Are you sure that you’re looking hard enough? (Via Constant Reader Rilkefan and Eugene Volokh.)
No, we’re not there yet — as Sebastian notes in these very (virtual) pages. But there’s cause for hope. There is yet cause for hope.
22 thoughts on “No Moderate Muslims?”
Comments are closed.
If I were reading that carefully and I knew a lot about those guys in the article I might say that a lot of them seem to represent the “official” position of one government of another: Jordan, Palestinian Authority, KSA …
Translated text of Al Sharq Al Awsat article.
Ah, clarity.
“We cannot redeem our extremist youths, who commit all these heinous crimes, without confronting the Sheikhs who thought it ennobling to re-invent themselves as revolutionary ideologues, sending other people’s sons and daughters to certain death, while sending their own children to European and American schools and colleges.”
Representatives from more than 900 mosques across France who cast their ballots for the new Muslim Council delivered a stinging slap to moderate candidates backed by the government.
The result was a personal defeat for the man seen as the modern face of French Islam, Dalil Boubakeur, the rector of Paris’ Grand Mosque.
The main winner was the National Federation of French Muslims, a group closely linked to the large Moroccan community in France and which receives financial and political backing from Rabat. The Moroccans are regarded as more conservative than the more integrated Algerians although they are more mainstream than the fundamentalist French Union of Islamic Organizations.
link
More Moderate Muslims:
via Sully:
“Obviously not all Muslims are terrorists but, regrettably, the majority of the terrorists in the world are Muslims. The kidnappers of the students in Ossetia are Muslims. The kidnappers and killers of the Nepalese workers and cooks are also Muslims. Those who rape and murder in Darfour are Muslims, and their victims are Muslims as well. Those who blew up the residential complexes in Riyadh and Al-Khobar are Muslims. Those who kidnapped the two French journalists are Muslims. The two [women] who blew up the two planes [over Russia] a week ago are Muslims. Bin Laden is a Muslim and Al-Houthi [the head of a terrorist group in Yemen] is a Muslim. The majority of those who carried out suicide operations against buses, schools, houses, and buildings around the world in the last ten years are also Muslims. “What a terrible record. Does this not say something about us, about our society and our culture?
If we put all of these pictures together in one day, we will see that these pictures are difficult, embarrassing, and humiliating for us. However, instead of avoiding them and justifying them it is incumbent upon us first of all to recognize their authenticity rather than to compose eloquent articles and speeches proclaiming our innocence…
Islam has suffered an injustice at the hands of the new Muslims… We will only be able to clear our reputation once we have admitted the clear and shameful fact that most of the terrorist acts in the world today are carried out by Muslims. We have to realize that we cannot correct the condition of our youth who carry out these disgraceful operations until we have treated the minds of our sheikhs who have turned themselves into pulpit revolutionaries who send the children of others to fight while they send their own children to European schools.” – Abd Al-Rahman Al-Rashed, former editor of the London daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat.
Yet, I’m sure, again, there will be those hawkish voices arguing that there are no Muslims decrying the violence.
Edward, I think the problem is not that there are no moderate Muslim voices, the problem is that there are not enough and that they are not making themselves a big part of the discussion.
And the author you quote is offering a rallying cry to those moderate Muslims precisely because he believes they aren’t being assertive enough.
And the author you quote is offering a rallying cry to those moderate Muslims precisely because he believes they aren’t being assertive enough.
Then let’s give credit where it’s due and plaster this across the blogosphere the same way the LGF’s and company do every time they find some nutjob Imam praising this or that terrorist action.
Then when are we going to see fatwas declared against Muslims who commit this kind of blasphemy that the moderates condemn? Where are the condemnations against the terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians? Why aren’t the moderates criticizing Omar Bakri Mohammed who is holding a meeting titled “The Choice is in Your Hands: Either You’re with the Muslims or with the Infidels,” to mark the third anniversary of the September 11th?
Don’t get me wrong: I am esctatic at the fact that Muslims are finally starting to speak out against these people. It’s something that is long overdue. But right now I am holding off on celebrating until I see something more concrete.
But right now I am holding off on celebrating until I see something more concrete.
And…we’re back at square one.
Until we clearly and loudly support the moderates who make statements like this, we’ll never see the sort of “concrete” condenmations that will have you celebrating.
Credit where it’s due. You don’t encourage more of the same by criticizing it as not being enough. You encourge more and more by praising it when someone is bold enough to do it.
Otherwise you leave the moderates battling both the extremists and the never-be-pleased critics, and they’re left with no support.
Not a smart approach.
Edward:
Credit where it’s due. You don’t encourage more of the same by criticizing it as not being enough. You encourge more and more by praising it when someone is bold enough to do it.
I agree that Muslim moderates should be encouraged. That’s the easy part. Now the tough one. Is praise more likely to encourage them or shutting up? Said another way will being seen as pro-Western encourage moderate Muslims?
Edward, I am being realistic. Muslim moderates have had several decades to take a stand and start criticizing their extremist elements and have refused to do so until recently. I never said that I was unsupportive but that I am not going to say that a few statements is ushering in a new era of enlightenment.
Cameron,
In a nutshell, I believe it’s accumulative.
You’re right that widespread attention to moderate Muslims is a recent development, but that’s probably more our doing than theirs. Look at it historically, until he invaded Kuwait, we were at least ambivalent toward Hussein publically. Until 9/11 we were positively chummy with the House of Saud on most issues. The moderates were still there, but we didn’t care about what they were saying.
Now that we do care, we should look at in plateaus. It’s silly that Abd Al-Rahman Al-Rashed should have to be worried about writing what he wrote in the context of Western free speech, but in terms of the way ME regimes run things, it’s a dangerous statement. If we celebrate him though. Make a big deal about his statement. Put him on the talk shows, op-ed pages, etc., we legitimize what he says. There’s still a risk he’ll be seen as pro-West, but he can use each of those forums to praise Islam first and then say what he says here. The point is to make it sound normal. Make it sound nonradical. Then to praise it. Other writers will then need to move to a higher plateau to receive the same level of attention…in other words, they’ll have to move closer to what you want them all to say to get the same star treatment…again, it’s accumulative.
By dismissing modest efforts, however, you leave all the Muslim writers back at where they started: not loud enough, not harsh enough, and with no highly visible support from us.
In the end, it discourages them.
” they are not making themselves a big part of the discussion.”
Except people only have a limited amount of control over whether they’re part of the discussion. It’s usually other people who determine that, by listening to them and repeating what they say.
So if you listen to what al Rashed has to say every day, he’ll be ‘prominent’, and if you don’t, he won’t. Regardless of what he says. He will be prominent to Muslims if many Muslims listen to him. Since he’s the general manager of al-Arabiya, that seems likely. But more importantly, do you have any way to guage it? Do you have any idea who is and is not prominent in the Muslim community? Do you have any idea how to measure it?
In a nutshell, I believe it’s accumulative.
It’s definitely accumulative and moderates should be encouraged to stand up and be heard more frequently. Of course the big obstacle you have is that the very media outlets that could make him more prominent would be more interested in the extremists’ viewpoints. And back home, they are going to face problems because of a perceived “Pro West” bias.
By dismissing modest efforts, however, you leave all the Muslim writers back at where they started
Me personally? I only wish I had that kind of influence. Seriously, the moderates are going to face this wall of skepticism no matter what. And I am glad that they are finally finding enough spine to go public with their views. It may even see Islam go through a long overdue reformation.
Me personally?
Well, no, I mean “you” as in “one,” but there again it is accumulative. Your voice does contribute to one camp or the other.
It may even see Islam go through a long overdue reformation.
I’ve been meaning to write on this. I’m wondering if Islam needs a reformation or rather Muslim nations need their own “enlightenment.”
Why I make that distinction is that there are those who’ll argue that Islam has had its reformation and the result (much the way puritanical fundamentalist strains emerged from the Christian reformation) is what we see growing in power today: Wahhabism and similar fundamentalist approaches. Whether the more secular Islam of Turkey or Central Asian nations isn’t akin to 15th century Catholicism. I’m still reading up on all this, but I’m curious what others think.
From what I’ve read so far, I’m convinced that Lutheranism and the other initial forms of Protestantism were as strict and led to a similar bloodlust in the way they were manipulated and spread as Wahhabism. Today’s Wahhabists just have access to better modes of transportation, communication, and destruction so it seems worse.
So if you listen to what al Rashed has to say every day, he’ll be ‘prominent’, and if you don’t, he won’t.
In a completely unexpected turn of events, I find myself agreeing with sidereal. Will wonders never cease?
And Edward, I think your exposition about inducing normalcy by celebration is well-taken, and should be one of the cornerstones of our use of soft power. The key, though, will be to ensure that we celebrate these people even when they don’t nice things about the US and even (horror of horrors) when they criticize us, provided they do it in a “democratic” fashion. Nothing will kill their credibility faster than being seen as a shill for American interests; nothing will raise it (and our ideals) faster than being able to criticize the United States in a sincere and respectful manner and not suffering repercussions.
Whether the more secular Islam of Turkey or Central Asian nations isn’t akin to 15th century Catholicism.
Maybe, but the Reformation is 16th century and the Counter-Reformation is late-16th, early-17th. I don’t recall there being any tremendous violent schisms (analogous to the Antipapacy, the Hussites, or the Albigensians) in that time-frame beyond the obvious Protestant/Catholic one, but my knowledge of the Catholic Church really ends in about 1521 so you should ask around.
And Edward, I think your exposition about inducing normalcy by celebration is well-taken, and should be one of the cornerstones of our use of soft power. The key, though, will be to ensure that we celebrate these people even when they don’t nice things about the US and even (horror of horrors) when they criticize us, provided they do it in a “democratic” fashion.
I agree…treating them like equals. Have a Hannity and Colmes style program that demonstrates how a Muslim and nonMuslim can disagree peacefully and thoughtfully about the issues, making sure the Muslim doesn’t pull his punches and is free to criticize the West, with the ultimate goal of course hoping to see we actually agree much more than we disagree. That, again, is leading by example.
Maybe, but the Reformation is 16th century and the Counter-Reformation is late-16th, early-17th.
Yes, but to see the flavor of Catholicism that inspired the Reformation, you should go back to the 15th Century. I use it to suggest a well-established, tradition-based, heavily secularly influenced religion.
“Have a Hannity and Colmes style program that demonstrates how a Muslim and nonMuslim can disagree peacefully and thoughtfully about the issues”
Sweet Lord no.
AL-HANNITY: So are Americans vampires or devils? There seem to be conflicting accounts.
COLMES: That’s crazy. Americans just want to live in peace like everyone else. They. .
AL-HANNITY: Shut up! Shut up! Your French-style appeasement is sickening to me. You’ve been al-Hannitized!
Muslims should do themselves a favor and stay away from newstainment permanently.
Yeah, I knew that example would send shivers down some spines…just trying to reach across the aisle, for unity’s sake, you know…
Edward,
link