I think it is up to the Moderate Islamists to distinguish themselves from the Fundamentalists, not those of us who read their writings. After reading Islam without Fear, Egypt and the New Islamists by Raymond William Baker, I didn't see as much of a distinction between the New and Old Islamists as Baker thought existed. Baker's Egyptian Islamists were still fundamentalist but more nuanced in their theology. The New Islamists wouldn't support terrorism or terrorist organizations but they agreed with much of the very restrictive hallmarks of the Islamism we have grown accustomed to hearing about. Also the New Islamists are pretty much keeping their mouths shut. If you do find one speaking up you can be pretty sure he's either agreeing with the old Islamists or writing from some place in Europe or America. Do any of these New Islamists have any influence? Baker thinks the ones in Egypt may one day have, but they are so reticent, so careful that no one knows for sure what they think. They remind me of Heidegger writing in Nazi Germany. Did he write so obscurely because he was by nature obscure, or did he do so to keep the Nazis from figuring out what he believed? On one of the issues where the Egyptian new Islamists could have emphasized their difference by defending Mahfouz, they failed, at least the most outspoken, Ghazzaly, did. He thought Mahfouz should be censured for his writings. I am not convinced that Turkey contains "moderate Islam.' Ataturk set Turkey up as a secular state. Islamists (Old Islamists) have tried to take control but have been prevented from doing so by the Military. But even much of the military has been tainted with Islamism. There was a move to institute Sharia Law in Turkey not so very long ago which would have been in direct violation of their constitution. I've spent some time looking for these "safe" Muslims you've mentioned. I suspect they are in hiding. Lawrence -----Original Message----- From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Omar Kusturica Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 4:57 AM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: "Stand By Denmark" Rally From: JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 04:11:13 EST <<Eric, you've told us how important it is to fight Islam. >> I don't think it is the notion of anyone (on this list, at least), that the West needs to fight Islam -- anymore than we need to fight Judaism or Christianity or ...fill in the blank. *Oh, I wouldn't be too sure. Yes the talk is usually about Islamism but there is very little attempt to distinguish between radical Islamism, moderate Islamism (governments of Turkey, Malaysia, Egypt etc. all claim to be in Islamic in one way or other), liberal Islamism, or even just traditional Islam. It seems that the only way Muslims could be completely safe from being perceived as enemies would be to convert to Christianity. In practice, of course, not all Muslims get treated as enemies, or even all Islamists. But the decisions seem to motivated by political interests of the moment rather than by any intellectual or ethical criteria. O.K. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html