There is an old rule in politics and an older one in propaganda: if you want to weaken an idea, don’t argue against it—degrade it. Make it sound coarse. Make it look angry. Make it appear incapable of self-restraint. Over time, people will recoil not because the idea is wrong, but because it has been made unappealing. That is precisely what appears to be happening to Islam today, not only through the work of its external critics, but—far more dangerously—through the conduct of some of its loudest self-appointed defenders.

In recent months in Bangladesh, a troubling pattern has emerged within segments of Generation Z activism and among figures associated, directly or indirectly, with so-called Islamic political groups. Vulgar language, crude slogans, and indecent expressions are being normalized and even celebrated as markers of boldness, authenticity, or revolutionary spirit. What makes this trend alarming is not merely its tone, but its consequence: it inflicts reputational damage on Islam globally, often without the speakers realizing—or perhaps caring—about the cost.

Among young leaders, particularly those with madrasa backgrounds or affiliations with Islamist student wings, such language is increasingly framed as “fearless truth-telling.” Videos circulate. Slogans echo. Shock becomes currency. The more outrageous the statement, the wider the reach. This may appear to be a cultural rebellion or political bravado, but in reality it is a gift to those who have long sought to portray Islam as inherently crude, intolerant, or incompatible with civility.

Chief Adviser Professor Muhammad Yunus, at the beginning of his tenure, remarked that Sheikh Hasina’s fall was the result of a meticulously designed plan. That comment, intended or not, reinforced a sense that politics in Bangladesh had entered an era of calculated engineering rather than organic democratic evolution. Yet what followed is more unsettling. Certain figures—some emerging from Islamist backgrounds—have been promoted as icons of the new generation, despite having popularized language that is fundamentally at odds with Islamic ethics.

The late Hadi’s vulgar utterance “Shawoa(in english – vagina), repeatedly amplified and rhythmically chanted by Islamist student organizations, did not arise in a vacuum. It was curated, echoed, and validated. When Professor Yunus publicly referred to Hadi as “the best son of the generation,” the endorsement carried symbolic weight. In effect, it suggested that moral restraint was secondary to political usefulness. That signal matters, especially to young minds searching for models of leadership.

To understand the broader implications, one must recall recent history. After 9/11, Western political discourse—often aided by selective media framing—worked tirelessly to equate Islam with terrorism. The “War on Terror” was not only fought with drones and troops in Afghanistan, Iraq or Libya; it was also fought with narratives. Pakistan’s complicated role, Iraq’s tragic descent into militancy, and the visibility of extremist rhetoric all helped construct an image of Islam as a religion of rage rather than reason. But, that was not Islam at all.

Today’s vulgar sloganeering in Bangladesh, though different in form, serves a similar function. It feeds Western Islamophobic circles with fresh evidence to recycle old prejudices. The label has subtly shifted—from “terrorist religion” to something arguably more corrosive: a “vulgar religion.” One associated not with discipline, mercy, and intellectual rigor, but with obscenity and street-level aggression.

This is not accidental. Nor is it entirely organic. When indecent expressions are elevated and normalized within Islamist spaces, they make the task of Islam’s critics effortless. No distortion is needed. The footage speaks for itself. The slogans travel faster than any scholarly rebuttal ever could.

A deeper look at the student movement that contributed to Sheikh Hasina’s ouster reveals an inconvenient truth often ignored. That movement was not religiously homogenous. Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, indigenous groups—all participated. Yet the coarse rhetoric overwhelmingly came from a specific subset: those associated with madrasa education or so-called Islamist student organizations. This raises a difficult but necessary question. Is Islam being consciously weaponized, or unconsciously sacrificed, for short-term political theatrics?

Either answer is disturbing.

History offers a cautionary parallel. During the height of the War on Terror, Western strategists understood that overt military force alone could not defame Islam; cultural degradation had to do the rest. Extremist voices were amplified. Moderate ones were sidelined. The loudest and most offensive expressions were treated as representatives. Today, when self-identified Islamist leaders themselves engage in language Islam explicitly forbids, they are, wittingly or not, completing that project from the inside.

Bangladesh is the world’s fourth-largest Muslim-majority country. Its people, by and large, love Islam deeply—not as a political weapon, but as a moral compass. The danger of the current trend is that it alienates that silent majority. Parents do not want their children learning profanity in the name of piety. Fathers do not want Islam presented to their sons as a license for verbal indecency. Mothers do not want faith reduced to a chant stripped of dignity.

As a parent myself, I would never permit my child to speak in such a manner. Nor would I want Islam associated with it. When parents see Islamist groups glorifying vulgarity, a quiet but consequential reaction follows: they begin to distance their children from those spaces altogether. In trying to appear radical and relevant, these groups risk making Islam socially unattractive within Muslim homes themselves.

What makes this tragedy sharper is that Islam’s own sources leave no ambiguity on the matter. The Qur’an, in Surah Al-Hujurat (49:11–12), commands believers not to ridicule one another, not to use offensive nicknames, not to engage in slander. Surah Al-Mu’minun (23:3) praises those who turn away from idle and indecent speech. These are not marginal verses. They are foundational.

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was even clearer. In authentic hadith, he stated that a true Muslim is one from whose tongue and hands others are safe. He explicitly rejected cursing, obscenity, and verbal abuse as characteristics of faith. When faced with provocation, he taught patience, restraint, and moral intelligence—not verbal escalation.

In other words, vulgarity is not merely un-Islamic; it is anti-Islamic.

The irony is painful. In the name of defending Islam, some are violating its core ethics. In the name of empowering youth, they are lowering standards. And in the name of resistance, they are handing Islam’s adversaries precisely what they want.

This is not a call for censorship. It is a call for responsibility. Islam does not need to be loud to be strong. It does not need to be crude to be courageous. Its power has always lain in moral clarity, intellectual depth, and disciplined speech. If Bangladesh’s so-called Islamist leaders and youth activists fail to recognize this, they will discover—too late—that the real conspiracy was not imposed from outside. It was enabled from within.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel

The post Deep-rooted conspiracy of giving Islam a bad name appeared first on BLiTZ.

[Read More]

—–
Source: Weekly Blitz :: Writings