fredens religion, och den som tycker annorlunda är rasist. På andra
sidan finns Sverigedemokraterna, Avpixlat m fl, som menar att islam är helt igenom
Författaren och professorn Barry Rubin skriver på sin blogg mycket intressant om detta: Is Islam Innately Evil? Is Islam Innately Good? Why This Debate is A Waste of Time
We all know that the number of Muslims who explicitly put forward a systematically coherent moderate theology of Islam is very small. We also know that radical Islamists pretend to be moderates and fool people in the West. We also know that foolish or dishonest people in the West claim that Islam is innately moderate; that Sharia law as it will inevitably be interpreted at present is no big deal; and that the radicals are a minority, hijackers, or will soon become moderate. People must know the truth about these issues.
However, it is also true that the number of Muslims who are anti-Islamist in politics and relatively moderate in their politics and practice of Islam number in the tens and even hundreds of millions. Their motives range from liberalism through ethnic (Berber; Kurdish) or state nationalism, conservative views that do see Islamism as improper, those who find refuge in the West and want to acculturate to it, ruling groups and their supporters who don’t want Islamists to cut off their heads, etc.
These people are our actual or potential allies in the battle against Islamism, and we better understand that and find ways to work with them, even if we don’t agree on everything. How can we find a way to blend those two different factors and combine them into a standpoint and strategy?
Artikeln är lång och mycket insiktsfull. Den sätter fingret på något oerhört viktigt.
Jag anser att det är fritt för var och en att tycka hur illa som
helst om islam. På samma sätt som vi kritiserar kristendomen ska vi
kritisera andra religioner.
Men detta klarspråk leder
sällan någonvart. Man kan på goda grunder säga att islam är ont, men om
man fördjupar sig i detta leder det oftast till svartsyn och hopplöshet. Man alienerar potentiella allierade.
Rubin menar dock att dessa allierade inte kommer vara särskilt toleranta:
The alternative is not “moderate Islam” in theological terms but those who see themselves as pious Muslims and yet are relatively moderate politically, more tolerant socially, and oppose revolutionary Islamism. They do not want to impose a Sharia dictatorship, seek to destroy U.S. and Western interests (or the West itself), and even if they hate Israel they are not prepared to risk their lives and devote extensive resources to trying to commit genocide against it.
Vad innebär detta då i praktiken?
What is needed is to see what is happening in the real world among actual political forces and people: to attack the lies that Islamism is not a threat and that it has no legitimate connection with Islam; to show the extremism and broad base of support for revolutionary Islamism; and to formulate a strategy for victory that includes identifying and supporting allies including many Muslims. This is a life-and-death political battle, not a theological debate.
För mig känns det som en mycket konstruktiv hållning. Islamism måste bekämpas och Rubin pekar ut en väg framåt.