Islam v. Islam

[keithprosser3]

To this outsider the Islamic world seems to be fighting at least two internal wars;
one is between Conservative Islamism and Secularist Modernism the other between Shia and Sunni. Islam is not targetting the west - we are just caught in the crossfire of their internal wars. We probably suffer less than one might expect given the level of our interference in the Islamic world.

The level of violence shows that Islamism has been driven to extremes to hang on against reformism. I don't think that hard-line Islamism has much future. It is simply not suited to the modern world - it cannot survive in a world where the internet and MTV connect people and inform and educate them. We see in Egypt that Muslims today certainly do not want to abandon Islam, but they do not want it in the extreme form represented by the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood.

I wouldn't say the 'moderation' of Islam is imminent, nor even certain in the foreseeable future. I am saying that much of the violence we see is due to the conflict between conservatism and modernism in Islam.

The other conflict between Shia and Sunni I think can be viewed as a proxy war between Shia Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia, each striving to dominate the Islamic world. It is hard to see how we can have any influence over that conflict - at least not for the better.

[keithprosser3]

My intention is starting this post was to explore the idea that what is perceived - or represented - as an Islamic onslaught on the west is not the simple truth. In my view the nuances of the problems that Islamism pose are not explored by westerners with nearly enough care.

In particular there are signs that Islamophobia has become 'socially acceptable' in a way that racism is not. I have noticed that these days one can 'get away with' saying things about Muslims that would be unacceptable about a ethnic race in everyday conversation (an in internet posts). That is a worrying sign to me, but I think some other people are very happy about it.

If we take a typical Daily Mail story, note that it has a scare headline that the story does not really merit. The steady drip-drip of half-truths and 'selective truth' has created an atmosphere of deepening inter-community tension that could well explode. The racists didn't get their way over Jamaicans, Indians and Pakistanis but this time they just might get their 'Rivers of blood'.

There -I've said my piece and got off my soapbox!

I'd be happy to learn more about the the roots and ongoing nature of inter-factional conflict in Islam on this or another thread.

[Pazuzu bin Hanbi]

No, you certainly don't have to answer. It is nice to know where people are coming from.

Atheist/Secular Humanist. Also ex–muslim since 2008.

[Danmark]

No, you certainly don't have to answer. It is nice to know where people are coming from.

Atheist/Secular Humanist. Also ex–muslim since 2008.

It seems that many move from being Muslim or Christian to being without belief in a god of theism, but there are a few who simply move from one religion to another. As East of Eden alluded to, he switched from belief in Islam to belief in Christianity. I find that more unusual or at least more interesting, particularly if the move is from one fundamentalist version of a religion, to fundamentalism of a completely different religion.

[Dantalion]

My intention is starting this post was to explore the idea that what is perceived - or represented - as an Islamic onslaught on the west is not the simple truth. In my view the nuances of the problems that Islamism pose are not explored by westerners with nearly enough care.

In particular there are signs that Islamophobia has become 'socially acceptable' in a way that racism is not. I have noticed that these days one can 'get away with' saying things about Muslims that would be unacceptable about a ethnic race in everyday conversation (an in internet posts). That is a worrying sign to me, but I think some other people are very happy about it.

If we take a typical Daily Mail story, note that it has a scare headline that the story does not really merit. The steady drip-drip of half-truths and 'selective truth' has created an atmosphere of deepening inter-community tension that could well explode. The racists didn't get their way over Jamaicans, Indians and Pakistanis but this time they just might get their 'Rivers of blood'.

There -I've said my piece and got off my soapbox!

I'd be happy to learn more about the the roots and ongoing nature of inter-factional conflict in Islam on this or another thread.

I agree with the general idea of your post but the word Islamophobia disgusts me.
There is a huge difference between racism and what you call Islamophobia.
The latter is a natural reaction to being continuously confronted with violence and hatred and atrocious acts coming from a certain religious group.
I agree with comparing this to KKKphobia or Naziphobia.
Some groups ought to be stood up against, and radical Muslims are one of those groups.
It's a shame for those Muslims who don't cause any trouble, but seriously, when there are 9 active serial killers all wearing green pants, and I love green pants, I'll either go on the streets protesting against those guys giving green pants a bad name, or either stop wearing them, know what I mean ?
And unlike green pants, Islam is very easy to be taken as a free pass for hatred and violence against certain people.

[keithprosser3]

Why does the word Islamophobia disgust you? It isn't a good word for anti-Muslim xenophobia, but we appear to be stuck with it.

If you detest Islamic doctrine but have no problem with moderate expressions of Islam then you are not an Islamophobe as the word is generally used or understood, no matter how much one protests the etymology!

The persistent myth is that Islam cannot be practiced or exist in a moderate form. That Islam exists in a pernicious form - which I and others prefer to call Islamism to differentiate it - cannot be denied. Nor can it be denied that Islamism is a huge problem (especially to moderate Muslims who can't shake being tarred with the same brush).

As things are, we are close to the situation where non-Muslims think every Muslim is a fanatical terrorist and Muslims think every non-Muslim is a xenophobic bigot. Obviously that is not the case, but sometimes perceptions matter more than reality.

[keithprosser3]

Why does the word Islamophobia disgust you? It isn't a good word for anti-Muslim xenophobia, but we appear to be stuck with it.

If you detest Islamic doctrine but have no problem with moderate expressions of Islam then you are not an Islamophobe as the word is generally used or understood, no matter how much one protests the etymology!

The persistent myth is that Islam cannot be practiced or exist in a moderate form. That Islam exists in a pernicious form - which I and others prefer to call Islamism to differentiate it - cannot be denied. Nor can it be denied that Islamism is a huge problem (especially to moderate Muslims who can't shake being tarred with the same brush).

As things are, we are close to the situation where non-Muslims think every Muslim is a fanatical terrorist and Muslims think every non-Muslim is a xenophobic bigot. Obviously that is not the case, but sometimes perceptions matter more than reality.

[East of Eden]

There is no moderate Islam, there is only Islam practiced less seriously. The president of supposedly moderate Turkey also said there is no moderate Islam, only Islam.

[Danmark]

Why does the word Islamophobia disgust you? It isn't a good word for anti-Muslim xenophobia, but we appear to be stuck with it.

If you detest Islamic doctrine but have no problem with moderate expressions of Islam then you are not an Islamophobe as the word is generally used or understood, no matter how much one protests the etymology!

The persistent myth is that Islam cannot be practiced or exist in a moderate form. That Islam exists in a pernicious form - which I and others prefer to call Islamism to differentiate it - cannot be denied. Nor can it be denied that Islamism is a huge problem (especially to moderate Muslims who can't shake being tarred with the same brush).

As things are, we are close to the situation where non-Muslims think every Muslim is a fanatical terrorist and Muslims think every non-Muslim is a xenophobic bigot. Obviously that is not the case, but sometimes perceptions matter more than reality.

I have a problem with this and with East of Eden's comments about 'there being no moderate Islam.'

In fact Muslims are not a monolithic group.

Muslims are not a monolithic group. National, political and religious variations highlight stark differences and multiple identities among Muslims. The Sunnis, who account for over 80% of Muslims, have over centuries fragmented into three clear strands - the Political, Missionary and Jihad movements who possess individual characteristics and vary in global view. It is only the Jihadists however that pursue and promote an armed Islamic struggle, which led by the mujahideen can occur in an internal, irredentist or global capacity.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_att ... _terrorism

But what really bothers me the most is that like all prejudice and stereotypes there is some truth or facts to support the fear and hatred. This is certainly true about Muslims.

A Daily Telegraph survey[3] showed that 6% of British Muslims (about 100,000 individuals) fully supported the July 2005 bombings in the London Underground, and one Muslim in four expressed some sympathy with the bombers.[4] A later poll found that one Muslim in four thought the Government had staged the bombings and framed the Muslims convicted.[5] A 2011 study by Pew showed that 1 in 5 Muslim Americans thought there was a great deal or a fair amount of support amongst them for extremism.[6]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_att ... _terrorism

Even if it is only 6% who supported those bombings; even if it is only 20% who support extremism, that is too much. But it still does not justify being prejudiced against all Muslims.

I have to protest this angry anti Muslim prejudice in part because I confess I too am susceptible to it. This kind of thinking and rhetoric appeals to our worst instincts.

[keithprosser3]

I have to protest this angry anti Muslim prejudice in part because I confess I too am susceptible to it. This kind of thinking and rhetoric appeals to our worst instincts.

We are all susceptible to it. One has to ask how much apparent support for such things as the London Bombings stems from frustration at the way ordinary Muslims get in the neck anyway. If there was really that much real support would we have had 8 years without a repeat? The IRA were more far more effective and persistent bombers than the Islamists but anti-Irish or anti-Catholic prejudice never got to the levels of anti-Muslim xenophobia we see today.

Or course, the Irish are white.

[Pazuzu bin Hanbi]

the Irish are white.

And…