Defending Those Who Speak Against Islam
In Sunday’s New York Times, Paul Berman writes about “Why Radical Islam Just Won’t Die” and offers up his theories as to why it is that extremism survives in Iraq, as well as why it flourishes in the West, too. Berman states that,
Even in the Western countries, quite a few Muslim liberals, the outspoken ones, live today under a threat of assassination, not to mention a reality of character assassination. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Somali-Dutch legislator and writer, is merely an exceptionally valiant example. But instead of enjoying the unstinting support of their non-Muslim colleagues, the Muslim liberals find themselves routinely berated in the highbrow magazines and the universities as deracinated nonentities, alienated from the Muslim world. Or they find themselves pilloried as stooges of the neoconservative conspiracy — quite as if any writer from a Muslim background who fails to adhere to at least a few anti-imperialist or anti-Zionist tenets of the Islamist doctrine must be incapable of thinking his or her own thoughts.
A dismaying development. One more sign of the power of the extremist ideologies — one more surprising turn of events, on top of all the other dreadful and gut-wrenching surprises.
This critique by Berman can also be extended, to some degree, to the humanist movement. For example, in the January/February 2008 issue of the Humanist, in a piece about Ayaan Hirsi Ali, authors David Schafer and Michelle Koth conclude, in part, by saying,
Her approach is poorly informed about the past and present of Islam, ineffectual at best, mainly counter-productive, and at worst potentially catastrophic in its consequences. It is here, too, that the influences of her principal intellectual environments since 2003—the VVD Party in the Netherlands and the American Enterprise Institute in the United States—taken as a whole, have clearly discouraged her development as a well-balanced defender of human rights and security.
Schafer and Koth are perhaps correct in stating that,
Hirsi Ali’s prior experience of Islam was confined to her youthful and often painful life in Africa: the tribal variety in Somalia, the strict Wahhabi version in Saudi Arabia, and in Kenya the Islamist political formulations of the Muslim Brothers and even more radical Sayyid Qutb—all followed by her intense contact with mainly African (e.g., Somali and Moroccan) immigrant women who had suffered abuse in the Netherlands. She knew little about the complex history of Islam in other times and other places.
While her views on Islam aren’t based on years of study, her intense, personal understanding of the religion also cannot be dismissed. Though what she dealt with is not the form of Islam practiced by every Muslim, it is also difficult to argue that she is taking her stand purely because of the ideology of the VVD Party, and the American Enterprise Institute.
Indeed, as the West continues to encounter Islam, not only on grand geopolitical scales, but everyday at the corner store or in a school hallway, it is imperative to recognize the vast and heterogeneous nature of Islam. What is perhaps forgotten, then, is that this also extends to the varying types of critiques of Islam. For Schafer and Koth to deride Hirsi Ali’s analysis of Islam simply because her view doesn’t conform to their understanding of the religion leads them down the same narrow path that they’re alleging Hirsi Ali has taken. It’s unfortunate that Schafer and Koth have fallen into the trap that so many others on the Left have fallen into.
Subscribe to Feed
Well said.
Oh hell nah! I can’t believe what I just read from you Jende! It’s like I’m reading something from Hannity from Fox News or Bill Cristol from the Weekly Standard!
This woman’s personal experience is nothing compared to other Muslim women, for her to make statements like she did in the November 2007 issue of REASON, where she said in a Q & A interview:
Q: Do you think Islam could bring about [desirable] social political change?
A: Only if Islam is defeated…
Apparently she doesn’t know anything about Pre-ZIONIST Palestine!
Q: Don’t you mean Defeating “Radical” Islam?
A: No. Islam period….
That’s closed minded and inhumane of her! How many Muslims commit crimes here in the US how many jihad have we had from American Muslim citizens since the initial rape of America (Native)? She has more personal problems than experiences!
Q: We have to crush the worlds 1.5 billion Muslims under our boots? In concrete terms, what does that mean, “defeat Islam”?
A: I think we are at war with Islam…you crush your enemy.
Who in the hell is “we”, and if you are going to be about it then be about it and get a gun and start killing: don’t talk Neocon bullshit! Her sorry ass personal experiences aren’t enough for her to want genocide!
Q: militarily?
A: In all forms…
She is a NUT! A Stalin who killed 7 million, Pol Pot who killed 1.2 million, Mao who killed more than 70 million kind of NUT! All Atheists not Muslim or Christian!
Q: Are we really heading toward anything so ominous?
A: I think that’s where we’re heading…
While this crazy-ass woman advocates Genocide of a Religious people (1.5 billion), you Jende, are putting her on a pedestal for her narrow limited Islamic personal experiences. She is an opportunist; and
Schafer and Koth is bull’s-eye on the money about this nutty-buddy!
Jende listen to yourself:
For Schafer and Koth to deride Hirsi Ali’s analysis of Islam simply because her view doesn’t conform to their understanding of the religion leads them down the same narrow path that they’re alleging Hirsi Ali has taken. It’s unfortunate that Schafer and Koth have fallen into the trap that so many others on the Left have fallen into.
Her wanting to kill all Muslims and your comment sounds like both you Jende and her have fallen into a trap, a NEOCON one, and that’s the worst one if you ask me.
BFBF
I will agree with Brotha on this his crticism of Ayaan Hirsi Ali but I would like to add that Hitler killed 12 million, and he studied to be a catholic priest. Slavery in America and the “rape” of the Native American as Brotha called it were all perpetrated by Christians. Also, slavery is still practiced in parts of Islamic countries. Also Pol Pot was not an Atheist. He was a Buddist and during the 1960’s the khmer Rouge adopted elements of Theravada Buddhism to justify their non-standard communism.
It isn’t the religion or the lack of it that is the measure of a person. It is how that person treats others. Atheists, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists..etc have all done terrible things to other people in the name of deeply held beliefs. There isn’t one philosophy that is innocent.
“It isn’t the religion or the lack of it that is the measure of a person. It is how that person treats others. Atheists, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists..etc have all done terrible things to other people in the name of deeply held beliefs. There isn’t one philosophy that is innocent.”
BINGO William Bogie!
Bogie is correct about Hitler as well, but I wanted to point out the murders by those that do not believe in God. I will like to add that “Jewish ZIONIST” Commissars were committing bloody crimes that made the Nazi atrocities and death count seem small, compared to the “conservative estimates” that some 60-75 million “INNOCENT” men, women and children MURDERED in Communism’s Gulag. The majority of them being CHRISTIAN! This is why I’m not so moved by the ZIONIST cries of anti-Semitism like most uninformed AMERICANS. All murder is bad, but they (Zionist Jews) did more killing than Hitler or any Muslim put together; they just have amnesia today!
It is my opinion that the Humanist Magazine should consider strongly in the future whom they should honor. It appears that the Humanist Magazine along with Jende’s Blog condones the Genocide of innocent religious people. Just because this women claims to be a non believer does not place her in the “HUMANE SANE” category. The Humanist Magazine would have been better off running a positive article on Farrakhan or Rev. Wright than this woman. I recall Lisa stating that I was not helping myself by posting the criticism of some Jews by Farrakhan. Well, I don’t think it helps AHA by posting praise of a person that advocates genocide of religous poeple.
William, you are as they say “a Gentleman of and Scholar”, even though we disagree on some issues. Thanks for speaking out!
BFBF
OK, let’s say for a minute that she is nothing but an opportunist, that she’s parroting the neo-con line, etc. etc. The question, however, that kept coming back to my mind is “is any of what she said true?” And unfortunately, the answer is yes. Any country or enclave within a country that practices sharia law inevitably falls into a theocracy, and you cannot excuse this under the guise of multi-culturalism.
“All murder is bad, but they (Zionist Jews) did more killing than Hitler or any Muslim put together; they just have amnesia today!”
Whoa, Nellie! Could you please give a minimum of evidence for this, and preferably more than a minimum?
It called the GULAG! It’s Called TRANS ATLANTIC SLAVE TRADE!
I’ve been waiting for someone like you to open this debate so that I can USE the JEWISH community center’s library books against one’s lies. Up for it? If so hold on, because the truth is even more damaging when it’s from the horses own mouth, Zionist being the horse!
BFBF
Then your baseless opinion is duly noted.
OK, you’re apparently one of those who believe that Communism was “Jewish,” so let’s get the facts straight:
- Karl Marx’s ancestors were all Jewish, that is correct. However, Marx’s father converted the whole family to Christianity when Karl was just five years old. In other words, Karl Marx was raised in a Christian household, not Jewish. As an adult, Marx rejected both Judaism and Christianity. And on a final note, in case you didn’t know, Marx’s writings are widely considered anti-Semitic.
- Fredrick Engels was born into a Protestant family. No Jews in the Engels family.
- Joseph Stalin was born into a Christian Orthodox family. He even attended seminary school to train for the priesthood. As an adult, he too rejected all religions. No Jews in the Dzhugashvili family.
- Vladimir Lenin was baptized into a Christian Orthodox family.
- Leon Trotsky was in fact a Jew (Congratulations, BFBF!). But of course, Trotsky was opposed to Joseph Stalin’s form of communism. In fact, he was even kicked out from the Communist Party and then murdered by Stalin’s assassins in 1940.
But yet you force yourself to believe that the Gulag in the USSR was run by “Zionist Jews,” even though Jews made up for less than ten percent of the total country’s membership. And by 1938, virtually all Bolsheviks - Jewish and non-Jewish - from the pre-Stalin era were killed under Stalin’s regime.
As for the Slave Trade:
“In no period did Jews play a leading role as financiers, shipowners, or factors in the transatlantic or Caribbean slave trades. They possessed far fewer slaves than non-Jews in every British territory in North America and the Caribbean. Even when Jews in a handful of places owned slaves in proportions slightly above their representation among a town’s families, such cases do not come close to corroborating the assertions of The Secret Relationship.” - Wim Klooster (University of Southern Maine)
I’m not debating what goes on in Shia Law. I can get that from the libraries or internet. What I have say is that her experiences (limited to none) are not enough to want GENOCIDE of a religous people.
You come on the blog “Cowboyd up” with spin. I never excuse the practices of extreme Islam, DID I? Well what in the hell are you spinning for. You and others on this site don’t like the fact that I expose the hatred of this person, kinda like Hitler! Disagree? If so, you are truly an Antisemite!
BFBF
I have not read either of her books (and neither have you apparently), so I will refrain from making so rash a judgment. But nothing in the interview indicated that she advocated “genocide of a religious people.” The stuff about “crushing the world’s Muslims under our boot” was just the interviewer putting words in her mouth.
And by the way, Sharia is not “extreme” in the sense of it being rare. See: http://blog.secularphilosophy.com/index.php?entry=entry080127-190527
On a final note, I’m happy to let you have the last word in this thread except for one thing- I never accused you of “excusing the extreme practices of Islam.” That was your own self-accusation, sir. I was simply making the point that whatever you think about Ali’s political activities, the issues she raises (Sharia law, treatment of women, etc.) cannot be ignored.
P.S.- It’s highly ironic that you use the term “antisemite” when you are the one who has pasted propaganda from the Nation of Islam and said that Soviet Communism and the Slave Trade were the Jews’ fault.