Richard Cohen nailed the Ground Zero mosque issue in his Washington Post column the other day: “in this case, the difference between compromise and defeat is nonexistent.”
In most cases where people are yelling and screaming on both sides of an issue, it seems reasonable (and is probably a healthy democratic instinct) to search for a compromise. But in this case, the debate is between those who think there is an issue here at all, and those who think that it is irrelevant that a mosque is being built near Ground Zero and baffling that one might object or find it “hurtful.” So, to accept a compromise is to admit that there is at least some legitimacy to the right-wing complaints about the mosque.
It is only “insensitive” to build a mosque near Ground Zero if you think that the people praying there are inherently connected to and tainted by what happened. When you only know one thing about a person or group, it tends to define them for you. The fact that people find a Ground Zero mosque cause for “pain” shows embarrassing ignorance of the Islamic world, which is a whole universe of its own with a billion people, a wide diversity of nations and cultures, and the full range of human stupidity, wisdom, cruelty, love, and every other human emotion, and every kind of institution and political belief on the spectrum.
We can only hope that the people who view Islam in this way can somehow gain a more sophisticated view -- echoing the path that Malcolm X describes in the amazing dramatic chapter (chap. 17) of his autobiography on his pilgrimage to Mecca, where he got an eye-opening glimpse of a diverse and humanitarian Muslim religion and decided to renounce racism.
For mosque supporters -- perhaps I should say "mosque non-opponents"; it's not as if I affirmatively want or care if there's a mosque there, I just don't see why anyone would object -- anyway, for non-objectors to give in at all, is to acknowledge that there might be some legitimacy to the mosque objections. Cohen is absolutely right and I hope they stand firm.
This "debate" is going to go down as a shameful moment in our history, and those on the wrong side, or who get wobbly on us, will be tainted by it.
The question of "who" perpetrated 9/11 is an interpretive act, once
you go beyond the specific individuals involved. The right wing seems
to see it as "the Muslims." A Shiite Muslim might say it was "the Sunnis." An atheist might say it was "religious people." A radical feminist might say it was "men." And so on.
The best way to view it, however, is that it was extremists or fanatics -- acknowledging that extremism and fanaticism can (and often has) emerged from any and every group of human beings. Including 21st century American conservatives.
