Normally, the left loves to demonize America’s founding fathers. However, when the task at hand involves comparing one of them – George Washington – to Muhammad, suddenly said founder is magically on solid ground. Only on the left can one find a penchant for demonizing heroes until it involves a comparison with Islam’s prophet, which leads us to a telling piece by Craig Considine.
In seventh century Arabia, a middle-aged man had a vision to create a new religious and social order for a largely pagan and tribal society. The man, Muhammad, told his band of followers to behave wisely and civilly. “The best among you,” he said, “are those who have the best manners and character.” More than 1,000 years later, Muhammad’s wisdom would be echoed again, this time in the British colony of Virginia, by a 13-year-old schoolboy jotting down a lengthy set of behavioral rules that would later be published as “Rules of Civility.” The schoolboy was none other than George Washington, who would one day become the first president of the United States of America.
Muhammad and Washington may seem like an unlikely connection, but in fact, they share strikingly similar biographies. Muhammad and Washington were students of history, restorers of justice and fierce warriors who led their respective nations through successful revolutions. Both men united a large swath of political territory and served as the founding father for two unprecedented social movements — Islam and the United States of America — whose universal ideals would both spread throughout the world respectively.
Conspicuously absent from this analysis is a demonization of Muhammad for being like George Washington, who, according to much of the left, was a racist.
The left has made a living out of painting America’s founders as racist white guys who had no concern for equality. Yet, whenever anyone points out Muhammad’s racism, the left cries foul, which is what makes Considine’s piece quite interesting.
Instead of comparing Muhammad to the racist founders of America, the Huffington Post’s Considine has decided to ‘elevate’ one of America’s founders to the level of Muhammad. If, as many leftists believe, Washington was a racist, how does equating him with Muhammad help Islam’s cause?
Doesn’t that put Considine on treacherous ground? Not likely, because his intent is to elevate Muhammad at the expense of Washington.
Islamists should have a problem with Considine’s equating their ‘holy’ prophet with the ‘racist’ Washington. Perhaps the reason they don’t has something to do with a tacit admission that Washington wasn’t a racist.
Otherwise, Considine’s equating Muhammad with Washington could put him on par with the ‘Innocence of Muslims’ filmmaker.