I didn't know Robert Spencer until recently, but I confess I like him. He's an intelligent, passionate guy. He's also very angry with me, because in my latest book I urged conservatives to stop attacking Islam. My point was that if you go around denouncing the Koran, the Prophet Muhammad and the Muslim religion, you will alienate traditional Muslims and push them toward the radical camp.
Since I mentioned book titles like Islam Unveiled, The Myth of Islamic Tolerance and Sword of the Prophet as examples of Islam-bashing, Spencer (who happens to be the author of a couple of these books) took it as a personal attack. He sent me a public invitation to debate him, and began to inform his readers that I was trying to "silence" him. I emailed him to say I wasn't trying to silence him but merely disagreed with him. It's not a difference that Spencer can easily appreciate.
I've debated Spencer on a couple of radio shows now, and the first one was quite acrimonious, while the second--just a couple of days ago--was more civil. But now Spencer is on the warpath again. He accuses me of spreading falsehoods about him in my National Review Online answer to critics. You can read that here.
What falsehoods? Well, on the first radio show, as well as in our only face-to-face debate on March 1 at CPAC, Spencer disputed my distinction between radical Muslims and traditional Muslims. He scornfully challenged me to name a single traditional Muslim.
When I named Ali Gomaa, the grand mufti of Egypt, Spencer retorted that the man is actually opposed to sculpture. Gomaa apparently thinks sculpture is un-Islamic! A strange view, but it doesn't bother me terribly, because I wasn't thinking of hiring Gomaa to give my daughter art lessons. My suggestion was to recruit the help of traditional Muslims like Gomaa to fight the influence of Al Qaeda. Here Gomaa has been very good, and you can read a profile of him here. Spencer contends that Gomaa is a supporter of Hezbollah and should be shunned on that account.
Spencer has assured me that he does not think all Muslims are radical, and I believe him. He contrasts radical Muslims with what he calls "cultural Muslims." (I noted this in my National Review Online piece but it seems to have been cut out by the editor for reasons of space.) By the term Spencer seems to mean Muslims who have come to recognize the problems inherent in the Muslim religion. Muslims who reject the traditional tenets of the Koran, Muslims who repudiate what Muhammad taught, Muslims who don't practice Islam the way it has been practiced for centuries--these seem to be Spencer's preferred "cultural Muslims."
But this comes perilously close to saying that the only good Muslim is a non-Muslim. Is this a winning strategy for America to pursue with the Muslim world? Is it even a sensible strategy for conservatives to adopt? Is there any realistic hope of non-Muslims like Spencer and Serge Trifkovic getting Muslims to abandon their religion? We keep hearing of the need for an Islamic Reformation, but even the Reformation was carried out by devout Christian believers, not reformers from other religions or no religion who urged Christians to abandon the central doctrines of their faith. I regard Spencer's attempt to become the Martin Luther of Islam a quixotic escapade, and conservatives who follow along in this path as naive.
So my disagreements with Spencer remain, even though I hope we can have them in civil and respectful manner.
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 1)
1. Dinesh, your sincerity and pragmatic approach is very obvious for those who are genuinely interested in promoting tolerance and peace in this world. I hope the US policy makers are paying attention to your wonderful insights into how to work with Muslims.
TruthSeeker1000 at 4:41PM on Mar 15th 2007
2. If "traditional" Muslims are so easily pushed into this radical camp by free speech and criticism...then as the saying goes "with friends like these who needs enemies?"
jack at 7:56PM on Mar 14th 2007
3. Jack beat me to it! The problem isn’t that a Muslim can’t be “moderate,” “traditional,” “nominal,” “merely cultural” – you pick your favorite Western-made label. The problem is the easy susceptibility to becoming “radical,” “fundamentalist,” “militant,” “extreme,” “fanatical” – again pick your favorite Western-made label.
I can find dozens of theories of why “we pushed them to the radical camp.” My libertarian friends say it is our interventionist foreign policy; free trade is the solution. My socialist friends say its global-capitalism. Neocons say it’s our years of supporting dictatorships. Multi-culturalists say it’s the neocon policy of insisting on a specifically Western form of liberal democracy. Anti-Semites say it’s our support for the evil Zionists. Don’t forget their hatred of Christian missionaries or worse Western hedonism!
Often we’re told it’s all of the above. Islamic critics will damn us if we do and damn us if we don’t. We’re damned for supporting Saddam in the 1980s, a secular dictator. We’re damned for boycotting Saddam in the 1990s as he took it out by starving his people. We’re damned for removing Saddam in this decade. As I said, we’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t.
One can find support for any position and its antithesis. Most people pick the “cause” that resonates with their pet complaint about our culture. This is all secondary. The problem is that they easily degenerate into barbarity and Islam plays a role. Every society or nation faces challenges of war, economic upheaval, natural disasters, etc. Healthy cultures are robust; they deal with the challenges productively and emerge to grow and heal. Spiritually impoverish cultures self-immolate and degenerate into barbarity.
One of Bernard Lewis’ theories is that the traditional autocratic Islamic regimes had limited means of command and control. Consequently, they had to negotiate and provide services in return for their power. It was a civil balance. In his narrative, the advent of modern technology enabled autocrats to maintain their power without the traditional institutions of partial-cooperation. His description of past Islamic society is very similar to some conservative’s description of feudalism and the balance between traditional “middle institution” that are neither the individual nor the total state. He even floated the notion, shortly after our entry into Iraq, of restoring the monarchy. Charming man!
All of this only confirms Islam’s unstable nature and inability to deal with challenges. It is a poor foundation for a liberal order and easily degenerates into barbarity. It’s irrelevant whether we decide that this is old (Salafi) new (totalitarian Islam) or extreme (radical). The point is that it readily attracts Muslims. From the reports I’ve received around the world from Muslims who are upset at this form of Islam, it is growing at record pace and readily attracts nominal Muslims who would otherwise remain as they were. Some damn the “Saudi money” but most damn some policy of the West.
As the Pacific Rim advances by leaps and bounds, as Israel turned a desert into a flourishing pluralistic society, as India awakes, Islam -- particularly in Arab countries and Pakistan -- disintegrates into oppressive Dark Age regimes of utmost barbarity. The problem is the susceptibility! Islam the the key to that susceptibility.
JasonPappas at 10:29AM on Mar 15th 2007
4. Dear Mr. D'Souza,
Let us set the facts straight here about Robert Spencer and Dinesh D'Souza.
It you who have been having fits as Mr. Spencer is under your skin due to psychopathies of inferiority in the uncomplex mind which you inhabit. Conservatives have more than the facts, but the entire words in your writing in insulting Republicans, the fellows at Hoover Institution and all Conservatives. If this was released the entire media would have a wonderlust fest in bringing you down. Conservatives have been gentle, considerate, kind and attempting to deal with you a self program researched problem child.
Conservatives are logical individuals from a male mindset of gathering facts, living those facts and making conclusions.
You, Mr. D'Souza, are of a female mindset. You decided you wanted to be a Conservative to empower yourself and have laid the reasoning behind it with things you read, emotions of the heart and illogic. That is why your words speak of "anger of Mr. Spencer" when he is nothing of the sort. He has been a complete father figure to you and you have played the ignorant ranting spoiled brat seeking attention.
Your ignorance overflows with every word you type. You conclude since Lewis has told you Islam started at such a date that Islam is set in stone. If you knew anything about the ancient rites, allah, Nimrod, Babel, lord of the flies, immigration patterns, you would know that Islam is old as Ninevah where it's roots formed, built upon lies and was forged upon the heresay of Muhammed of Tanakh and New Covenant teachings.
The harm which you are causing the world with your D'SouzCONservatism is manifold in enabling hatred in Isalm, spreading your own hatred toward others and hating the Conservatives who funded you.
As advice which you will not take as you are too pompous, take this down 500 steps and get off the thrill wagon of poking true intellectual giants and start considering the most important people in this world in your wife and daughter. They deserve a future where they do not have to deal with ridicule over the legacy of stupidity which you are sowing a perpetual harvest of which they will have to endure.
Mr. D'Souza you are in need of Christian psychological counselling to help you deal with your inferiority and thrill seeking. Do this for your family as they deserve better than the spectacle of shame you are acting out in attention addiction.
Respectfully and not wanting your correspondence.
LC
Lame Cherry at 1:29PM on Mar 15th 2007
5. Guys/gals, Dinesh is speaking from scholarship rather than just blind hatred of the other. Some people are so intrinsically racist that they cannot see an Indian born scholar of high repute air views that make sense.
TruthSeeker1000 at 6:24PM on Mar 15th 2007
6. D'Souza, you're ad hominem attacks and misrepresentations of Spencer are really breathtaking. Did you notice none of the people you've been condemning lately have responded in kind?
PRCAlDude at 3:04PM on Mar 16th 2007