In the Oxford Handbook: Islam and Politics, Khaled Abou El Fadl identified the conflicting views of two Arab states on the topic of revolution. The first opinion comes from Saudi Arabia which considers the phenomenon to be un-Islamic and, even more so, contrary to the principles of Shari'a, Islamic law. This ruling was motivated by the fact that the aforementioned law prohibits the demonstration even if the party in power shows unjust ways and methods of governing the state. Egypt, on the other hand, sees revolution against injustice as a religious and moral obligation incumbent on all Muslims. This Arab state on the African continent resists and fights against oppression and injustice of all kinds. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The two different opinions are good evidence that despite adhering to the same Islamic reference, there can still be different interpretations of the teachings. This gives light to Baker's theory in his book, One Islam, Many Muslim Worlds, that each of us will make a significant contribution to Islamic renewal despite our different responses to events. This shows that Islam embraces pluralism and should not be viewed with a monolithic approach. The Western approach to Islamic accounts includes different positions: absolutist, relativist, ethnocentric and above all humanistic. According to Baker, absolutist and ethnocentric views are so arrogant that there is only one standard truth. In the eyes of an ethnocentric, no other truth is valid except their higher truth. In the relativist approach, there is an understanding of different experiences and one's truth is relative to one's place and time in history. Dialogues and opposing arguments are acceptable, however there is no necessary resolution. Somehow it gives credence to diversity but does not require coexistence. The humanistic approach, on the other hand, encourages both parties to appreciate plurality and reach a level of understanding that encourages reconciliation and harmony. The above locations reminded me of a Gap ad that went around recently. The promotional material shows a hijabi girl alongside children of other origins. For the American population, this means the normalization of diverse representation in the media. Indeed, the commercial was seen as a breakthrough in embracing diversity and tackling racism. The ad is currently available in two countries, the US and the UK. In France, however, although the advert has not yet been released in their country, it has already sparked controversy. The advertising was seen as regressive, misogynistic and as an abuse of their value of freedom and justice – which Europeans place the utmost importance on. This has led some movements and politicians to urge the masses to boycott the brand. The French government's concern about Muslim women's clothing stems from the view that head coverings are patriarchal and sexist. On the other hand, Sam Cherribi, in his article Islamic Politics in Europe in the Oxford Handbook of Islam and Politics, explained that the resistance of European states against any Islamic ideology has three factors. The first factor is the fear of losing the European national identity with the expansion of the European Union. Second, Islam becomes a major security issue due to the rise of global militant political Islam and terrorism. Third, Europeans discovered that they were incapable and inexperienced in dealing with the new rise of religious pluralism. The first and last factors pose a threat to the fact that Europe is a huge geographical entity that shares acommon religion: Christianity. Consequently, the introduction of a new ideology, Islam, which touches all aspects of human existence becomes a cause for concern over the lack of a cohesive political identity. They are currently unified by their singularHowever, the emerging identification of Islam as the enemy in the preservation of one's identity also begins to serve as another unifying ingredient that binds other European states. For nearly 40 years, Turkey has attempted to join the European Union. Their possible inclusion becomes a source of tension between member states. If this happens, it will be seen as legitimizing the Muslimization of Europe, and this is not something Europeans can accept, given their efforts to revive and preserve their own identity. In 1989, during the presidency of Slobodan Milosevic in Yugoslavia, Kosovo and its Muslim communities suffered ethnic disintegration. Due to the Europeans' lack of a unified defense identity, some movements called for the help of the Americans and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to put an end to Milosevic's ethnic cleansing. This led to airstrikes in Serbia and Kosovo that sent hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing to neighboring European countries for protection. Around 6,000 Muslim men and boys were massacred despite being under the protection of the Dutch United Nations. For some, this was like a déjà vu of the betrayal of the Dutch when Jews sought refuge in Holland during World War II. The massacre was even labeled by others as the worst genocide in Europe since the Holocaust. In 1996, the Dutch government requested the Netherlands Institute for War Documentation (NIOD) to conduct research into the events that occurred before, during and after the Srebrenica massacre. In 2002, the NIOD report was published and the findings prompted former Dutch Prime Minister Kok to announce that he would take full responsibility for the massacre, and thereafter he and his cabinet resigned. Currently, some activists and movements raise a question about the Dutch government's reparation to the victims of the Srebrenica massacre – considering the high regard Europeans place in defending justice and freedom. Sadly, in a press release dated 11 July 2015, Amnesty International's director for Europe and Central Asia, John Dalhuisen, said: “Two decades after the world turned its gaze away from the worst crime committed on European soil since 1945, the families of the victims of the Srebrenica genocide are still waiting for justice”, Islam in North America, Abdullah Al-Arian (Oxford Handbook: Islam and Politics) One of the first groups of Muslims to arrive in America came from 'West Africa. Most of them, if not all, were subject to slavery. In recent years, the lives of those Muslim slaves have been shared with a wider audience through books and films. There is Ayuba Suleiman Diallo, an 18th-century slave whose extraordinary journey allowed him to return to his home along the Gambia River in West Africa, and `Abd al-Rahman Ibrahima Sora, an enslaved African prince in the Americas early 19th century. century and was freed only after the intervention of President John Quincy Adams. Through documentation, it has been proven that the first Muslim slaves were educated and/or of respectable origin. They even had the ability to read and write Arabic and displayed a strong Islamic identity and knowledge of the Quran. However, in the years to come, most of them began to suppress their faith practice for fear of being discovered and penalized. ; therefore, Islamic practices were not.