Questionable Motives

August 2, 2016

What motivates ISIS?

Filed under: Uncategorized — tildeb @ 4:24 pm

In a word, Islamism.

In response to all those who refuse to name the core principle that motivates those who commit violence in the name of ISIS – religion – comes a very clear and succinct article from the propaganda arm of ISIS. The primary motivation for this organization to front is hatred of non belief towards establishing Islamism that will not and cannot be moderated or mitigated by liberal appeasement of the One True Faith in all areas of human concern (Islamism) nor denied by some magical number of bombs and bullets aimed at those who represent the Caliphate.

Listen for yourself:

 

What does correctly identifying the motivation for ISIS mean in practical terms?

It means altering our policies – foreign and domestic – to align with a real and not imagined solution: policies and procedures against Islamism.

Now that we actually know what the battleground is, namely, the attempt to make Islam supreme in all areas of human concern through Islamism, we have to consider how best to neutralize it. Short of a species wide revelation that all faith-based belief including the religious kind is inherently pernicious and divisive and should be rejected outright by all reasonable and sane people (if only), I think the next best solution is to liberalize and reform Islam by supporting change from within rather than continuing this failed attempt to impose a violent suppression from without.

What does that look like?

If Islam is to survive as a socially acceptable religious branch within the family of competing human belief systems, then its adherents have to come to terms with the superiority in the public domain of fundamental Enlightenment values. These values – individual legal autonomy, legal equality, dignity of personhood, shared rights and freedoms – must supersede religious values in the public square. That means Islam itself must undergo a public reformation… a reformation that must be championed and not undermined by Western liberal secular democracies.

The adversaries of ISIS – and ISIS’ unwavering, intolerant, unforgiving, brutal promotion of Islamism by whatever means necessary must be first and foremost be disowned by its most likely victims: reasonable Muslims. It falls to reasonable Muslims to be the front line defense against Islamism, reasonable Muslims who must demonstrate a  compatibility between and allegiance to a private version of Islam – an anti-Islamism – within a secular public arena.

Western policies must be targeted at promoting private domain Islam, publicly supporting liberal Muslims, reformist Muslims, who agree to this role, who advocate for supporting those Muslims who support Enlightenment values over and above all other considerations including Islam.

Private polices to help bring this about belongs to all of us. It falls to all of us to go after – meaning with loud and sustained reasonable criticism – Islamist apologists (they are legion and often led by the likes of a Reza Aslan, a Glenn Greenwald, a Karen Armstrong)  who blame everyone and everything except Islam itself for producing Islamism. This includes criticizing anyone who calls for the appeasement of criticism of public domain tolerance for Islamist goals like sharia courts and religious schooling, criticism of those who tolerate and excuse and even champion anti-Enlightenment Islamist practices… including Muslims (duh)! This means criticizing those people who like to sling the term ‘Islamaphobe’ at anyone who criticizes Islamism in the public domain. These apologosts, these enablers, of Islamism Creep are many, and they currently enjoy much very stupid and shortsighted support among Western leaders, academics, media personalities and journalists, and misguided voters who falsely equate criticism of Islamism with intolerance, who falsely equate support for liberal Muslims who wish to reform Islam as undermining respect for Islam. Fighting against this necessary reformation and aiding the spread of Islamism even by tacit silence is undermining the very foundation of the ability to do so. Offering respect and tolerance for Islamists who wish to establish the organs of the Caliphate in every part of the public domain everywhere and over everyone is an attack against all of us.

We need to wake up.

Advertisements

21 Comments »

  1. Good to see you publishing again.

    Islam is, today, essentially insidious. Christianity was the same from 500 CE to about 1300 CE. What pacified Christian barberism was education. I’d say the same thing will pacify Islam.

    Of course, we could just hope the rabbi’s come out and make a collective public statement, rather than individual confessions… but you never know. We can hope.

    Comment by john zande — August 2, 2016 @ 6:29 pm | Reply

  2. I agree with

    its adherents have to come to terms with the superiority in the public domain of fundamental Enlightenment values. These values – individual legal autonomy, legal equality, dignity of personhood, shared rights and freedoms – must supersede religious values in the public square. That means Islam itself must undergo a public reformation… a reformation that must be championed and not undermined by Western liberal secular democracies.

    but it does seem to me we are preaching what we don’t do. In many places, which are not exactly Christian theocracies, the churches seem to have a very marked influence on policy. It is not just practiced as a private affair.

    Comment by makagutu — August 3, 2016 @ 6:10 am | Reply

    • Not just what we don’t do but what we won’t do: support policies that remove religious privilege (and its effects) from the public domain. The battle against ISIS is the same battle against any and all religious incursions into the public domain. You can’t battle one without battling the other, and this is huge challenge all of us must face no matter how religious we – or how seemingly benign the local popular religion – may appear to be. The neutering of ISIS is the same as the neutering of, say, the Catholic Church or the local evangelical one: a directed and intentional move by government policy to get religion out of the public and into the private domain.

      Comment by tildeb — August 3, 2016 @ 6:36 am | Reply

      • Seneca said the leaders see religion as useful. The church makes it easy to subjugate a population and those in power exploit this. It is simply because of this they maybe unwilling to have the state declare that worship/ belief is a private affair.

        Comment by makagutu — August 3, 2016 @ 7:32 am

  3. There a good article over at Quillette by Valerie Tarico on the need to critique religious ideas. Worth the read.

    Comment by tildeb — August 4, 2016 @ 10:26 am | Reply

  4. I don’t think that it is Islam per se that is the problem, but the seeming stranglehold that the Wahabi (sp?) sect has over them. A violent, fundamentalist sect, it has been growing in power since it first appeared 4-500 years ago, particularly in those parts of Arabia over which the House of Saud held (and holds) sway. Vast oil wealth has given Saudi Arabia the ability to spead its brand of Islam throughout the world.

    Comment by Gordon MacDonald — August 4, 2016 @ 9:24 pm | Reply

    • In the main, I agree with you. Wahabism is a huge problem when backed by so much oil money.

      But here’s the twin problem: the Koran does indeed command that sharia be implemented as the law, that the words of the Prophet – no mater how ianti-intellectual, anti-scientific, anti-human and intolerant of dissent they may be – be held in the highest regard, that the fundamental tenets of submission be followed or risk being identified as a blasphemer and apostate, a kafir. Combined with these explicit instructions is the idea that one can only be a good Muslim by how closely one submits to the will of Allah as revealed in the Koran through the Prophet Mohamed.

      So liberal Muslims have a very hard row to hoe; suggesting that there should be acceptable interpretations can itself be shown in the Koran to be kafir and that anyone who disagrees cannot by definition be a good Muslim… so why should anyone pay attention.

      I think the solution has to do with understanding the difference between the spirit of the writing and the literal reading of it. It is possible to make these two incompatible frames compatible but that is the hard job of moderate liberal Muslims trying to live not in the 8th Century when a literal reading was appropriate for believers but the 21st when the the spirit must take precedence to become a religion of peace.

      Comment by tildeb — August 4, 2016 @ 10:29 pm | Reply

  5. When you have The President of the United States saying ridiculous nonsense like this “ISIL speaks for no religion… and no faith teaches people to massacre innocents. No just God would stand for what they did yesterday and what they do every single day. ISIL has no ideology of any value to human beings. Their ideology is bankrupt…. “, we see that we’re going to have an uphill battle. Only 1 of the current presidential candidates speaks candidly about this topic – and unfortunately, he’s a sociopath, a pathological liar, an ignoramus and partially unhinged in every other regard.

    Comment by Ashley — August 5, 2016 @ 3:26 pm | Reply

    • Just so, Ashley.

      And Sam Harris has been pointing out for years that it’s a sign of great trouble and confusion in the Left when only the extreme Right is willing to even talk about the role of religion in extremist actions. Of course, they get it wrong, too, but at least they’re knocking on the right door.

      Comment by tildeb — August 5, 2016 @ 3:37 pm | Reply

      • I said this to my friends a few weeks ago – I wonder if anyone in any of the European countries – like say, specifically France and Germany, are regretting their immigration policy right about now? That maybe they should have been a bit more vigilant in their screening process? I wonder if they can even bring themselves to see what the root cause (religion – Islam specifically) is of all this violence?

        Comment by Ashley — August 9, 2016 @ 8:39 am

  6. Sam Harris has a podcast talking about this article and other powerfully illuminating testimonials in Dabiq and what it means for our response to it. Well worth the time.

    Comment by tildeb — August 18, 2016 @ 8:51 pm | Reply

    • A fantasy world of gratuitous religious bullshit that strips all the value out of life

      Great line. Great podcast. Thanks for posting it. (i didn’t hear, though, where he discussed this article?)

      Went through Dabiq. Read it, thinking, what year is it?

      I think now, more than ever, that rabbi’s have an obligation to stand up, and as one voice, declare the Pentateuch myth.

      Comment by john zande — August 19, 2016 @ 9:34 am | Reply

      • Yeah, I thought it was one his best.

        Sorry to be unclear about articles. Harris comments at length not just about the ‘Why We Hate You’ article but the testimonial of the Finnish convert and how her motivation makes incoherent the various reasons for ISIS she has wholeheartedly embraced that pointedly refuses to acknowledge its religious core.

        And yes, it’s not like the rabbis could piss off the imams more than they already are (the Koran having adopted much of the Pentateuch as a science and history guide that we know is myth). such an admission would be a good starting point.

        Comment by tildeb — August 19, 2016 @ 10:51 am

      • I’ve spoken to a few rabbi’s about whether they’d be willing to do so, and they all seemed certainly open to the idea. Just need a Ring Master, and if you thought herding cats was difficult…

        Comment by john zande — August 19, 2016 @ 11:19 am

  7. Can you really use the words ‘reasonable’ and ‘Muslim’ in the same sentence?

    Comment by Argus — August 21, 2016 @ 5:45 am | Reply

    • Yes, I think so… in the same way one can use the terms ‘reasonable’ and ‘Catholic’ in the same sentence.

      Comment by tildeb — August 21, 2016 @ 8:51 am | Reply

  8. Hi Tildeb,
    Since there’s no contact button, I’m putting this comment (nothing to do with the post; sorry about that) on this thread. Just wanted to give you a shout-out for the time and trouble you went to on our ‘friend’s post of late. Although it seems that your excellent points fell on stone-deaf ears, I think it’s worth observing that 14,000 subscribers of his can’t all be of the same mind. To some of them (even if it’s a handful, and I’m optimistic that the numbers are higher) who read with open and enquiring minds, your words were no doubt thought-provoking. You are appreciated. 🙂 A Maritime salute to you!

    Comment by carmen — September 2, 2016 @ 12:24 pm | Reply

    • I assume we’re talking about JB here, to which I thoroughly agree with your comment, Carmen.

      Comment by john zande — September 2, 2016 @ 5:01 pm | Reply

  9. Thanks Carmer. Back atcha. from the sweltering central regions (actually, today being one of the first nice days this summer).

    Comment by tildeb — September 2, 2016 @ 12:46 pm | Reply

    • We’re right on the shore so we seem to always get a breeze, especially when the tide changes! 🙂 ( Oh, and the Maritime salute doesn’t involve kissing a codfish but you can rest assured there’s alcohol involved. . . )

      Comment by carmen — September 2, 2016 @ 1:15 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: