A "Moderate" Tutorial
I need some help thinking this through.
Do “moderate” Muslims think of Islamists, or “radical” Muslims, the way decent, everyday Catholics think of pedophile priests? Do they think to themselves, “What horrid, disgusting, and embarrassing evils these guys have brought upon this world and us in the name of our most sacred beliefs, our religion?” Or, do their opinions more resemble those that some Irish-Americans (Ted Kennedy, say) had of the IRA? You know, “We can’t condone violence, but those English bastards kind of had it coming”?
I suspect the Ground Zero mosque folks are in the latter camp. But, if indeed I am expected to accept that these may or may not be "moderate" Muslims, shouldn’t I know what that means exactly? What’s the analogy that will help me better understand the personalities and practices of a moderate Muslim? The lapsed Catholic? The secular Jew? Obviously, we don’t see many multi-million dollar houses of worship being built by secular Jews and non-practicing Catholics.
Are “moderate” Muslims, like so-called cultural Catholics, Muslim by background and birth, but not by deed? What exactly distinguishes an Islamic moderate from an Islamic fundamentalist? If Imam Rauf uses moderate language, but his money speaks of extremism, shouldn’t I assume that he’s either hedging (like an Irish-American in the example above) or lying? What am I to make of this?
If the best we can expect from “moderate” Muslim leaders is that they are funding terrorist front groups, I shudder to think about the worst we can expect from them. Which leads me to my belief that we need a comprehensive Islam policy, not merely an ad hoc one whereby we deal with individual crises – or potential crises -- as they arise, all the while keeping our fingers crossed that no one means us any actual harm.
I certainly fret about the possible – even likely – evils to come from allowing the GZM and the wearing of burqas. Yet I believe that if we welcome Muslims into our country then we must also grant them the rights and protections that we offer our citizens. That’s kind of the American deal, right? However, if we believe that Islam’s views on women, children, Israel, equality, separation of church and state, homosexuality, and etc. are despicable and will eventually poison our communities, then shouldn’t we come up with a plan?
Obviously we are at a serious disadvantage here. We can’t tell moderate Muslims from radical Muslims simply by looking at them. Moreover, we know for a fact that the bad guys are trying to fool us by acting like good guys. But, short of outlawing Islam, I think we have to let Muslims do their thing within the limits of the law. That might mean burqas and it might mean mosques at Ground Zero. But it might lead to honor killings. It’s awful to contemplate, but the way things are going, it seems likely that radical Islam will hit us again soon. And does anybody doubt that when it happens, it’ll be a bunch of smiling guys in Polo shirts rather than housewives in burqas? The sad part is, we’ll never know until it’s too late.
So I say, let them all in and cross your fingers that the American ideals of liberty and justice for all change their hearts, or keep them all out and sleep in peace. Is there a sensible, comprehensive middle ground I’m not considering?
- Comment (22)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
I have a friend with whom I work. He is an Iraqi Shi'a Muslim. I would call him a "moderate." His observation of his religion is very private. I have known him for a number of years. I have never been invited to his home, nor has anyone else that I know of although we have known each other for several years and we live about 10 minutes apart, well away from our work environment. I believe he is a good citizen. He is certainly a hard worker. During Ramadan he does fast. He says that it is a discipline, and I understand that.
Having said all of that I have to say that there is a privacy, a part of himself that he does not share which I have come to associate with his beliefs. I think at some level he is first and foremost a Muslim, that put in a position of choosing between us and them he would choose them. I do not believe that you can be a Muslim in the same way that you can be a fallen Catholic or a non-observant Jew. Islam is servitude to Allah, that is absolute.
May '10
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
Ursula, great job articulating the questions and fears I am sure many of us share.
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
There are 1.5 billion Moslems in the world (give or take a few, depending who's doing the estimating), so opinions vary widely. I've met many who think of radicals pretty much precisely "the way decent, everyday Catholics think of pedophile priests"--as not only evil but a hideous, cringing embarrassment, as well as a serious danger to them, because most of the victims of Islamist violence are Moslems. (Al Qaeda bombed the synagogue down my street a few years ago and managed to kill only Moslems. Believe me, no one in my neighborhood has forgotten that.) I've also met many of the “We can’t condone violence, but those English bastards kind of had it coming" variety. This view is widely held by many non-Moslems around the world, though; it's sort of a standard trope of the Left, so it's hard to disaggregate "stupidity" and "Islamism" here.
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
There's definitely a sensible middle ground. Anyone whose money goes to terrorists or comes from it? Freeze the assets. They certainly don't get to use it to build mosques. We say clearly and publicly: Monotheism? Great! Prayer? Fine! Fasting on Ramadan? No worries. Giving to charity? We love it. Making the Hajj? No problem. You don't drink? Good for you! Bash homosexuals? We lock you up for a very long time. Kill your wife or your daughters? We execute you. And no, you can't wear a burqa, and if you don't like dogs, that's your problem: If you refuse to let seeing-eye dogs in your taxis, you're in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act, and we'll take away your taxi license.
We actually have most of the legal apparatus we need in place to deal with this issue; we just need to be unafraid to use it.
Jul '10
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
I think the question of whether or not there are moderate Muslims is almost irrelevant. Of course there are varying degrees of religiosity in every creed, so you have your "cultural Catholics" and "cultural Muslims,"
There were undoubtedly "moderate" Germans and Japanese who were content to just go on with their lives and probably saw the wars of aggression as a terrible thing. So what? Even if bad people in a religion/country/ideology constitute a very small minority, if they are the ones screaming the loudest and causing the most mischief, it matters little if they are 10%, 5% or 1%.
Even if 1.4 billion Muslims were peace-loving, pro-democracy, liberal, Israel-supporting, US-praising democrats, that still means there would be 100 million non-moderates. That mythical, huge disparity would be no consolation to me.
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
Then you're not thinking straight. (I say this affectionately.) The difference between the problem we have on our hands if we have 100 million implacable enemies and 1.5 billion is night and day. If it's the latter, we may as well just give up now. There's no way we can win a war against 1.5 billion people. Fortunately, we don't have to.
Jul '10
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
It may sound odd, but I think that a moderate yet religious Muslim would be the equivalent of a Baptist. Or perhaps a generic Evangelical Christian. The thing that makes radical Islam so dangerous is the internalized commandment to spread the word through all lands, by force if need be. The imposition of Sharia as a social mandate, by force if need be, is the thing that makes it a threat.
What distinguised much of the Protestant Reformation, especially by the time it got down to Baptists, was that the relationship with God had become significantly personalized. One often hears Evangelicals speak of their "personal relationship with Jesus".
That personalization of the commands of Islam, the "de-socialization" of sharia if you will, is essential if are to have moderate Islam. I suspect the vast majority of Muslims would embrace such an approach. The problem that the guys who are pushing the radical vision have lots of guns (and rocks) and are not afraid to use them.
May '10
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
Whereas pedophile Priests used their positions in their religion as a means to their end, they did not (to the best of my knowledge) use the religion and its doctrine to justify their behavior. The Islamoterrorists do. We are between a rock and a hard place precisely because as a society we have sought to remove traditional religion from the public sphere, and now we are forced to deal with a religion that not only has a faction that wishes to destroy our way of life, but a larger contingent that won't quietly shrink back into the shadows, but rather confounds the multicultural-above-all PC police with their in-your-face attire and practices. It would be amusing were it not dangerous. In the end, we as a society will have to ask not whether we will be tolerant of them, but whether their religion will tolerate our societal values, norms, and laws.
Jul '10
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
Claire Berlinski:
We actually have most of the legal apparatus we need in place to deal with this issue; we just need to be unafraid to use it. · Aug 7 at 8:23am
Well said. We have to devote ourselves to our fundamental liberal democratic principles and make clear that defending those principles does not mean we are bigots, xenophobes, or imperialists. Our founding fathers uncovered some basic truths. We are willing to share them with anyone, but they must be willing to accept them as truths and agree to live by them.
Jun '10
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
As Iran demonstrates, if there's no democracy--no real democracy--it doesn't matter very much what the man or woman in the street believes. It only matters what those at the top believe. From where I stand, Islam seems much more tolerant of tyrants. If the fraud and secrecy of Iran's last presidential election happened in America, we'd be doing more than marching in the street and shouting from rooftops. God help the American government if they ever used violence and murder to control speech. It wouldn't last long.
Aug '10
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
Claire Berlinski: Giving to charity? We love it.
There's a potential problem with charitable giving, though. I think a lot of Muslims -- and a lot of non-Muslim pacificsts and liberal Christians -- give to charities not knowing -- and perhaps willfully hoping to never find out -- that some of their charitable contributions eventually make their way into the hands of terrorist groups.
To us there may be a bright distinction between charity and supporting terrorism. But I think there are vast numbers of people who would have difficulties making distinctions between the two.
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Claire Berlinski: Giving to charity? We love it.
There's a potential problem with charitable giving, though. I think a lot of Muslims -- and a lot of non-Muslim pacificsts and liberal Christians -- give to charities not knowing -- and perhaps willfully hoping to never find out -- that some of their charitable contributions eventually make their way into the hands of terrorist groups.
Completely agreed. But I have no problem at all with soup kitchens. I'm sure you don't either. And here in my Islamic corner of the world, I see a lot of those. This too is part of Islam, and I'm sure we can all say that the practice is very welcome. Yes to funding soup, no to funding terrorists, and if you're having trouble telling the difference, we'll make it easy for you by making it illegal to fund the terrorists.
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
Okay, well this helps me a bit. So, the problems you mentioned happening in England (girl beaten b/c she was going to be in a school play, etc.) is an outgrowth or result of a government/law enforcement squad too fearful to use the legal apparatus in place to deal with the issue?
Aug '10
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
Ursula Hennessey:
Okay, well this helps me a bit. So, the problems you mentioned happening in England (girl beaten b/c she was going to be in a school play, etc.) is an outgrowth or result of a government/law enforcement squad too fearful to use the legal apparatus in place to deal with the issue? · Aug 7 at 11:25am
Theodore Dalrymple at City Journal has written a lot of essays with evidence that this is the case. His archives are here. Even if you don't find what you're looking for right away, all his essays are a ripping good read. (And just for fun, Claire's City Journal archives are here.)
I believe Dalrymple's essay "Zero Intolerance" deals with lack of enforcement against crimes in general, but he also has written passages (I forget where) addressing British hesitancy to enforce against crimes committed by minorities, especially "asians".
Aug '10
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
Ursula, here are some of Dalrymple's essays specifically addressing the issue, at least in passing.
"British Freedom and Muslim Discipline"
"No Beheadings, Please, We're British"
"Reader, She Married Him -- Alas"
"When Islam Breaks Down" -- may not specifically address law enforcement, but certainly some willful blindness by authorities
Lots more can be found by searching City Journal's archives with Dalrymple Muslim.
Jun '10
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
Deja vu all over again. Well wriiten and challenging post, Ursula. I have asked for a definition of "moderate" Islam on this very site as well.
" However, if we believe that Islam’s views on women, children, Israel, equality, separation of church and state, homosexuality, and etc. are despicable and will eventually poison our communities, then shouldn’t we come up with a plan?"
Yes, How about a federal law specifically outlawing Sharia in any form, under any circumstance, in the entire country and territories.
Claire Berlinski: There's definitely a sensible middle ground...
We actually have most of the legal apparatus we need in place to deal with this issue; we just need to be unafraid to use it. · Aug 7 at 8:23am
This is solid, except for our PC spineless 35% and all of their judges (see the Flying Imams and the New Jersey wife beater).
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
Often, yes--there's are many reasons things have come to this in Britain, though. A bit too complicated a story for me to coherently summarize at comment-length. I wrote about Britain quite a bit in Menace in Europe, particularly in the chapter called "White Teeth." It's not just the fear of applying the law, it's the failure to legislate appropriately, and quite a number of associated issues, such as educational policies designed to promote multiculturalism at the expense of integration; economic policies that reinforce ghettoization; immigration policies that have resulted in attracting the very immigrants most likely to radicalize, and so forth.
Jul '10
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
I may sound Scottish here, but I wonder why our ruling classes are so enthusiastic about 'working with' Islam under the guise of toleration, while at the same time, they show such meagre toleration of Christianity? ie, the Orthodox Church that was destroyed on 9/11 has (apparently) faced nothing but regulatory barriers to RE building its centre.
I am beginning to believe that it isn't really about "toleration" at all but rather, there is a lot of money in this for leaders who 'work with' Islam. And best of all, I'll bet this money is under-the-table (the kind that made Chirac really really rich.)
And Codavilla has pointed out that to rule is to dispense patronage. And there is a LOT of Saudi money sloshing around the world's upper classes.
To quote our leftist citizens, this is a very 'trickle down' economy, is it not?
Jun '10
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
You may be onto something, heatherme.
Re: A "Moderate" Tutorial
Thanks, all, for the comments. I guess I'm still troubled by some nagging thoughts. First, if, as I say, we know that the bad guys are going to try and make themselves look like good guys -- e.g. "moderates" -- then how can we make ourselves safer from extremism? What specific safeguards can we put in place? Furthermore, if we want to be serious about protecting the rights of women, homosexuals, and schoolchildren here in America, I wonder what we can do before Europe's problems become our problems. I realize that America is different in many important ways than Europe, but I also am not convinced that we are fully guarding against what we see happening elsewhere. Unfortunately, I still feel like we are still -- nearly ten years after 9/11 -- operating under the "cross our fingers and hope we don't get hoodwinked" approach.