The media in 2024, including newspapers, were quieter than in previous years regarding the horrible events of Sept. 11, 2001. Prior to this year, the media had consistently presented newscasts and provided articles on the fraught nature of Muslim existence in America. The typical article had pictures of Muslim families followed by a sympathetic analysis of Muslim experiences.
What changed? I suspect the events of Oct. 7 quieted editors and media voices on the difficulties Muslims in America might face. New York’s Twin Towers tragedy aside, sympathy does not play well after face-to-face savagery, violence and brutality perpetrated in the name of religion. The rape and murder of innocents and the beheading of concertgoers does not illicit feelings of good will and support.
Unless, of course, a person is on a college campus, where students and professors often defend the behavior of butchers and justify the killing frenzy of moral nihilists.
What else changed since Sept. 11, 2001? One change involved FBI crime data on hate crime by religious bias. Twenty-three years ago, Muslims and Islamic institutions were the second-most victimized group by hate crimes with an anti-religious bias. In 2022, though, more Sikh individuals and institutions were victimized, at 181 incidents, because of their faith. Muslims and Islamic institutions were the third-most victimized group, at 158 incidents, followed by Catholic individuals and institutions, at 107 incidents. Interestingly, the FBI data show that “anti-other Christian” bias produced the fifth most victimizations, at 97.
If the FBI data are reliable, anti-Catholic bias produced more incidents than all the anti-other Christian religions combined, a significant change from years past.
However, some things never change. As the Department of Justice stated for 2022, “There were 2,042 reported incidents based on religion. More than half of these (1,122) were driven by anti-Jewish bias.” The number of incidents and the number of offenses involving the Jewish population and institutions has been consistent for some time now.
Twenty-four years ago, the FBI reported that anti-Jewish bias produced 1,109 incidents, anti-Protestant bias 59, anti-Catholic 56, and anti-Islamic 28 incidents. In 2001, anti-Jewish incidents numbered 1,043 with 481 anti-Islamic incidents. In 2003, FBI data show 927 anti-Jewish incidents and, in a considerable decrease, 149 anti-Islamic incidents. Taking into account the Jewish and Islamic populations, the data shows the Jewish victimization at more than two-and-a-half times the rate of Islamic victimization in 2003.
According to Statista, Indiana ranked 16th among states in the number of hate crimes in 2022. Indiana was slower to pass hate crime statutes compared with other states. The state had no “hate crime” statute until April 3, 2019, when Gov. Eric Holcolmb signed Senate Bill 198 into law.
Nationally, hate crime offenses more than doubled between 2013 and 2022. In Barack Obama’s last three years in office, hate crime offenses went from 6,418 in 2014 to 7,321 in 2016, a miserable record for a president who promised a reduction in hatred. Joe Biden, he of the “bring the nation back together” rhetoric, is no better. In 2021, there were 1,288 offenses and in 2022, there were 13,337 offenses.
The federal government has responded to the incidences of hate crimes, especially with an eye to hate crimes with an anti-religious bias. The Community Relations Service (CRS), formed in 1964, “offers services to help communities recover from hate crimes and improve their ability to independently prevent and resolve future conflicts.” As its website states, “CRS offers training to enhance police officers’ understanding and engagement with Muslim, Sikh and transgender communities.”
The CRS appears to focus on individuals and institutions from groups less victimized by religious bias than the Jewish population, sort of like former university presidents (satire alert).
In other words, the folks at the CRS have probably been following the practices found on many campuses across America. Those practices treat anti-semitism with indifference and provide encouragement for anti-semitic behavior.
Richard McGowan is an adjunct scholar of the Indiana Policy Review Foundation, where this commentary was previously published. He has taught philosophy and ethics cores for more than 40 years, most recently at Butler University. Send comments to [email protected].
