Finger-pointing at Muslim Extremists

Last updated on: May 9, 2013 at 6:20 am by Faithful Democrats

Finger-pointing at Muslim Extremists 2013-05-09T06:20:03-06:00 Faithful Democrats

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The article below is a response to an LA Times

Editorial by Sam Harris, “Head in the Sand Liberals:”

Sam Harris claims that Muslim fanaticism is a threat to the
world, and displays woeful ignorance of the facts. Religious fanaticism is not
a product of one faith over another, but thrives only under specific political
conditions. Four factors need to be present for fanatical faith to thrive – be
it of the Christian or Muslim variety. First, a group must be oppressed. In our
nation’s history, Southern religious fanaticism flourished in the wake of the
Civil War. As the South tried to get back on its feet, people flocked to hear
religious leaders that preached hell and punishment for the South’s oppressors .
In the case of Iran,
the Islamic fundamentalism flourished as a backlash against the Shah, who
ruthlessly oppressed his people.

The other necessary ingredient for religious fanaticism to
flourish is the absence of legitimate moderate voices. In the case of the
Israel-Palestine conflict, those advocating peace are called naive. In the wake
of Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, Palestinians who advocate negotiation
with Israel
are thought of as soft. Similarly, Israelis who want to sit at table with
Palestinian negotiators are considered out of touch with reality. Whenever a
society loses sight of the middle, you’ll get religious fanaticism on both
sides of the fence. The fact is any
religion can be easily twisted to give rage an air of legitimacy, to provide a
focus to extremism that, when people are oppressed, seems quite reasonable and
appropriate. It’s hard to advocate peace if those who do so are dead in a ditch
the following morning. Similarly, in Iraq, extremism flourishes in the
absence of workable moderate solutions. Since US
policy in Iraq
is failing, the entire playing field is now in the hands of the most hard-line Sunnis
and Shiites, ripe for payback after years of repression under Saddam. This is
not a problem with Islam. It’s a power vacuum that parallels what happened in
the former Yugoslavia after
Tito fell, what happened to the Biafrans in Nigeria
and the Tutsis in Rwanda.
The violence has to do with a response to oppression, not the core values of
one faith or another.

Let’s put this in a more familiar context. What if, after
having the presidency stolen from him in 2004, Al Gore had done what Mexican
candidate Obrearor is doing. What if he stuck by his guns, set up an
alternative government, hardened his positions and stance, as well as the
passions of his supporters. Imagine a military response, a violent one. Imagine
tit-for-tat going on for a couple of years, with increasingly violent
reprisals. You don’t think Southern churches would be full of militaristic
doomsday prophets, men ready to excommunicate anyone who didn’t take the
hardest line? Of course they would be. And the North would point at them and
say, “You can’t talk to those people. All they understand is violence.”

So those are the conditions that give rise to fanatical
faith. A society devoid of legitimate democratic institutions, where violence
and retribution are so severe that only the hardest line makes sense.

There’s another condition necessary for religious fanaticism
to really take root. As Chris Rock says, look for the white guy with the money.
In the 1950’s the US
had a choice to either support the pan-Arab social democrat movement of Nassar,
or support the authoritarian Islamic Wahhabism of Saudi Arabia. You can guess
what America
chose. Nassar was pushed into the arms of the Soviet Union, and became the
second in a long line of Arab Terror Boys that each successive American
President used to justify military action (the first was Iran’s democratic and popular
reformer Mussegadeh, whom the CIA overthrew in 1954).

In truth, America
likes it this way. Our foreign policy demands that Less Developed Nations be
ruled by strongmen, rather than democrats. That’s because authoritarian leaders
can deliver the goods, and democrats, who must consult with their own people,
are unpredictable partners. (What if the poor people in a non-industrialized
nation begin to demand fair wages? The price of coffee goes up, the price of
leather goes up. Can’t have that). In
the case of Saudi Arabia, oil
was at stake, and America
found itself in league with the most oppressive, fanatical voice in the Arab
world, the hardline dynasty that gave us Osama Bin Laden. We didn’t mind, as
long as we got the oil. In Congo,
where diamonds and copper were at stake, America preferred the authoritarian
General Mobotu (one of history’s most diabolical figures), to the reform-minded
Patrice Lumumba, whom the CIA overthrew in 1962.

So that’s where religious fanaticism takes hold: in nations
with weak democratic institutions, and leaders more interested in appeasing
world powers, than lifting up their own people. Where freedom of expression is stifled, blind-faith,
martyrdom-seeking fanatics will find fertile soil.

The final thing you need for religious fanaticism to
flourish is writers who are willing to demonize the other side. Writers like
Sam Harris who, rather than remind us that people all over the world are just people,
that the vast, vast majority of Islamic worshippers are just as peace-loving as
anyone else, Sam is busy revving up the folks at home for a Holy War of nuclear
proportions. He would do better to point a finger at the Ayatollahs in our own
midst, rather than feed the Presidential war machine with more justifications
for its election-saving invasion of Iran.

Reader Blogs

Previous Post

September 18, 2006

Being Straight Makes Me a Better Christian?

Next Post

September 19, 2006 Family? Values?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category About Us About Us Action Center Advertise Ask a Theologian Ask a Theologian Blogs Books Campaign Blog Candidate Spotlights Commentary Donate Facebook Featured Writers Fellows Fellows From the Pulpit General Information Hillary Clinton Interfaith Blog Latest Media Center Media Center Media Center MyBlog MyBlog News Newsflash Newsflashes Our Team Reader Blogs RSS Sermon of the Week Shop Social Networking Static Items Support Talking Points Test blogs The Basics Theology Uncategorized YouTube

Select a Month November 2020 October 2020 February 2020 August 2019 July 2018 July 2017 March 2017 February 2017 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 June 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 January 2006 August 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What is the book of songs and prayers in the Bible called?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Genesis Psalms Proverbs Matthew