[lit-ideas] Re: Traditionalist Islam

I read them. The only one that speaks about Moderate Muslims in the Middle East is the first article and the only mention of a Moderate Muslim speaking out in the Middle East is Khatami who was replaced by Ahmadinejad. I've read several articles about Khatami in the past and some people hoped he was moderate but others found him engaged in some extremely immoderate behavior. His past was immoderate. And now he is out of office and apparently not speaking out.
Why just plunk this stuff down here and expect me to develop your argument? If you think they are self-authenticating, they aren't. Where are the Moderate Muslims speaking out from inside the Middle East? I don't think your articles provide any? If you disagree, let's hear it.
I have heard plenty of assertions that there are Traditionalists in the Middle East as I said, but as I also said, I discovered that I wasn't seeing any evidence of Traditionalists or Moderates writing or speaking out from within the Middle East. Now in past discussions we of course excluded Muslims from Afghanistan and Iraq for obvious reasons. We also excluded Muslim areas outside of the Middle East like India, and I found that the most outspoke and moderate were right here in the USA where it was safe to be Moderate and speak out.
During past discussions with Omar we discovered an outspoken fellow from Iran. Perhaps he was the person who broke the rule, but no, he was hounded out of Iran; although he went back from time to time when he thought he could get away with it -- especially during the Khatami regime.
There is also an Egyptian novelist who seems to present a moderate position in his novels, but he has been abused, attacked, and the last I heard was being tried for something like heresy. I have one of his novels lying about some place but I can't remember where. I haven't heard how his trial came out. This novelist by the way has argued that his novels do conform to strict sharia-law-type thinking, but his attackers don't believe him.
I keep hearing about political trouble in Iran, about Iranians who oppose the policies of Ahmadinejad. There were the students who opposed the repressive actions of the Mullahs and their policies, but they were suppressed. I've read articles that claim there is something going on in Iran once again, and the Ahmadinejad regime and the Mullahs behind him may all come tumbling down, but that may just be the same old wishful thinking.
The Middle East is not a place where freedom of thought and speech are encouraged. Beyond that the Fundamentalists suppress or seek to suppress those whose views are not as strict as theirs, people who might approximate the definition of a moderate, and their violence is persuasive. 

Lawrence



At 08:48 PM 2/26/2007, you wrote:
If you had looked around on the second website, or read the content of the first, or looked past the first line of the third, you would find that all three discuss moderate Muslims IN the Middle East.
I didn't really have the inclination to pick out the "in the ME only" sentences/paragraphs, as I tend to believe context is important.
I understand, however, why you don't have time to read such lengthy pieces. I'll try to pare them down for you. 

Julie Krueger

========Original Message========
Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: Traditionalist Islam
Date: 2/26/2007 11:46:33 A.M. Central Standard Time
From: <mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To: <mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent on:
Notice what you quoted: "I wasn't hearing from any in the Middle East." You give me three web sites but none of them are in the Middle East. Yes, I know there are moderates outside of the Middle East. If they become Moderate they have to move out. They go to the Brookings Institute in Washington DC (your first web site). They became an assistant professor in a college in Michigan (your second web site), or they become involved with the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (your third web site). They do not stay in the Middle East and write from there. 

Lawrence




At 09:20 AM 2/26/2007, you wrote:

<http://www.ijtihad.org/moderatemuslims.htm>http://www.ijtihad.org/moderatemuslims.htm
<http://www.ijtihad.org/women2.htm>The Legacy of Muhammad and the issues of Pedophilia and Polygamy 

These are two interesting articles from a Moderate Muslim perspective.

And here's a website you might take a look at:

<http://www.aifdemocracy.org/about/principles.php>http://www.aifdemocracy.org/about/principles.php

Julie Krueger

======== Original Message========
Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: Traditionalist Islam
Date: 2/25/2007 4:35:00 P.M. Central Standard Time
From: <mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To: <mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent on:
When I click on your reference I get Issue # 132 and don't see anything in it by Fukuyama.
The route you say I've chosen is the one I've been on all along. I started out believing all I was hearing about the Traditional Muslims but one day realized that I wasn't hearing from any in the Middle East; so right here on this very Lit-Ideas I challenged Omar to produce some "moderate" aka traditional Muslims from he Middle East, and he couldn't, or didn't have the time to look. So I said that I wasn't going to believe they existed until some were produced. My stance hasn't changed. I said that deep down I think they do probably exist, but did you read the rest of what I said, Simon? In practical terms their existence is moot because they take no observable actions based upon their beliefs. They don't write. They don't speak out politically. In practical terms they may as well not exist.
[Simon] I say back to you that the present actions of the west (by the US and the UK for example), which for the most part are nothing but verification of what the fundamentalists are saying the west would do, preclude that possibility. More importantly, these actions serve to push more and more traditionalists towards the fundamentalist camp.
[Simon] Now I know this is something you disagree with. You (and Eric) think that fundamentalist Islam is a product exclusively derived from Muslim culture and a too tight reading of the Koran. You (and Eric) say that the movement of muslims from the traditional fold to the fundamentalist is something the west cannot influence. At least that's what you say over here...
You haven't said enough for me to "disagree" or agree with. What "actions of the west" do you have in mind? And how does "verification of what the fundamentalists are saying" preclude the possibility of the semi-mythical traditionalists reaching out to us assuming they knew we (Conservatives) existed -- and D'Souza says they don't know we exist. D'Souza says it is the actions of the Cultural Left that antagonize the Traditional Muslims. They believe that we are all irreligious, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual marriage, pro-sleeping around and a host of other things that appall them. They do not hold our taking out the Taliban and Saddam Hussein against us. They do not mind that we are fighting Al Quaeda and the Baathists in Iraq. But they hate what we are (read what the Cultural Left is). D'Souza says we should be more vocal, and become visible to the Traditional Muslims. Once they know we exist and share Non-Leftist Cultural views with them we can take a common stance against Radical Islam (not to mention the Cultural Left) 

Lawrence


At 01:04 PM 2/25/2007, you wrote:

Well Lawrence, I'm pleased that you've chosen the interesting route.

I'd like to start with a quote from you on Lit-Ideas, from the last post:

"...let me say for the record that I believe the Traditionalists do exist."
Now, just in case you have some intent to catch me out, I hope we can agree that the 'traditionalists' you are referring to to are the 'moderates' that we have discussed previously. We can? I'll assume that to be the case.
In which case, I'd like to go back to something I've been saying repeatedly: that the war being fought by the US and the west (sometimes called the War Against Terror, other times otherthings), at its heart, is a battle for the hearts and minds of the tradional muslim, for the moderate. You say that their invisibility (in the middle east) means that we are unable to reach out for them, but that they should reach out for us.
I say back to you that the present actions of the west (by the US and the UK for example), which for the most part are nothing but verification of what the fundamentlists are saying the west would do, preclude that possibility. More importantly, these actions serve to push more and more traditionalists towards the fundamentalist camp.
Now I know this is something you disgree with. You (and Eric) think that fundamentalist Islam is a product exclusively derived from muslim culture and a too tight reading of the Koran. You (and Eric) say that the movement of muslims from the traditional fold to the fundamentalist is something the west cannot influence. At least that's what you say over here... 

[conflation...]

A few days ago I included a link to an article by Fukuyama:
<http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/list.php?category=138&issue=549>http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/list.php?category=138&issue=549
I believe it's important and relates to the current discussion. Perhaps you could read it and comment. 

Simon

----- Original Message -----
From: <mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>Lawrence Helm
To: <mailto:Lit-Ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>Lit-Ideas
Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 8:28 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Simon's peculiar responses

Simon writes:
There are, I've decided, two different Lawrences: one here and one in 'another place'. Here, our Lawrence is unequivocal, the war is against Islam because the moderates (or traditionalists) are 'semi mythical'. Over there, their Lawrence appears to be nuanced and the moderates (or traditionalists) are the ones that should be approached by western scholars with a view to steering them away from the fundamentalists. Now this is interesting to say the least. Perhaps it's because Lawrence is a hypocrite, or perhaps it's also because he's writing for a different audience. Is it because in both places he's after an argument? 
And what does that make him?
Of course, he might just attempt to reconcile these two different psyches. And that would be really interesting... 


Lawrence reluctantly responds:
It goes without saying that you are once again confused, Simon.
By "another place" I assume you mean Theoria where I discussed the book The Enemy at Home, The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11 by Dinesh D'Souza. I might have discussed that book over here on Lit-Ideas but I didn't because I had been declared SPAM for awhile. Some of my comments about this book had to do with D'Souza's thesis that it was better to fight against just the Islamic Radicals than all of Islam. The Right-Wing reviews I read of this book were uniformly negative. They objected to D'Souza's putting himself in the shoes of the "Traditionalist" and looking for points of agreement. He argues the American Conservatives should seek out these traditionalists and make common cause with them -- just as the Left and the Radical Muslims are making common cause. My problem with the reviews is that none of them I read seemed to think it would be a good thing if we could avoid fighting all of Islam by making common cause with the traditionalists. If they exist, and D'Souza believes they do, then it would be good if we could reach some sort of common-cause agreement involving opposition to the radicals (and the Left). My point here, and once again a smidgeon of understanding of Logic would help you, Simon, is conditional. If the traditionalists exist then it would be a good thing if they and American conservatives could reach a rapprochement like D'Souza suggest. I do not have to believe or disbelieve that they exist to make that conditional statement. But in one of my Theoria notes (one that you apparently missed), I stated that I continued to believe the Traditionalists to be invisible and that since we couldn't find them to reach out to, perhaps it would behoove them, if they existed, to reach out to us. Lest that is too elusive for you, Simon, let me say for the record that I believe the Traditionalists do exist. I make disparaging comments about them, calling them invisible and semi-mythical, because they are not outspoken. They are not a present-day force in the Middle East. They keep silent. If you called someone like that to be a witness over here in the U.S.in, say, a drive-by shooting, he would say, "I don't want to get involved." Some Muslims are courageous and they seem to have gravitated to the Radicals. They like to blow things up. The uncourageous, the ones who would go to Canada if they lived over here, tend to keep their mouths shut. D'Souza has a different view of them and I suspended disbelief as I read his book (something his reviewers failed to do), but I still wait to hear from them. Where are they Dinesh? And don't point to Iranians living in Los Angeles or Arab Doctors working at Loma Linda Hospital. Where are they in the Middle East? 
Lawrence





----------
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at <http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/1615326657x4311227241x4298082137/aol?redir=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaol%2Ecom>AOL.com. 




----------
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at <http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/1615326657x4311227241x4298082137/aol?redir=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaol%2Ecom>AOL.com.

Other related posts: