An Islamophile Speaks

Yesterday, I learned (thanks to Keith Burgess-Jackson; see here) about an essay in Dissent magazine by Michael Walzer, who is on the left but who shares concerns with us “Islamophobes.” See here. There is also a response to the essay (here) by Andrew March, who is an associate professor of political science at Yale University. Let me point out some of the responses he has made and then comment on those responses.

1. Leftists have priorities, and fighting the Islamists isn’t one of them. Fighting American imperialism is much more important.

2. This is because there is already a lot of fierce criticism against the Islamists, as well as massive state violence against them.

3. Because of this state violence, the war against Islamism is taking care of itself, and there is no need for the liberal left to get involved.

4. Leftists have time and again condemned the actions of the Islamists, despite what Walzer thinks. “Who doubts that we are against these things?” he asks.

5. “For my part, I doubt that future historians will look back at the period between 2001 and 2014 and remember it for its culture of appeasement, excuse, and apology toward Islamist terrorism.”

6. People in the Muslim world struggling for justice, equality, and democracy aren’t looking for the help of Westerners, and instead they want the help of leftists in restraining “non-leftist Western power in their countries.”

7. If leftists have decided to focus on our (i.e., America’s) ongoing crimes rather than those of the Islamists, “how can Walzer be so sure that this judgment is wrong?” It is always easier, he claims, to focus on the crimes against us rather than one’s own crimes.

8. Anyone who gives an explanation for the rise of Islamism other than its being due to colonialism, imperialism, and global capitalism is giving a thin explanation.

9. We on the left don’t have power.

Completely missing from March’s response is any recounting of the threats of murder and actual murders of leftists by Islamists. For those new to this blog, let me note that these include (1) the murder of tens of thousands of liberals and leftists in Iran after the Shah was evicted, (2) the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, (3) the murder of Theo van Gogh, (4) the threats against the Danish cartoonists, (5) the murder of the cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo, and (6) the recent attack in Copenhagen. There are also any number of murders in the Muslim world that we seldom hear about. One can only guess at what he would say. That they are nothing but outliers? Anyway, let me respond to his responses in order.

1. If it is true, as I believe, that Islamists will have no hesitation in killing leftists when they have the chance to, then not making them first priority could mean the death of the left in the West. The left underestimated the Nazis, too.

2. There is fierce criticism against the Islamists, but it seems to come from ordinary people and not from our media, schools, or Hollywood. Accordingly, it feels like nothing is being said because they control the national vibes. As for the massive state violence, there are no boots on the ground against ISIS. I know of no Western powers arrayed against Boko Haram in order to get the Nigerian schoolgirls back, and they keep committing outrages.

3. There is no reason to believe that the war against the Islamists is taking care of itself because the groups seem to proliferate. Anyway, both Walzer and March seem to believe that the fight is overseas and not also right here at home.

4. Despite claiming that leftists have denounced the Islamists, he gives no citations. And lots of us doubt that they are against these things. We seldom hear leftists condemn them, there are no demonstrations against them, and the demonstrations that do occur are against other outrages which are minor by comparison. So, it is reasonable to doubt that they are against them.

5. It could very well be that leftist historians will not look back on our era in that way, but that doesn’t mean that others will follow their example. For that matter, there is no guarantee that the left will be here at the end of this century.

6. To begin with, when the Arab Spring hit Syria, the rebels wanted our help, despite March’s belief that what people in the Muslim world want is for us to get out. Secondly, in the book I am frequently praising and referring to, Karima Bennoune’s Your Fatwa Does Not Apply Here, actual voices from the Muslim world are quoted, and what they don’t like is the way that Western leftists have abandoned them and instead support the Islamists. It is true that these voices are from leftists in the Muslim world and not from Islamists, but why would leftists in the West want to ignore other leftists?

7. When someone doesn’t talk about an important topic – in this case, the killings of leftists by Islamists – one assumes that they are in denial about reality and so it is reasonable in this case to assume that the left is wrong. Of course, it could be that leftists will eventually begin talking about the killings of leftists by Muslims, and they will make it clear why they think those killings are unimportant. But until that happens, I have to conclude that they are in denial and that accordingly they are wrong.

Let me digress and point out that if you are a young person, you might want to think carefully about getting involved with the left since they don’t seem to care about their own.

8. It is true that this response was an ad hominem response to Walzer, who in fact did give no explanation of the rise of Islamism other than that religion is back with a vengeance. So, let me give a stab at it. Every culture has a default mode that is strongly traditional, anti-science, irrational, and of course anti-leftist. This is what human culture was like for tens of thousands of years, and it is only recently that things have changed. However, they can revert back at any moment if one’s guard is let down. And that is what has happened in the Muslim world. They seldom left default mode during their supremacy, and after having been surpassed by the West, have been reluctant to change. Still, change was happening, partly as a result of pressure from us Westerners, but then the pressure vanished when the New Left emerged. No more did we Westerners talk about how Muslims needed to become more Western. Instead, the new message said that there was nothing wrong with the Muslim world and that it was in fact the West that was the problem. We in the West needed to stop being imperialists over you, we said.

With the relaxation of pressure from the West, the reactionaries began clawing their way back. They got a big boost when the Shah of Iran was evicted, and they ruthlessly eliminated their leftist rivals. Then when the fatwa against Salman Rushdie was issued, and we in the West did almost nothing, they realized we had no will to fight them. The Islamists smelled blood. They were helped by massive numbers of Muslim immigrants who, thanks to the left, had no pressure put on them to assimilate.

There are now near-constant terrorist incidents and would-be terrorist attacks. It seems that new groups are springing up all the time to fight us, some in the Middle East, but some here. Of course they fight each other, too, but they all say the same thing, that they want to impose shari’a on us, and that they will succeed in doing so.

9. It was the left that has had the power to bring in massive numbers of immigrants and to insist that they will not have any pressure on them to assimilate. For a leftist to bemoan their lack of power means they aren’t looking in the right directions.

I could say a lot more, but this should suffice.

Comments

[Jan Jansen]

Excellent analysis. Great debate.
Marches response seemed angry, although he accused Walzer of that.
I don't think March will continue the discourse after Walzer's reply :)