Anti-Islamic Hate Crime and the Enduring Effects of 9/11

In this blog entry, on the anniversary of 9/11, Lori Peek, author of Behind the Backlash, describes the aftereffects of the terrorist attacks for the Muslim community.

Behind the Backlash sm FINALSoon after Behind the Backlash was published, I had the opportunity to give a guest lecture on the book at my undergraduate alma mater in Kansas. At the end of the talk, a student raised her hand and asked about the longer-term implications of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Specifically, she wanted to know whether anti-Islamic hate crimes and other forms of discrimination had continued to increase, even years after that fateful day. After she asked that question, another student raised his hand and inquired about the geography of post-9/11 hate crimes: Were they happening more often in big cities or small towns? Were they occurring in places close to or far away from the epicenter of the terror attacks?

In order to answer those questions, I collaborated with my colleague, Dr. Michelle Meyer, to assess the temporal and geographic patterns of anti-Islamic hate crime in the years following the terrorist attacks.* We compiled and geocoded data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reporting Program so that we could analyze the prevalence and geographic distribution of incidents of anti-Islamic hate crime. We also drew on county-level Muslim population estimates so that we could describe the relative risk that Muslims faced in terms of experiencing hate crime in different counties. I briefly outline what we found in this blog post. The full version of our findings is available here.

1. 9/11 Provoked a Sudden and Dramatic Increase in Anti-Islamic Hate Crime

Following 9/11, the onset of hate crime activity was swift and the increase in recorded hate crimes substantial. The total number of hate crimes targeted at Muslims in the month following 9/11 was 58 times the number reported in the month leading up to the disaster. This elevation in hate crime continued for the remainder of 2001 and through the first anniversary of the attacks with 14 times as many anti-Islamic hate crimes in the year following 9/11 compared to the year before.

Figure #1. Anti-Islamic Hate Crimes One Month and One Year Before and After 9/11

(click on charts to make them appear larger)

Fig 1

2. 9/11 Has Had an Enduring Effect on Anti-Islamic Hate Crime

9/11 has had an enduring effect on anti-Islamic hate crime in the U.S., with increased numbers of recorded hate crime representing a “new normal” for Muslim Americans. During the pre-9/11 period, from 1992-2000, the yearly average of anti-Islamic incidents was 23. In the post-9/11 period, from 2002-2009, the yearly average was 134, which is nearly six times greater than before 9/11.

Figure #2. Anti-Islamic Hate Crimes Yearly Totals, 1992 – 2009

Figure 2

3. Since 9/11, Anti-Islamic Hate Crimes against Persons Have Been More Common Than Those Against Property

Hate crime can be any type of criminal offense that is motivated by bias, including crimes against persons as well as crimes against property. While all types of anti-Islamic hate crime surged after 9/11, crimes against Muslim persons (e.g., intimidation, aggravated assault, simple assault) were more common than crimes against their property (e.g., vandalism, theft arson, etc.).

Figure #3. Anti-Islamic Hate Crime Offenses against Persons and Property, 1992 – 2009

Fig 3

4. Intimidation, Vandalism, and Simple Assault Have Been the Most Common Forms of Post-9/11 Anti-Islamic Hate Crime

Hate crime can take many forms, and the FBI data that we analyzed for this work includes 46 distinct bias-motivated offense types. After 9/11, intimidation, vandalism, and simple assault were the three types of anti-Islamic hate crime that were most common. They increased markedly and have remained elevated in the years since.

Figure #4. Anti-Islamic Hate Crime Offense Types, 1992 – 2009

Fig 4

5. Anti-Islamic Hate Crime Has Become Widely Dispersed Geographically since 9/11

The backlash that followed the 9/11 attacks led to an unprecedented number of anti-Islamic hate crimes that were geographically dispersed across the U.S. As shown in Figure #5 below, before 9/11, most anti-Islamic hate crime was concentrated in cities and states with larger Muslim populations. After 9/11, anti-Islamic hate crime spread to both densely- and sparsely-populated counties, to places with small numbers of Muslims, and to areas with no prior experience with this type of hate crime (see Figure #6).

Figure #5. Anti-Islamic Hate Crime, 1992 – September 10, 2001, with Cities and States with the Largest Muslim Populations Highlighted

Fig 5Figure #6. Anti-Islamic Hate Crime in the Years Since 9/11

Fig 6

6. Since 9/11, the Overall Risk of Experiencing Hate Crime has Increased for All Muslims; Those Muslims Living in Counties with Smaller Muslim Populations Have Experienced Greater Relative Risk of Being Victimized

The figures below show the rates of anti-Islamic hate crime per 100,000 for the one year before (Figure #7) and one year after 9/11 (Figure #8). It is clear that the overall risk of experiencing hate crime increased for all Muslims in the United States after 9/11. The data also indicate that areas with smaller populations of Muslims have a higher rate of anti-Islamic hate crimes, meaning that Muslims in counties with few other Muslims are at greater relative risk of experiencing hate crime than those in counties with larger Muslim populations. For example, in the year following 9/11, Saginaw County, Michigan, where the estimated Muslim population in the year 2000 was only 77, had the highest anti-Islamic hate crime rate with 3,896 incidents per 100,000 Muslims. In comparison, Washington, D.C., which has an estimated Muslim population of just over 60,000, had the lowest rate of anti-Islamic hate crime at 1.65 incidents per 100,000 Muslims.

Figure #7 Anti-Islamic Hate Crime Rates in the Year Before 9/11

Fig 7

Figure #8 Anti-Islamic Hate Crime Rates in the Year After 9/11

Fig 8Muslim Americans have endured decades of stereotyping, discrimination and violence, largely triggered by conflicts in the Middle East and acts of domestic and foreign terrorism associated (rightly or wrongly) with the Islamic faith. However, 9/11—the most shocking and deadly terror attacks in the nation’s history—precipitated the largest-ever rise in anti-Islamic hate crime in the U.S. We hope that the above analysis offers a general sense of the short- and longer-term effects of the terrorist attacks on anti-Islamic hate crime activity at the national level. We also think this work has implications for those professionals tasked with more effectively preparing for and responding to the social consequences of terrorist events.

Lori Peek is author of the award-winning book, Behind the Backlash: Muslim Americans after 9/11. She is also co-author of Children of Katrina, and co-editor of Displaced: Life in the Katrina Diaspora. Dr. Peek, an Associate Professor of Sociology and Co-Director of the Center for Disaster and Risk Analysis at Colorado State University, studies vulnerable populations in disaster. Her work focuses on low-income families, racial and ethnic minorities, women, and children. She has conducted research in New Jersey after Superstorm Sandy, in the Gulf Coast region following Hurricane Katrina and the BP oil spill, in Joplin, Missouri after the 2011 tornado, and in New York after 9/11.

Notes

*Peek, Lori and Michelle Meyer Lueck. 2012. “When Hate is a Crime: Temporal and Geographic Patterns of Anti-Islamic Hate Crime after 9/11.” Pp. 203-225 in Crime and Criminal Justice in Disaster, 2nd ed., edited by D. W. Harper and K. Frailing. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

A Q&A with Dan Rottenberg, author of THE OUTSIDER

This week, in North Philly Notes, a Q&A with Dan Rottenberg, author of The Outsider: Albert M. Greenfield and the Fall of the Protestant Establishment.

How and why did you come to study Albert M. Greenfield?
Like most authors, I’ve always had several books on the back burner. One, for years, was a book about how Jews have changed business in America and vice versa. Another was a book about the decline of the Protestant establishment in America. I came across Albert M. Greenfield, and I realized this man ties into both of those themes, and that’s what I was really interested in. He was the quintessential Russian immigrant hustler who terrified the Protestant establishment in Philadelphia. They tried to shut him down in 1930. They thought they had. He came back and shut many of them down.

What surprised you in researching and telling Greenfield’s story?
What surprised me was that I couldn’t quite get a handle on him: Do I like this man or don’t I like him? There were a lot of things about Greenfield that I really liked and that I found I had in common with him—he was a tremendous optimist, and had no use for people who whined and complained—I’m pretty much the same way. He had very little empathy for people who had problems. He said take your problems somewhere else. On the other hand, he did a lot of things that were not quite ethical. He had his own narrative of his life, a lot of it was total nonsense. What I had to do as the writer was sift out the myth from the facts.

The Outsider_smHow do you think Greenfield used his Jewishness, or broke away from the stereotype in his business affairs?
Greenfield was Jewish, but he really broke all boundaries, and all rules. His basic mantra was, I can define myself as whatever I want. Sometimes he defined himself as Jewish, sometimes he thought he was the second coming of Benjamin Franklin. He was all over the place.

Do you find that his business savvy was his sheer love of business, versus fear of financial failure?
When you come right down to it, he was not really that concerned with making money or power, he really just loved to play the game. He lost a fortune twice in his life, and came back and each time, he really got the sense that he enjoyed the comeback. It was much more fun. He once said, “I’d rather fall off the highest rung than never climb the ladder.”

Greenfield was active in real estate, banking, retail, and politics, among other things. What do you think was his greatest accomplishment?
In business, he built up a huge empire, including department store chains up and down the east coast. He built some of the major building that still stand to this day, including the Ben Franklin Hotel and the Philadelphia Building, which for years was called the Bankers’ Security Building, named for his company.  But really his business empire collapsed shortly after he died. It was largely a one-man band. His legacy really lies elsewhere.

What was his greatest disaster?
Probably the failure of the Banker’s Trust Company in 1930—his venture into banking. He just assumed he was smarter than everybody else and he could succeed at anything he put his hand to. Banking turned out to be something very different than real estate. In real estate, the biggest asset is your optimism, your ability to inspire confidence in your investors or tenants. In a banker, your biggest asset is your reputation for prudence, caution, and reliability. Totally different things.

What do you think Greenfield’s legacy in Philadelphia is today?
I would say his greatest legacy is the message that his life transmits to people, that you, as a private, ordinary citizen, can really exert tremendous influence on your community, your country—if you really want to. The idea that we ought to be a little more optimistic about the future—that we ought to be a little more accepting of change. You can make your own identity, whatever you want it to be, and collectively, we can make this community and this world a better place if we want. I also think his legacy is the importance of immigrants in our society. Every generation there is a fear of immigrants and a feeling that immigrants don’t really know what America is about. Greenfield had the opposite idea. He said immigrants really appreciate America more than anybody else does.

About the author
Dan Rottenberg is the author of eleven books, including The Man Who Made Wall Street: Anthony J. Drexel and the Rise of Modern Finance, and the founding editor of the Broad Street Review, an arts and culture website.

 

Harvey Milk’s lasting influence in the labor history of queer America

In this blog entry, Miriam Frank, author of Out in the Union, explores Harvey Milk’s political vision of union involvement and LGBT progress.

article-stamp-0404Two months ago the United States Postal Service issued a new “Forever” postage stamp to honor Harvey Milk. I remember when Harvey Milk won his seat on San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors in 1977. He was California’s first openly gay elected official.

A year later Milk was still campaigning, but not for himself. A new amendment to California’s state constitution was on the ballot for the November election. If Proposition 6 passed, it would require local boards of education to fire school employees for public or private declarations of their queer identities, as well as any school worker, straight or gay, who affirmed or advocated gay existence.

In June 1978, Milk spoke out against the menace of Proposition 6 to hundreds of thousands of gay people at San Francisco’s Gay Freedom Day rally. He challenged supporters to defy the threat by making their gayness more open than ever. “Come out to your friends, if they indeed are your friends,” he said. “Come out to your neighbors, to your fellow workers, to the people who work where you eat and shop.”

Milk organized hard against the amendment. Throughout the summer, he was on TV for interviews, or for debates with state Senator John Briggs, Proposition 6’s author. Milk’s prominence and charisma kept the battle in the news, but central to the fight were California’s lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender citizens: city dwellers, suburbanites, rural folks. Many so feared how the amendment would affect their lives that they did come out. Sons, daughters, friends and co-workers told the people in their lives the truth about what the amendment would mean for their futures. One by one they asked their families and neighbors to vote “no on 6.” And one by one, they broke through the secrecy and fear that had held them back from living open, authentic lives as equals in civil society.

The decision to come out had to be an individual one, but LGBT people who were fighting Proposition 6 were not alone. Harvey Milk was not only dedicated to the gay community of the Castro but had also supported the municipal workers’ unions and a successful Teamster-led boycott of Coors beer in the neighborhood’s gay bars. Unionists were familiar with Senator Briggs’ record of hostility to labor’s issues and opposed the amendment because it would undermine collective bargaining and legalize workplace discrimination. Three days after the Gay Freedom Day rally, the San Francisco’s Labor Council announced its unanimous opposition to Proposition 6.

Out in the Union_smUnion endorsements and donations enabled wide canvassing and publicity. By mid-summer, liberal religious groups and civil liberties organizations were also involved in the expanding grassroots campaign. Squads of queer activists knocked on doors in city and suburban neighborhoods and visited community meetings at union halls and country churches. In September, an endorsement of “No on 6” by former Governor Ronald Reagan, a right-wing rival of Senator Briggs, swung many more voters. Unions released the power of their political machine in late October with phone banks, a front- page editorial in the AFL-CIO newsletter and 2.3 million palm cards at the polls. On election day, Proposition 6 was rejected by 58 percent of California voters.

California’s successful defeat of Proposition 6 in 1978 was the first major political coalition to connect the fresh and angry power of gay liberation with labor’s long-haul commitment to fairness and equality. Many other great LGBT labor collaborations have flowed forth since then.

In my book, Out in the Union, I interviewed people who participated in those coalitions. My research began in 1995 and my search for stories continued for another several years. To explore the lives and achievements of primary activists, I conducted interviews in New York City, Boston, Detroit, Washington DC, Portland, Oregon, San Francisco, Seattle, Tacoma, Los Angeles, Salt Lake City and many places in between.

The lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender union members who have told me their stories have been newspaper workers, nurses and health technicians, bus drivers, telephone installers, construction tradespeople, store clerks, hotel and restaurant employees, factory workers, social service workers and employees of AIDS clinics. Their queer lives have taken them through extraordinary adventures and long phases of everyday routine; and their everyday jobs are as various and their unions as diverse as the labor movement itself. Some have founded new union locals; others have negotiated innovative contracts; and still others have fought to save jobs when their plants were being closed. They are the people of Out in the Union.

Harvey Milk did not live to see the great changes that his activism started.  But  I like to think that he would have been proud of all that the labor and LGBT movements have accomplished.

 

Adia Harvey Wingfield, acknowledges receiving another award for No More Invisible Man

This week in North Philly Notes, Adia Harvey Wingfield, author of No More Invisible Man, offers her thoughts on winning the Distinguished Contribution to Scholarship Book Award from the American Sociological Association’s (ASA) section on Race, Gender and Class, 2014.

WingfieldFinal.inddI am so happy and proud to receive the Distinguished Contribution to Scholarship Book Award from the American Sociological Association’s (ASA) Race, Gender, and Class Section. This section of the ASA has long been at the forefront of focusing scholarly attention on how these fundamental issues of race, gender, and class are overlapping categories that mutually influence each other in different ways. It is a section that is replete with brilliant scholars doing cutting edge work, so it really means a lot to me to be honored in this way.

I particularly appreciate the recognition that black professional men’s work lives are significantly shaped by these issues of race, gender, and class in ways that render their experiences unique. As the title of this book indicates, for far too long these men have been ignored and overlooked by scholars and media alike. I am happy to be part of the effort to highlight how black professional men, too, live lives that are formed not just by race but also by their gender and class position, and am so pleased that the Race, Gender, and Class section saw fit to recognize these men as well.

Announcing the publication of Kalfou: A Journal of Comparative and Relational Ethnic Studies

Temple University Press is pleased to announce the publication of
Kalfou: A Journal of Comparative and Relational Ethnic Studies

Kalfou

Kalfou is the Haitian Kreyòl word for “crossroads.” It is a scholarly journal focused on social movements, social institutions, and social relations. Editor George Lipsitz explained, “The publication of Kalfou ushers in a new era in engaged scholarship. This first issue blends contributions from the leading scholars in ethnic studies with compelling writings from artists and activists. This journal constitutes a new public square for addressing the most important issues of our time.”

The journal seeks to promote the development of community-based scholarship in ethnic studies among humanists and social scientists and to connect the specialized knowledge produced in academe to the situated knowledge generated in aggrieved communities.

Kalfou is published by Temple University Press on behalf of the Center for Black Studies Research at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Spring 2014, Volume 1, Issue 1

Introduction: A New Beginning • George Lipsitz

Feature Articles
Martin Luther King Encounters Post-racialism • Kimberlé Crenshaw
Hansberry’s A Raisin in the Sun and the “Illegible” Politics of (Inter)personal Justice • Tricia Rose
The Ideological Alchemy of Contemporary Nativism: Revisiting the Origins of California’s Proposition 187 • Daniel Martinez HoSang
Beyond Conflict and Competition: How Color-Blind Ideology Affects African Americans’ and Latinos’ Understanding of Their Relationships • Chrisshonna Grant Nieva and Laura Pulido, with Nathan J. Sessoms
From College Readiness to Ready for Revolution! Third World Student Activism at a Northern California Community College, 1965–1969 • Jason Ferreira

Talkative Ancestors
Chris Iijima on Asian American Identity

Keywords
Critical Ethnic Studies • Chandan Reddy

La Mesa Popular
The Alchemy of Race and Affect: “White Innocence” and Public Secrets in the Post–Civil Rights Era • Paula Ioanide

Art and Social Action
Music and Mobilization: Kombit Pou Haiti 2010 • Chuck D and Gaye Theresa Johnson

Mobilized 4 Movement
Race, Municipal Underbounding, and Coalitional Politics in Modesto, California, and Moore County, North Carolina • Emily Tumpson Molina

Teaching and Truth
The Bigger Scandal • Pauline Lipman

In Memoriam
Afro-Asian People’s Warrior: Richard Aoki, 1938–2009 • Diane C. Fujino

Book Reviews
The Woman in the Zoot Suit: Gender, Nationalism, and the Cultural Politics of Memory, by Catherine S. Ramírez • Reviewed by María Angela Díaz
From Toussaint to Tupac: The Black International since the Age of Revolution, edited by Michael O. West, William G. Martin, and Fanon Che Wilkins • Reviewed by Michael E. Brandon

 

KALFOU EDITORIAL BOARD

Senior Editor: George Lipsitz, University of California, Santa Barbara

Associate Editors:
Enrique Bonus, University of Washington, Seattle
Maria Herrera-Sobek, University of California, Santa Barbara
Roberta Hill, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Tricia Rose, Brown University

Book Review Editor:
Paul Ortiz, University of Florida, Gainesville

Founding Editors:
Claudine Michel, University of California, Santa Barbara
Melvin Oliver, University of California, Santa Barbara

Managing Editor:
Rose Elfman, University of California, Santa Barbara

 

Two Temple University Press authors acknowledge their recent awards

Adia Harvey Wingfield, author of No More Invisible Man, received the Richard A. Lester Award for the Outstanding Book in Labor Economics and Industrial Relations at Princeton University. The award is presented to the book making the most original and important contribution toward understanding the problems of industrial relations, labor market policies, and the evolution of labor markets.

WingfieldFinal.inddI am very happy to receive the Richard A. Lester Award for the Outstanding Book in Labor Economics and Industrial Relations published in 2013. Given by the Industrial Relations Section at Princeton University, this important award “is presented to the book making the most original and important contribution toward understanding the problems of industrial relations and the evolution of labor markets.” As such, it is my pleasure and my honor to be a recipient.

While I am thrilled to receive this award, more credit and attention should go to the men who were the focus of this project. Part of what inspired me to conduct this study and ultimately write this book was the realization that black middle class professional men are largely absent from the literatures on race, gender, and work. Their unique experiences and the ways they are constructed by intersections of gender, race, and class often go unnoticed, particularly as academics and media instead choose to spotlight economically disadvantaged black men who all too frequently are underserved by existing social institutions. Black professional men’s work lives are frequently lumped into general studies of the black middle class or obscured by the focus on their more visible female counterparts. I thank the men of my study for sharing their lives with me and refusing to be the invisible men of years past.

Bindi Shah’s book Laotian Daughters received the Association for Asian American Studies’ Outstanding Book Award in the category Social Science.

Laotian Daughters sm FINALI am absolutely delighted to accept this book award from the Association for Asian American Studies. The award is not only recognition of my scholarship in the book, but also of the shift in the discursive representations of young Laotian women from the children of Southeast Asian refugees to active citizens and a positive voice for change.

This book would not have been possible without the Asian Pacific Environmental Network’s early vision in building an Asian American face to the environmental justice movement, and without the participation of young Laotian women in APEN’s Asian Youth Advocates program. The teenagers’ spirit, perseverance and commitment to social justice in the face of adversity provided the inspiration to write a book that challenges dominant narratives of assimilation and incorporation.

I also want to thank two people associated with Temple University Press: Linda Võ, who as one of the series editors of Temple University Press’ Asian American History and Culture Series, believed in the book from the beginning, and Janet Francendese, who supported the project through all its stages.

 

Questioning French Republican Politics

In this blog entry, Jennifer Fredette, author of Constructing Muslims in France, writes about Marine Le Pen’s reaction to Muslim soldiers who gave their lives for France during WWII.

French president François Hollande recently paid his respects at a memorial in Paris dedicated to the 100,000 Muslim soldiers who gave their lives for France during the First World War. Marine Le Pen, leader of the far-right National Front party, responded by saying, “It makes me vomit.”

Strong words, to be sure.

What was it that made Le Pen vomit? In her words, it was the very idea of “dividing the French” along the lines of religion: these soldiers should be celebrated as soldiers, and as French; their religion should be immaterial.

On its surface, Le Pen’s statement reflects the French way of doing politics, the “republican tradition.” Americans are accustomed to hearing political leaders speak openly about race, gender, and religion. In fact, our political leaders even appeal to such group identities for the purpose of elections (consider “Women for Hillary” or the “Moral Majority”). French republicanism, however, abhors the recognition of difference. French republicanism is a political philosophy that demands that people engage in politics purely as a citizen, leaving their other identities and affiliations (such as race, gender, religion) at home. Why the distaste for identity politics? The short answer French republicanism offers is that identity politics rip a nation apart. They make it impossible for citizens to appreciate one another as equals, sharing a nation and its future together.

Constructing Muslims_sm We really need to examine Le Pen’s comment a bit deeper, however. After all, Le Pen is no difference-blind republican. She is the head of a xenophobic, anti-immigration political party whose manifesto boldly announces that France’s national culture is profoundly influenced by Christianity. In 2010, Le Pen equated Muslims praying in the street (a result of insufficient prayer space, not religious fanaticism) with living in Nazi-occupied France. True, French republicanism would criticize those who pray in the streets for bringing religion into the public sphere in a highly visible way; but equating them with Nazis was a rhetorical flourish all Le Pen’s own, suggesting that Muslims are dangerous outsiders seeking to invade and even oppress France.

Beneath the surface, Le Pen’s comments about the memorial communicate something else: the power of political omission. Le Pen says these soldiers should be celebrated as French, not Muslims. But many of these soldiers fought for France as French colonial subjects. To celebrate them simply as “French” is to conveniently forget France’s participation in the systematic domination and oppression of parts of the Muslim world. Furthermore, media coverage and political discussion of French Muslims today often portrays them in a negative light, questioning their Frenchness and depth of “integration.”

A 2012 French Institute of Public Opinion poll indicates that nearly half of the French would describe Muslims in France as a threat to national identity, and the National Consulting Committee for Human Rights recently warned that Muslims are increasingly subject to violence at the hands of their fellow citizens. In light of this highly charged and certainly not difference-blind climate, it seems a problematic oversight to celebrate these soldiers without recognizing that they happened to be Muslim, and that Muslims have indeed contributed to the betterment of the nation.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 74 other followers

%d bloggers like this: