Author: admin

Jackson’s explanation for his use of the term “Blackamerican” intrigued me as I’ve thought a lot about how we linguistically privilege one group over the “other”. It is always “white vs. non-white”, but non-white can be a million other things. In “Islam and Black Religion”, Jackson immediately begins to distinguish “Black Religion” from “African-American Religion”, with the latter being any religious African Americans. He describes Black Religion’s central goal as “the desire to annihilate or at least subvert white supremacy and anti-black racism” (Jackson 29). This dubbed title made me wonder if there is such a thing as “white religion”? Maybe the Evangelical Lutherans? I’m not sure what Jackson means when he describes the “deism” or “natural religion” of Blackamericans (31). On page 32, he describes that slaves entered a different sort of consciousness due to being in such a state that stripped them of their dignity, that required “a mode of being in the world that resists dread and despair”. Though this can be thought of as a trauma response, he describes it as resistance. I wonder about Jackson’s claim about “the general resistance to the urge to embrace reverse-domination or supremacy”. It is my understanding that this idea requires an inherent essence to certain groups of people, which is something I’m not sure of and could be problematic. On page 33, Jackson taps into something which he also touched upon in his quote on using “Blackamerican”. It’s this idea of viewing Africa as connected in some way to Black Americans, when in reality, those connections were forcibly cut off long ago, with remnants remaining, but for many confusing and unattainable. He talks about the “African Image” later in the chapter, and its importance to be connected in some form to Black Religion. The historical precedent for Black Americans being left out of European liberalism/enlightenment is fascinating, although I feel like there is a possibility that what Jackson describes as “unabashed patriarchal impulse, no-nonsense folk mentality, and stark gender differentiation” is actually something more closely rooted in white supremacy. For example, Black Americans in this country have routinely voted Blue, a party that, while immensely flawed, still opposes on face-value the more socially conservative values of the other option.

Karim talks about how the “model minority” of successful South Asian immigrants, who had already come prepared and with wealth, were used as an example by the state on how America had succeeded in overcoming structural racism. Now, everyone in America, including immigrants, could make it. This is a class example of the American Dream. However, this hierarchical, economic based structure of merit also created conflicts within different communities. “The hierarchies of discrimination embedded in white supremacy— African Americans are treated differently from Latinos who are treated differently from Asian Indians who are treated differently from West Indians— make it possible for those who experience one form of racism to discriminate against others” (Karim 29). The idea of multiculturalism, or cultural celebration as Karim calls it, reminds me of companies who come out with merchandise during black history month, celebrating black people or movements like BLM, when in reality there is no real, structural, legal or economic change that is going on in this country to help black or non-white communities. If racism is declared as a thing of the past, there doesn’t need to be any work into dismantling a racist system, and white supremacy and supremacy of the billionaire class can continue in this country. Today, we see how these false neo-liberal politics allowed a second and more damaging Trump administration to roll back years of DEI efforts, as they posed no real ideological opposition in the first place.

As the report shows, Muslims are likely to be proud to be American and Muslim. They believe in the “American Dream” and are satisfied with their lives. I wonder if this will change at all in the coming years, and if it differs among old and young people. From my experience, immigrants often feel a greater sense of pride in America given their hardships to become a U.S. citizen. The Muslim population represents 1% of the country, is growing, and largely consists of first, second, and third generation immigrants from 75 countries. Many non-Muslim U.S. citizens do not know much about Muslims, and this is coupled with the fact that many Muslims are concerned with the way the media portrays them. Likewise, many Muslims experience some form of discrimination, and it is more common among women or those with obvious traits (dress). The pressure of wearing a hijab or not for women must be far greater than that of a Muslim country, though this may be true for many other aspects of what it means to be Muslim in America. Because of this discrimination, some Muslims feel isolated from American society or that they have to prove or defend themselves and their faith. As we enter a second Trump term, where he has already begun violating protections against immigrants and refugees, I wonder how this rise in white nationalism will affect all minorities including Muslims. What is the “American Dream”? What are American values? What does it mean to be American, and how has this continually changed throughout history? Should the standard of a successful immigration process be assimilation and to what extent?

In this chapter, Ernst explores how the definition and perception of religion has changed throughout history. Much of this, he asserts, can be traced back to modern European Christianity and Imperialism which has affected the way Islam is perceived in the West, as well as how Muslims practice Islam. This chapter raised many questions for me, such as how can and should politics and religion (state and private life) be separated, if at all? Why does Christianity have such a strong history of violent conversion and aversion to other religions? One part I found particularly interesting was on page 43 and 44. Ernst states that this Christian mission of worldwide conversion has no comparison in Islam, and that Christians have, through a form of projection perhaps, labeled Islam as ‘the enemy’ who’s wish is to violently convert everyone. I’m curious about this change of attitude about religion in modern times. If it is true that a religious (monotheist) person believes a non-believer is going to burn in Hell for eternity, would it not be a high goal to attempt to convert them? And wouldn’t it also be important to practice the faith in all areas of life, including state affairs? Ernst goes on to say that religion is more than just belief, which holds more emphasis in Christian doctrine than in Judaism or Islam, which place more value on Ethics and Law. I’m curious about the idea of religious pluralism, since it seems to be an accepted framework; yet at the same, so many people consider religions to be in competition with one another. Can religions and religious people co-exist together, and if so, can it be possible for one group to not face persecution from another?

When I read the first part of “The Manilla Envelope” it made me think about a problem my high school had in transferring our google profile, which caused many of us to lose our digital documents from the past four years. At the time, we were annoyed, but it went away quickly. It was not like any of us had been writing a novel we cared deeply about–sure, we worked hard and were proud of that–but we also found that we had little care for the various essays and assignments we were forced to complete. I think in the modern world, where everything–in fact, every moment–is digitalized, we are losing sentiment for physical objects in physical reality. Watters question of privacy seems more important to me than his question of what has permanence. Is there ever a private digital space, and who has access to these spaces and why? The section on the Indie Web made me think of all the recent talk of AI being the next best thing, and based off the way people used to talk about the internet, it’s probably true. The fact that we’re seeing the rise of industries like bitcoin and tech oligarchs running the country means we are unfortunately not, as Watters pleas in the end, moving towards digital democratization or freedom, but rather seeing a the beginning of total machine control.