Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Note: Pending a good counter-argument, I'll go with the apparent consensus that "Muslim" is the more etymologically rational spelling.
My initial post gave rise to two broad criticisms, both in the comments and my e-mail In Box. To summarize:
1) Claire, if they're moderates, they're not really Muslims. Islam is like communism: If you're serious about the core principles of the belief system, you can't be serious about Western, liberal democracy. It's simply incompatible with what the Koran says and the way it has historically been interpreted by anyone with serious influence.
2) Claire, it doesn't matter. These moderates aren't in power and they don't want to be. They're nice curiosities, but so what.
I'm not going to give a comprehensive reply in one post, but I'll return to them repeatedly in the next few weeks. When considering those arguments, though, keep these points in mind. I'll be returning to these, too.
1) There is an unbelievable amount of money now circling the globe to promote and advance the first proposition. That money is coming from Saudi Arabia and the proposition is called Wahhabism. We'll be looking closely here on Moderate Muslim Watch at the way that money is shaping this discussion. If you don't grasp this, you've grasped nothing.
2) If moderate Islam exists, it exists as a private faith, not a political program. That means moderate Muslims, when in power, are not apt to appeal to Islam to justify their political agenda. You may, therefore, have failed to notice that they're moderate Muslims who are in power; it does not mean that they are failing to advance liberal democracy and counter Islamic extremism.
With those points in mind, consider the founder of Ni Putes Ni Soumises, who happens to be France's Secretary of State for Urban Policy. Fadéla Amara is also known as Fatiha Amara.
When I brought up her name, a commenter asked, "Is she a Muslim?"
A ban on the wearing of the burka in France would help stem the spread of the "cancer" of radical Islam, one of its female Muslim ministers has said. ...
"The burka represents not a piece of fabric but the political manipulation of a religion that enslaves women and disputes the principle of equality between men and women, one of the founding principles of our republic," she said.
France was a beacon for an enlightened Islam at ease with modernity, so it was necessary to fight the "gangrene, the cancer of radical Islam which completely distorts the message of Islam," she said.
Ms Amara, who is of Algerian descent, argued that banning the burka would help women to stand up to the extremists in their communities.
"The vast majority of Muslims are against the burka. It is obvious why," she said.
"Those who have struggled for women's rights back home in their own countries - I'm thinking particularly of Algeria - we know what it represents and what the obscurantist political project is that lies behind it, to confiscate the most fundamental liberties."
So, people keep asking me, why don't these moderate Muslims speak out against the radicals? Why don't they denounce them more forthrightly? They are. Those who say they aren't simply aren't listening.
Amara's speech is strewn with fighting terminology: she talks of her combat and her battles. She is also certain about what she's defending: a secular republic that allows for equality of the sexes. Anyone who obstructs that "is my enemy". That includes, notably, Islamists. Amara is a practising Muslim, and proud of her religion, but she's fierce in her condemnation of "political Islam," which arrived in the suburbs in the 1990s, preached "by self-appointed imams in basements where nobody could see them." Unlike Amara's Islam, which "leads to the freedom of the individual", she says this version advocates archaic traditions such as the subjugation of women and the wearing of headscarves. She calls it "green fascism," after the colour usually associated with Islam. "I can tell you that saying that has caused me a few problems."
During the "tour of France" in 2004, debates were regularly hijacked by heckling Islamists. "It was verbally very violent," says Amara, drawing a finger across her throat to mimic the gestures they made. But she's not scared. Though she is often named in the ranks of "western-friendly Muslim women," Amara's office door is wide open.
Amara's position on Islamists has caused rifts in French feminism, too. Last year, she took NPNS out of the Comité National des Femmes, a powerful collective of women's-rights groups, in response to the cultural relativism of some of the members. "They define liberty and equality according to what colour your skin is," she says. "They won't denounce forced marriages or female genital mutilation, because, they say, it's tradition. It's nothing more than neocolonialism."
Sadly, I can't find a subtitled clip of her speaking on YouTube. (And what does this tell you about the media's eagerness to make sure her voice is heard outside of France?) But if you understand French--even a little bit--you'll get the point. Here's the Berber Tigress denouncing socialists who prop up Islamic radicals:
The story of Ni Putes Ni Soumises is extraordinary. It means, Not Whores, Not Doormats.
"Ni putes ni soumises!" We took up this ardent cry to say no to the constant and intolerable degradation of the girls of our neighbourhoods. We force society to hear so that no one can ever say again: we did not know! What is there to fight for if not for the freedom and liberation of all? What is there if not the fight for unity and democracy? Truly, how can we, in the 21st century, tolerate Sohane or Chahrazad being burned alive by boys in the very heart of their own neighbourhoods? How can we accept that Ghofrane was stoned to death just outside of Marseille? What can we say again of the young women who are in, or face, forced marriages, who walk among us every day?
So, who wants to tell Fadéla Amara, who founded this organization, that she's not a Muslim? Who wants to tell her she's not in power? "Urban Policy" is quite the key brief when it comes to fighting Islamic radicals in France, by the way. Whether she's a bad Muslim who misinterprets the Koran is, as far as I'm concerned, between her and God. Me, I'm fine with her interpretation.
Postscript: Let me also call your attention to this interesting discussion about former French justice minister Rachida Dati among Muslim feminists. I suspect Ricochet readers will find it fascinating and familiar, but perhaps not in the way they'd expect.
- Comment (31)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Sep '10
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Claire: Since I cannot grasp the arguments against the existence of moderate Muslims I have 3 related questions. Does the Muslim belief system produce an inordinately high number of immoderate people? If so why? How would most moderate Muslims answers these questions? TY for your post – you make me think!
Jun '10
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Supporting Muslim men and women such as Ms Amara is a critical function of those of us who believe in outlawing sharia in the United States. If we don't have the backs of moderate Muslims, they will cease to exist. We must make it absolutely safe for people like her to express their opinions. We must make it safe for an artist or cartoonist to draw "muhammed". The West has to take the gloves off. Without being disrespectful, one can be critical. But disrespect is part of the game. Every society, country, and religion receives its fair share. Islam has certainly earned a jaundiced look from the West. We, of the West, have plenty of which to be proud when it comes to our civilization. In order to support moderate Muslims, we must be willing to take a strong stance in our own defense.
Jul '10
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Perfectly stated. Islamists cheat by redefining Islam as inseparable from politics, distorting everyone's frame of mind from the get-go and thus, reality as well. The huge amount money naturally helps their cause.
That should answer Jim's question "Does the Muslim belief system produce an inordinately high number of immoderate people?" In reality, the Islamist belief system produces an inordinately high number of immoderate people, not the Muslim belief system, which has to do with the private realm and not the political arena.
Aug '10
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Claire,
A well written piece, and it moves the ball down the field.
But I have a question. Tell me if this isn't true: Assuming the West is conquered and Islam wins, isn't it inevitable that they'll fall to fighting among themselves, as they did when Muhammad died?
Sunnis and Shias began their feud in 632, and have been at each others throats every day since.
Wahabbis will be emboldened, believing they engineered a great victory, and have divine authority.
But now they'll have nuclear weapons.
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
River: Claire,
A well written piece, and it moves the ball down the field.
But I have a question. Tell me if this isn't true: Assuming the West is conquered and Islam wins, isn't it inevitable that they'll fall to fighting among themselves, as they did when Muhammad died?
Goodness, River, if that happens, who cares what happens next?
But yes. Nothing is inevitable, but that's very plausible. And you don't need to assume the West's demise to fear an intra-Muslim nuclear exchange.
Edited on Oct 8, 2010 at 5:56amRe: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Okan, the Islamist belief system is a Muslim belief system--and a perfectly plausible interpretation of the Koran. It just doesn't happen to be the only one. You can't say "They're not real Muslims" any more than you can say Amara's not a real Muslim. I'm interested in demonstrating that self-described Muslims can and do hold beliefs very different from them, and that the friends of the West are not as voiceless and minute in number as many fear.
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
(And I'm also interested in demonstrating that many self-described moderates are either Islamists or their enablers. Hence the need for careful scrutiny. Coming up.)
May '10
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Claire, she's obviously a genuine moderate, the kind we ought to be supporting in every way, as cdor said above.
But I don't see how the reality of her and many like her to be proof against the idea that the problem is Islam--viz., that its texts and tenets and history and ethos tend inexorably toward a violent clash with modernity.
I think a compelling argument can be made that notions like the unalienable rights of the individual, religious liberty, the equality of the sexes, and so on, grew organically out of the judeo/christian tenets, texts, and experience. They are alien to Islam. Individual Muslims, and even societies of Muslims may accept and incorporate them, but to the extent they do, they are weakening their identity as Muslims, and giving rise to an unsustainable (I strongly suspect) hybrid.
Jul '10
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
Okan, the Islamist belief system is a Muslim belief system--and a perfectly plausible interpretation of the Koran. It just doesn't happen to be the only one. You can't say "They're not real Muslims" any more than you can say Amara's not a real Muslim. I'm interested in demonstrating that self-described Muslims can and do hold beliefs very different from them, and that the friends of the West are not as voiceless and minute in number as many fear. · Oct 8 at 5:55am
True. Islamism is also based on an interpretation of Islam. However, not only does it clearly take it out of the personal sphere and exploit it for political power, it also sees itself above all other belief systems, including the non-Islamist Muslim belief systems, which makes Islamism a violation against human rights unlike most or all other various Muslim belief systems, only because it combines religion with politics making a single religious belief system the law of the universe. Hence, from a certain angle, whether it is a religion or a crime based on religion may be debatable as well.
Edited on Oct 8, 2010 at 6:55amJul '10
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Meh. Color me unimpressed. Who elected Erdogan, extremists?
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Michael, is that a serious question? Because I can give you a very detailed--I mean, very detailed--account of who elected Erdoğan, why, and how. I mean, I'm Turkish politics central. Understanding the answer to that question is essential. If you're interested in a serious answer, and I really think people should be, I'm here. I just usually find people's eyes glaze over when I try to explain this.
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
I'm interested Claire! My sense is that it wasn't extremists who elected Erdogan, but I could be wrong. Besides, isn't it true that he grew increasingly extremist after the election?
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
Michael, is that a serious question? Because I can give you a very detailed--I mean, very detailed--account of who elected Erdoğan, why, and how. I mean, I'm Turkish politics central. Understanding the answer to that question is essential. If you're interested in a serious answer, and I really think people should be, I'm here. I just usually find people's eyes glaze over when I try to explain this. · Oct 8 at 7:25am
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
To imply the current ascendancy of violent, revolutionary Islam is somehow of a piece with 1400 years of the history of Islam is nuts. “Islam” changes all the time.
The current situation is a combination of Saudi petrodollars vigorously exporting the violent, reactionary strain of Wahhabism in exchange for the ruling family's being given the (Wahhabi) establishment's imprimatur following the Juhayman incident in Mecca in 1979, their reaction to the Iranian revolution (short answer: they hate and fear it), and the confluence of Western revolutionary thought with Islam (indeed, Islamism is in many ways just Marxism or whatever you want to call the "we have to murder our enemies to bring about utopia" ideology of 1789 and thereafter with "religions" substituted for "class" or "race.").
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Okay, Emily! Since you asked, start here and here. I wrote that two years ago, but I think it holds up pretty well. I'm working on a piece now about Turkey and Iran. I will, obviously, provide the link when it's done--but it will be a while.
May '10
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Claire Berlinski, Ed.:
There remains the question of why Wahhabism has been so successful. If all it took for propaganda to be successful was money and determination, Wahhabism could be combated with the same. Yes, I believe Saudi propaganda is involved, but why have so many bought what they're selling?
If Steyn is right that nearly every nation with a Muslim majority is brutally intolerant of other religions and commonly practices gross injustices against its own people, why? The cultures of these nations, from Indonesia to the UAE, vary widely. Shouldn't we expect some to reject the Saudi propaganda?
Edited on Oct 8, 2010 at 11:14amJun '10
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
It comes down to moral weakness here in the West. I don't mean moral in a religious sense, but rather as it concerns a belief in liberal values.
"They define liberty and equality according to what colour your skin is," she says. "They won't denounce forced marriages or female genital mutilation, because, they say, it's tradition. It's nothing more than neocolonialism."
How true! Where were NOW and ERA when Bill Clinton was leveraging his position (don't let that image scar your brain) as Governor, then President, to sleaze his way through office? Where were the women's rights groups last year when the American Society of Pediatrics gave their approval of female circumcision, deferring to 'cultural sensitivities'? Where are the loud cries of condemnation from women's groups about the rape of Sudan or sex slavery in North Africa? Where is the feminist critique of the burqa and niqab? Those are cultural, not religious, garments; where are the dissertations in our universities about this actual subjugation of women, as opposed to the default, "Keep your hands off my uterus!"?
Liberal culture really is better. We should have the courage to admit it.
May '10
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Aaron Miller
Yes, I believe Saudi propaganda is involved, but why have so many bought what they're selling? The cultures of these nations, from Indonesia to the UAE, vary widely. Shouldn't we expect some to reject the Saudi propaganda? · Oct 8 at 8:27am
Edited on Oct 08 at 11:14 am
Some do, Aaron. Check out the last Indonesian election, for example. Pakistan elected Benazir Bhutto, then her widower.
The well-funded loud ones can buy attention. Our mission in battling extremism is to support and enable the good people. If all of America was viewed as the MSM presentation of Jerry Falwell, we would not come off well.
Those who say that we must throw up our hands, "more rubble, less trouble" annihilation of those backward societies is the only hope are adopting the CAIR/ISNA/MB propaganda that the Qur'an and the Hadith (sources for Sharia) have one interpretation only- armed conquest and dhimmitude.
That's wrong; Ms. Amara, Stephen Schwartz, Zuhdi Jasser, and many others will confirm.
Banking has been made to fit the "Sharia" prohibitions on interest- that shows that there are reasonable interpretations favoring moderate, pluralistic Islam as well.
Sep '10
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
I did once refer to a Mosqulim, a term which provoked much staring from the Turkish looking fellows sitting across from me at one of the international departure lounges at Athens Airport.
Aug '10
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Recently finished both. Wow, Claire, how do you manage to keep track of all that? Trying to make sense of it all would make my hair hurt!
Brava.
Oct '10
Re: Moderate Muslim Watch: Yes, They Are in Power
Ms. Berlinski: Could I please encourage/persuade you to accumulate and make available a collection of links like the two above, in one place? A wiki or something, perhaps? One challenge that I find "new media" (ugh) presents us is that so much knowledge and experience is distributed throughout the web. On one hand, that's good: it's resilient, it tends to reach more people, etc. But there are also valuable aspects of having some centralization of the information, and while Googling "Claire Berlinski" is extraordinarily educational, it still leaves one with a bit of a needle-in-the-haystack problem. :-)