribute to the strengthening of the Islamist “Muslim woman” construct. For example, Mohammed’s study of working-class Pakistani Muslims in southern England demonstrates how the fears of the West’s seduction and moral degradation pose a challenge to [Muslim] groups’
Honour, morality and identity, which lead to, renewed efforts to protect `cultural authenticity' by redrawing the group's boundaries, for example by imposing greater socio-spatial restrictions on young women.[28]
Afshar's (1989[29], 1994[30]) empirical studies of Pakistani Muslim women in Yorkshire also underscored the relevance of Islamic discourse in relation to group identity construction. She argues that:
the assertion of a Pakistani Muslim identity is understood in opposition to `the West' and positions women as both the `guardians and the guarded' in a manner that shares much in common with the constraints on their movements and dress experienced by women in Iran.[31]
Muhammad identified four factors which are responsible for what she refers to as “socio-spatial regulation of Muslim women” which, in turn, create a sense of “separation” between Muslims and non-Muslims. Additionally, Muhammad argues that these factors are also used as distinct markers of Muslim woman’s identity by some members of western Muslim communities.
Dress, is one such socio-spatial regulatory practice identified by Mohamad.[32] The centrality of dress as an identity marker in the context of western Muslims is, for example, argued by Dweyer who asserts that dress “has become an over-determined signifier for the identity of young British Muslim women.”[33] Similarly Hoodfar writing in the context of function of the veil in North America maintains that dress has significant social and political functions “serving as a non-verbal medium of ideological communication.”[34]She further maintains that clothing is the most salient way in which human collectivities demarcate social boundaries and distinguish self from the other at both collective and individual levels.[35] Benn and Jawad echo this sentiment by stating that visual markers such as the hijab/khimar (head-covering worn by some Muslim women) are highly significant in issues of cross cultural integration.[36] The role of dress, especially the veil, argues Dweyer, is seen as a primary signifier of a distinct oppositional Muslim religious identity vis-à-vis western identity for Muslims and non-Muslims alike.[37] Indeed, Meshael argues that “it is impossible to separate the issue of hijab in the Canadian context from larger questions of gender and cultural identity, assimilation and discrimination.[38]The practice of veiling, furthermore, ensures that “essentialised and oppositional identities are straightforwardly read from appearances.”[39] The veil, in the minority culture context of Western Muslims is often seen as a marker of foreignness and those who adopt it are often denied social acceptance. According to Zine, this situation, in turn, gives rise to the emergence of “a specific discourse of Foreignness and Otherness” framing the way in which Muslims see their identities as “being socially evaluated and ultimately rejected.”[40] Meshal’s study on the hijab in Canada confirms this by indicating that integration and the wearing of veil exist in an inverse relationship.[41] In her study of young British Muslim women Gwyer echoes this sentiment by asserting that the (Muslim) Asian vs. West dichotomy is often reinforced through choice of dress re-inscribing or strategically fixing essentialised identities.[42] This type of self-other mutual identity construction, needless to say, in Zine’s words, “causes insularity with respect to Muslim interactions with others.”[43] Therefore, the wearing of the veil or advocating for it tends to facilitate exclusivist and oppositional self-other identity construction.
This clearly applies to the proponents of neo-Traditional Salafism, who, as shall be demonstrated below , emphasizes the normativeness and centrality of the concept of the veil ( including the covering of the face or most of it ) for the religiously normative Muslim woman image. Therefore, advocating a position which considers veiling of Muslim women as an absolute religious norm, in the context of an new immigrant minority religion, can affect western Muslims’ social orientation resulting in adoption of socially exclusivist orientations toward the broader society. Several sociological studies mentioned above, confirms this view.
It is important to keep in mind that the above described exclusivist and oppositional Self-Other identity construction related processes in context of belonging to a new immigrant religious minority neither apply to all western Muslims nor are they adopted by all members of the broader society. Indeed, as we demonstrate in the next section western Muslims have adopted a number of different (religious) identities and social orientations and only some can be characterized as being (self)-exclusivist in nature.
2..Ways of being a Muslim in the West and Social Orientation : A brief Overview of Typologies
Several scholars have developed typologies of Muslim groups or schools of thought and their orientations toward the West. The two that are more closely relevant for the purposes of this chapter are that of Ameli and Dassetto which serve as a good indicator of the complexities and differences between Muslim identities and orientations in the West and help us situate and define the NTS type of western Muslim identity in a more broader context .
Ameli, in the context of examining the effect of globalization on the main elements of British Muslim identity, developed a typology of British Muslims concerned with religious orientations and tested in empirically . Ameli’s typology included the following types of Muslim identity: traditionalist ( which is characterised by social conservatism, ritual centredness and political indifference);islamist (characterised by their emphasis on Islamic politics and movements and the comprehensiveness of the Islamic way of life); modernist ( characterised by a “combination of modernization and Islamic ideology”, their desire to achieve social reformation through modernization and reformation of religious thinking in accordance with modern modes of thought);secularist ( characterised by rejection of politicization of Islam, and its traditional aspects but unlike traditionalists active participation in secular politics and social activity and lack of religious observance and involvement within social institutions);nationalist ( characterised by those who identify themselves primarily with the culture of the parents’ homelands as an expression of patriotism ); anglicized ( no serious inclination towards original culture , inability to re-assimilate into it, absorption of attitudes, values and norms governing British culture to the point that it is indistinguishable from ‘native ‘counterparts; involvement in multiplex secular social relationships with non-Muslims , and comparatively less religious orientation);hybrid (characterised by no firm orientation towards the original culture as well as not giving primacy for the new British culture) and undetermined ( characterised by rejection of diverse cultures one is confronted with, confusion about religious belief and sense of hopelessness and rootlessness).[44]