The Search for Moderate Islam: Part I

Frontpagemag.com ^ | January 28, 2005 | Lawrence Auster

[rmlew]

Does it Exist?

A leading intellectual figure and stalwart fighter in America's confrontation with radical Islam, Daniel Pipes is perhaps best known for his idea that "radical Islam is the problem, moderate Islam is the solution." As Pipes argues, radical Islam, though currently the dominant political force in the Muslim world, is supported by only 10 to 15 percent of Muslims worldwide, while moderate Islam represents the great, though so far mostly silent, majority of Muslims. He further points out that radical Islam, also known as militant Islam or Islamism, is a very recent phenomenon, having more in common with modern totalitarian ideologies than with true, historic Islam. While he warns that militant Islam aims to overthrow the West and regain lost Islamic glory, he insists with equal conviction that traditional, moderate Islam is fully capable of living at peace with the rest of the world.

Pipes's dual perspective on Islam leads him to advocate a dual-track strategy toward it. We must, he says, use all necessary political and military means to defeat the Islamists and secure our own safety, even as we seek out moderates and help them in the vital work of reforming Islamic beliefs and practices, isolating the extremists, and building an Islamic community that can be a normal and productive member of a democratic world community.

[rmlew]

In this article, Mr. Auster refutes the assertion that there currently is a moderate form of Islam. Specifically, he uses the work of Daniel Pipes to refute this idea proposed by Mr. Pipes.
In a follow up peace, Auster suggest that we take a different course in fighting a Clash of Civilizations. As, such it is an important peace. We are not fighting "terror", we are fighting Islamists, who are supported by traditional Islam.

[Gunrunner2]

So. . .10-15% are radical and the rest (85-90%) moderate?

Somehow I don't buy it. . if these numbers are true then are cowards to let the alleged small amount of radicals kowtow them into remaining silent over the hijacking of their religion and the forcing of them into mass celebrations of terrorist attacks and bombings. . .yeah right. . .small minority. . .

Piffle.

[JudyinCanada]

It is not a clash of civilizations. It is a clash between civilized and uncivilized.

[Sam Cree]

OK, read later

[oolatec]

One has to wonder however, of that "silent majority" that are apparently "moderate", just how many of them aren't moderate? They are silent after all...

[rmlew]

Ping

[Darkwolf377]

The search for Moderate Islam will take you to the same place as would the search for an informed comment by Ted Kennedy.

[FreeKeys]

Check out: The Minaret of Freedom
and:  New book says the Qur'an gives women the same rights as men
and:

[snip]

Yet much more is now required of the adherents of Islam: the reinvention of their religion. No longer can the words of the Koran be considered inerrant, infallible, those of Allah himself. The words must be read thoughtfully and critically, and the wisdom they contain extracted with reflection, not reflexively. 

Christianity emerged from its Dark Ages when its sacred texts were considered infallible and criticism condemned (often to death) as heresy, to subject itself to historical examination and rational discussion. It is stronger for it. For a religion's strength does not lie in fanatical belief, in an unquestioned assumption that disagreement or criticism of it is an incomprehensible perversion. A religion's strength lies in the goodness it does for people's souls.

As Al-Rawandi puts it: 

The claims of Islam do not depend on historical origins, but on an inner knowledge of God, the accompaniment and reward of piety. What makes Islam true is the spiritual life of Moslems, not religious history but religious experience. 
These are the teachings of a school of Islamic thought known as Sufism. How Islam must reinvent itself to emerge out of the Islamic Dark Ages it has inhabited for the last several hundred years, and join and flourish in the civilized world, is to combine the teachings of Sufism with those of Jadidism, the attempt by Central Asian Islamic scholars 100 years ago to make a revitalized Islam compatible with the modern world. 

While Jadidism was snuffed by the Soviets, its revival, combined with the inner peace and truths provided by Sufism, could reinvent an Islam prepared to participate and prosper in the 21st century.

The combined synergy of Sufism and Jadidism would be the salvation of Islam. Today it stands in dire need of being saved. I hope that dedicated Islamic scholars will appear on the scene to create such a salvatory synergy. In the meantime, none of us any longer needs to be afraid or intimidated by the Myth of Mecca.

-- Jack Wheeler, HERE

[rmlew]

Did you read the article?
Auster's arguement is that Islam is not moderat, that theyre are only individual moderate Muslims.

[Dark Skies]

It's a mistake to blame Islam, a religion fourteen centuries old, for the evil that should be ascribed to militant Islam, a totalitarian ideology less than a century old. Militant Islam is the problem, but moderate Islam is the solution.

We all hear what Dr. Pipes is saying but, if it is true (and at this point this is pure speculation), how do we reconcile this with the fact that, after 9/11, moderate Muslims around the world joined hardliners in rejoicing and cheering.

[kipita]

I respectfully agree with Mr. Pipes and would argue that Moderate Islam is the solution. Islam desperately needs a Reformation and such forces come from the common folk in society which account for 90+% of Islamic citizenry.

[TapTheSource]

Pipes is absolutely correct. I have felt this way for some time. Moreover, much of what we call "Radical Islam" might not be related to Islam at all. Might want to check out the following article for more...


http://www.worldthreats.com/russia_former_ussr/Terrorists%20In%20Muslim%20Diguise.htm

[Gunrunner2]

My post was in agreement, as constructed within the context of my own analysis.

[TapTheSource]

If your interested, read original post and then see link in post #12.

[rmlew]

The Search for Moderate Islam: Part II

[kipita]

Your tagline states the "real" problem with humanity and your post is the specific reality of Islam. Unfortunately, I don't think change will take affect for generations. Maybe 2050?

[Fiddlstix]

So. . .10-15% are radical and the rest (85-90%) moderate?

A moderate muslin is a sadist.
A radical muslim is an uber sadist.
imho

[Noachian]

...moderate Islam does not now exist. It must be created. Moreover, it can only be created by means of renouncing that which Islam has always been. But, on those terms, can the result still be Islam?

This is the crux of the problem.

Islam cannot remain Islam if it is changed into the "peaceful religion" Bush claims it is. If Islam cannot be changed into a more civilized religion then it will remain the anti-democratic, barbaric, religion it has always been.

[rmlew]

Islamism is a 20th century phenominon. Islamist and Maxist Arab groups did recieve aid in terrorist activities from the USSR. However, we face a far larger problem than fighting a few Islamist groups. They are the activists supported by a much larger population of traditional Muslims.

[JudyinCanada]

In addition to dancing in public after 9/11 (they did that up here in Canada, as well), do they not follow the same quran, the writings the militants are simply implementing?

There is no way to monitor who believes what and to what degree. If you follow the quran, you have the potential, at any point, to become a militant.

[Dark Skies]

You know I agree...a moderate Muslim is really an apostate or lapsed Muslim. Sooner or later someone is going to come along and return them to their true religion.

[blackie]

[TapTheSource]

"Islamism is a 20th century phenominon. Islamist and Maxist Arab groups did recieve aid in terrorist activities from the USSR."

And they are still receiving aid from the USSR (err...Russia).

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1331406/posts

[TapTheSource]

"Putin pledged joint business ventures, including projects focusing on the development of oil and gas resources in Syria, and agreed to write-off 73 percent of Syria's $13.4 billion debt to Russia."

How's that for giving aid and comfort to our enemy Syria???

[rmlew]

Strictly sepaking, Syria is Ba'athist. However, Putin's actions are quite unfriendly. Not only is Syrian debt being written-off, by Russia is selling Syria weapons.

[TapTheSource]

Ooops...last post was meant for you...

---

More on Russia's long-range strategy in the Middle East.

http://www.anti-communistanalyst.com/Russiasgame.htm

[TapTheSource]

"Putin's actions are quite unfriendly. Not only is Syrian debt being written-off, by Russia is selling Syria weapons."

Let's face it, Russia is still supporting virtually all of her "former" allies (read: our enemies)...and she is supporting some new ones as well (i.e. Venezuela, etc).

[joesnuffy]

Jonah Goldberg

http://www.NewsAndOpinion.com |
Earlier this month the Washington Post's Richard Cohen
wrote, "As the late Susan Sontag bravely pointed out
in a New Yorker essay published right after Sept. 11,
2001, those terrorist attacks were in response to
American policy in the Middle East - not, as Bush has
said repeatedly since, because Islamic radicals cannot
abide freedom."


And Patrick Buchanan - allegedly on the other side of
the ideological spectrum - has declared countless
times, "Osama bin Laden and his crew up there in Tora
Bora did not stumble on a copy of the Bill of Rights
and go berserk that Americans are free in the United
States."


In short, the notion that America is in a war for
freedom over tyranny has elicited bipartisan
snickering and guffawing. In the wake of Bush's
inaugural, the chorus of complaints intensified. And
understandably so, given the fact that his address was
the most forceful articulation of his "freedom" vision
to date.


But before the cackles could reach their crescendo,
the naysayers hit an inconvenient snag. Musab
al-Zarqawi, the "prince" of Al-Qaida in Iraq,
appointed by Osama Bin Laden, came out and agreed with
President Bush. "We have declared a fierce war on this
evil principle of democracy and those who follow this
wrong ideology," Zarqawi declared in a statement.
"Democracy is also based on the right to choose your
religion," he said, and that is "against the rule of
God."


You can almost hear Cohen and Buchanan snapping their
pencils "Darn it, stop stepping on my message!"


Zarqawi's declaration came after a statement by Bin
Laden himself in December, in which he pronounced:
"Anyone who participates in these elections . has
committed apostasy against Allah."


Now, this doesn't mean that Bin Laden and Zarqawi
aren't motivated by less lofty - or merely different -
principles than an Islamist rejection of democracy. To
be sure, Bin Laden's initial grievances included
America's relationship to Saudi Arabia, Israel and all
the usual complaints. But underlying these gripes was
an ideology - and remains an ideology - opposed to
freedom and democracy. The intellectual founder of
Islamism, Sayyid Qutb, wrote in 1957: "In the world
there is only one party, the party of Allah; all of
the others are parties of Satan and rebellion. Those
who believe fight in the cause of Allah; and those who
disbelieve fight in the cause of the rebellion."


If you peruse the incalculably valuable website
Memri.org - which translates articles, manifestoes and
broadcasts from across the Arabic world - you will
find countless declarations from Islamist groups
declaring that democracy is an "atheist" heresy that
replaces the law of God with the law of man, and that
anyone who advocates elections is ipso facto an
infidel. In his December statement, Osama Bin Laden
"ruled" - as if he has any right to do so - that Iraqi
forces who aid the upcoming elections "are apostates
who should not be prayed over upon their deaths. They
cannot inherit, and they must not be inherited from
[after their deaths]. Their wives are divorced from
them, and they must not be buried in Muslim
cemeteries."


Sure sounds like someone hates democracy to me.


Those who pooh-pooh the notion that our enemies hate
freedom believe that such ideologically totalitarian
movements can exist within their own borders
indefinitely. All we have to do is treat them like a
hornet's nest and don't upset them (no matter that
they topple their own governments and seek ever more
conquests).


Unfortunately, we live in a world where a bunch of
antidemocratic and homicidal zealots can make life
dangerous for all of us. "Not our fight," the
president's critics seem to say. But if they're wrong,
thousands or millions could die as a result. And, like
it or not, that fight is in Iraq right now.


For the first time in a hard-fought, bloody, and at
times metaphysically depressing couple of years, it
looks like there's cause for optimism there.
Indications are that turnout will be high in Sunday's
elections. Sunni leaders now say they want a role in
constructing the new constitution. Zarqawi's prized
bomb-making lieutenant was captured, and interim Prime
Minister Allawi is gaining support.


But the best news from Iraq in a while is Zarqawi's
forceful and forthright rejection of democracy and
freedom as a principle. He doesn't want a more
"authentic" democracy, he wants to kill it. This alone
gives Iraqis, particularly the Sunnis he claims to
represent, a stark choice: Accept the painful but
promising path of elections, or side with the man most
responsible for the car-bombings of mosques and
markets, who would replace Saddam's nationalist
totalitarianism for a new religious one ruled by
foreigners like him and Bin Laden. Given that choice,
who can doubt the Iraqis will vote with their hearts
and ballots for what's behind Curtain No. 1.

[Fred Nerks]

"Moderate muslims around the world joined hardliners in rejoicing and cheering."

I have always been inclined to take what Pipes writes about moderate islam with a huge dose of salt...but after recent events in Australia, when the islamic community itself is making moves to remove their imported mufti from a position of power in the largest mosque in this country,
I am beginning to wonder...was the 'rejoicing and cheering' a 'natural' reaction from the majority of the followers of islam, or was it cleric-driven?

I can't forget Arthur Koestler's story. He lived in Israel during the 1920's. He wrote that from Monday through Friday, the Jewish tenants and the Arab landlord would be friends, like brothers. On Friday night, after prayer at the mosque, the same Arab landlord would come home, take out his kitchen knives and slay the entire Jewish family.

Daniel Pipes is perhaps trying to help us find the kernel of humanity within, something we all share, and could just be the greatest enemy the evil clerics have.

We speak of 'freedom of religion' as a right guaranteed by our constitutions, American and Australian, yet neither are able to make the same guarantee to muslim immigrants, not while imported Saudi wahhabi clerics apply sharia via the mosques.

[knighthawk]

If bin Laden's and other jihadists' understanding of jihad "is in keeping with its usage through 14 centuries of Islamic history," as Pipes indicates, then jihadism, i.e., militant Islam, has in fact been a normative component of Islam for 1,400 years. Therefore it cannot be true that militant Islam is a very recent, minority movement.

Islam-list

If people want on or off this list, please let me know.

[Dark Skies]

I remember reading about an area in Israel where the Muslim population and the Jewish residents got along well (in fact, strong friendships were built). However, I think that is quite the exception to the rule.

I have no doubt that people, without clerical (Muslim) interference, are capable of crossing religious lines, particular when those lines are relaxed. But I am suspicious. Is something in Islam that makes it vulnerable to clerics (and others)...such that when "true believers" apply electricity, those ancient hatreds springs to attention.

I am certainly openminded but when a religion says "oh, worshiper of Allah, there is a Jew hiding behind me...come and kill him"...I have to suspect that there is a potential for trouble.

[Happy2BMe]

What was your former name on FR?

[Fred Nerks]

"Is there something in Islam that makes it vulnerable to clerics..."

Of course there is. It's called the koran and hadith. But you know that. Now, who is it that spends billions of petro-dollars on building mosques, on wahhabi influenced literature, on clerics sent throughout the world to 'interpret' the mohammadan creed to muslim immigrants in the West? Where do the clerics come from? Where are the 'Universities' at which they study?
Why are 'prayer leaders' (imams) not all of the same bent? Why do the Iranian immigrants in Australia for example, wish to practice a totally different form of islam?
Doesn't that suggest there is more than one aspect to this 'religion'?
Why do the Iranian mullah's need a military force made up of arabs who are foreigners, to keep the muslims in Iran prisoner in their own country?
Too many questions...there's an answer there, somewhere.

[Dark Skies]

Of course there is. It's called the koran and hadith.

I started rereading Shirer's "...Third Reich" again today for the fourth time (it has been at least seven years since last reading). I wanted to see if I noticed any new paralells between Islam and the rise of Hitler and Nazism, particularly in light of 9/11.

When I read it and Tolands bio of Hitler before 9/11, I remember a strong sense of the metaphysical. I am only 30-35 pages into it this time, but the same sense of the metaphysical is there but much stronger in light of recent history.

It would take much too much time to explain it all, even if I knew exactly what I felt. But that is what I am referring to (in addition to the Qur'an and Hadith). I am asking if there is a metaphysical quality to Islam that gives hardliners a key to the ignition of ancient Muslim hatred.

[He Rides A White Horse]

The Search for Moderate Islam

I'm betting on finding Atlantis first.

[CaptainAwesome2]

There is no moderate Islam. That includes the terrorists we are wasting our time with in Iraq.

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

Islam = Evil cult

Moderate Islam = Moderate Evil Cult

Why do Societies insist on trying to understand Evil instead of just destroying it ?

Toying with madness will either destroy you or turn you i for one would rather destroy the madness than endure it !

[SJackson]

If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

[broadsword]

Therefore it cannot be true that militant Islam is a very recent, minority movement.

Bloodthirsty Islam IS the norm, and the quiet (so-called "moderate") Muslims are the trojan horses for this worldwide march against human civilization.

[sheik yerbouty]

Silent as in Trojan Horse..

[broadsword]

The difference between moderate Islam and bigfoot is that bigfoot has reportedly been spotted.

[broadsword]

Islam desperately needs a Reformation

OK. Now how would you, as a Muslim, reform the religion that calls for an immediate death sentence for all who would try to reform or even question the "holy" Koran or the "prophet" Mohamed? The Koran, the Hadith and Shariah law are bursting with calls for ruthless slaughter, oppression, world takeover, misogyny, slavery, beheadings terror attacks, etcetera. To whom would you go to "reform" this bloodthirsty madness?

Good luck on your hopeless "reformation".

Islam has one thing to say to you, "Shut up and be assimilated, or DIE!

[broadsword]

The bottom line is this:

I would NOT profess a religion that demanded worldwide conquest, the brutal subjugation of women and the slaughter of every human being that will not be assimilated... AND I CANNOT TRUST OR RESPECT ANYONE WHO PROFESSES SUCH AN EVIL RELIGION... even if they promise to be nice, for now.

[kipita]

As a non-Muslim and non-religious person, I'd first start with saying that Mohammed married a much older woman whom he cherished and valued in his life. So, respect and value women in society. Based on global trends, your people will live very well and prosper

[broadsword]

LOL! He married a very rich widow and had many wives, many of whom hated him, but they had no choice in the matter because he treated them like dirt. And his last wife was only six years old when he took her. What a filthy pig!

"Your woman is your dirt, cultivate her." --The "holy" Koran.

[Gunrunner2]

Indeed.

[FITZ]

His favorite wife was the 6 year old girl.

[FITZ]

The problem is --- some Muslims would live peacefully --- but they aren't following Mohammads commands or carefully reading the Koran --- the Koran would have to be heavily edited to make Islam moderate. It needs to say "all people don't have to be forced into submission", "muslims who leave their faith and convert to another religion don't have to be put to death", "Jews and Christians can live" and on and on.

[kipita]

Well, his first wife "groomed" him and he never loved another afterwards. I'm a simple man but am of the belief that woman are more complex and intellectual than most men want to admit.