In Search of a Moderate Muslim
By David Yerushalmi
The mythical “moderate” Muslim — the Muslim who embraces traditional Islam but wants a peaceful coexistence with the West — is effectively non-existent because to the extent he exists, he has no voice.
Any serious student of Islam – of historical, traditional, and authoritative Islam – understands that Islam is as much a political ideology with hegemonic designs as it is a monotheistic religion. All major legal schools of Islam take the same view of the non-Muslim world: it must be converted through peaceful means, and if that is not possible, subdued through coercion, and if that is not successful, conquered militarily through war and the death (i.e., murder) of the infidels. Strategies and emphasis on active Jihad (i.e., offensive vs. defensive Jihad) differ, but the goal of all major Islamic sects — of their legal rulings and of their faithful followers — is quite focused and directed.
And, it is also true that Islam’s war against the Christian West, which began soon after Mohammed’s death by his successors, has continued unabated to this day although it remained dormant as long as Christian Europe was prepared to fight back and the ruling Caliphate was weak. Such was the case during the decline and ultimate breakup of the Ottoman Empire, but the political and theological teachings, exhortations, and jurisprudence demanding Jihad against the infidel nations of the West have remained a central aspect of Islam.
In the West, and in America specifically, we have found the way to PC-spin our approach to Islam’s long-standing war against the West. One PC response suggests that Islam is a “noble religion of peace” on par with Judaism and Christianity “as one of the three great monotheistic faiths” which has been hijacked by a small group of militant extremists. The group which takes this view is now notoriously associated with the “democracy-builders” – men who preach their own ideology that all people, everywhere, and at all times desire nothing more than freedom and democracy and if we but “liberate” the Muslim world from oppression, the Muslim masses will embrace liberal democracy with the same passion as the Christian world has. This group spends their time running around looking for that rather invisible (or quite “silent majority”) of “moderate Muslims.”
Another group responds to Islam by suggesting that Islam’s complaint against the West is our one-sided and imperialistic behavior in the Islamic world, notably the Middle East. They argue that if we but abandon the Middle East and our senseless support of the Jews in Israel (typically referred to as “Zionists” or “Jewish Settlers” to avoid the deadly charge of anti-Semitism), we can separate ourselves from the Muslim world and live, if not live in peace, at least in a state of peaceful divorce.
There are of course many other “interpretations” but these represent the two extremes of the West’s response to Islam’s long-standing war against the Christian world.
The Society of Americans for National Existence (SANE), an organization I founded but which now boasts the active participation of military men with more than half a century of military, intelligence and counter-terrorism experience in the Middle East, approaches the threat we face from Islam quite differently. At SANE, we approach Islam and the Muslims on their own terms. We take what they preach and what they teach and what they do seriously. We also understand that while only a small percentage of any “people” will actively enlist for war as combatants, the overwhelming majority of Muslims around the world, as documented in survey after survey, embrace Islamic law or Shari’a as divine and authoritative. This law mandates a worldwide Islamic Caliphate as a reality in the here and now and not as some future eschatological event, such as in the coming of the Messiah as taught (albeit with material differences) in both Judaism and Christianity.
We assess Muslims by what they do and what they themselves say. But mostly by what they do. In this context, we witness Muslims actively pursuing and supporting the worldwide Jihad, Muslims passively supporting the worldwide Jihad, and the largest group moving between these two poles but wholly committed to traditional Islam and Islamic law.
You also have a handful of brave and courageous Muslims and “former Muslims” who reject Islam as it is and demand it be radically reformed to make it more Western, and in a very real sense, to make it Christian-like. But these men and women, as few as they may be, are not “moderate Muslims” because “moderation” is not a viable alternative in Islam. These men and women are the Reformers, like Dr. Tawfik Hamid and the Rejectionists, like Ms. Ayaan Hirsi Ali. The former calls for a wholesale reformation of traditional Shari’a and Quranic interpretation while the latter rejects Islam outright and indeed any religious expression in the public square, including Christianity. Our view is Dr. Hamid has it right; Ms. Hirsi Ali is just a former Muslim turned radical secularist. (Don’t get us wrong; we respect her courage for standing up against Islam but it takes far more courage and fortitude to confront Islam as a Reformer.)
The mythical “moderate” Muslim, however, the Muslim who embraces traditional Islam but wants a peaceful coexistence with the West, is effectively non-existent because to the extent he exists, he has no voice. And he is voiceless precisely because he chooses to remain within traditional Shari’a-based Islam, where the Ulamā or Islamic legal scholars, and the Muftoon (singular: Mufti) who issue fatawa (singular: fatwa) or legal edicts, reign supreme together with the lesser mullahs, imams, and maulvis. A “moderate” among these men will simply be shouted down, coerced into silence, or murdered.
[SNIP]
No comments:
Post a Comment