|
Why liberals cannot allow themselves to see the reality of Islam
Writing at Tech Central Station, Lee Harris is shocked and disturbed that the Iranians have outlawed Western music, particularly Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, which he sees as the highest expression of the Western vision. Voicing an old-fashioned liberal idealism, Harris gets carried away with his ode to the Ode to Joy, the Schiller poem about the Brotherhood of Man that Beethoven set to music in the final movement of the Ninth. Harris conceives of the “higher truth” conveyed by Western music in terms of this Brotherhood of Man. He is very specific about what this means: “Note that Schiller does not say all Germans, or all Europeans, or all Christians, or all Westerners will become brothers—when he says all men he means all men. He is preaching in his poem that doctrine of the brotherhood of the human race, and it is a brotherhood that transcends all ethnic, cultural, and religious divides.” But the Iranian leaders, Harris complains, oppose such a Brotherhood of Man transcending all boundaries, because they only believe in a Brotherhood of Muslims. Of course, as we know, it’s not just Iranian crazies who reject the liberal idea of the Brotherhood of Man, but all believing Muslims. But if Muslims reject, as a fundamental religious doctrine, the very idea of the Brotherhood of Man, then they can’t effectively be a part of the Brotherhood of Man, can they? And if Muslims can’t be a part of the Brotherhood of Man, then the Brotherhood of man permanently excludes at least a fifth of the human race, doesn’t it? And if the Brotherhood of Man permanently excludes at least a fifth of the human race, then the Brotherhood of Man is invalidated, isn’t it? And if the Brotherhood of man is invalidated, that means the end of the liberal dream of a single humanity transcending all ethnic, cultural, and religious divides, doesn’t it? And this is why liberal Westerners cannot allow themselves to face the truth about Islam. To acknowledge what Muslims themselves really believe—what they are commanded by their religion to believe—would mean the end of the liberal hope of transcending all ethnic, cultural, religious, and other boundaries. Therefore liberals (so long as they remain liberals) will never admit that the problems of Islam, such as its rejection of Western universalism, are intrinsic to Islam. Harris himself blames the banning of Western music not on Islamic teachings, but on the current Iranian president and his regime:
Let the Supreme Cultural Revolutionary Council do its worst; it can never hope to erase either Beethoven’s sublime melody or the poetry of humanitarianism with which it will forever be associated. As long as men can hum to themselves, it will continue to stir men’s souls and to elevate them above all the pettiness that divides us. It will remain long after Ahmadinejad has become merely a footnote in the history of our dark and troubled times. Harris has glimpsed the fundamental incompatibility between Islam and liberalism. But by applying this insight to only a handful of Iranian fanatics, instead of to Islam as such, he can go on happily believing in the ultimate victory of the Brotherhood of Man, as well as in the ultimate success of President Bush’s democratize-Islam policy, which is the political expression of that ideal. Spencer Warren adds:
Lee Harris has a superficial view of this greatest of all symphonies. Like all great music, it is beyond words, and to reduce it to the Schiller poem employed in the final movement is wrong. This music is explosive—it soars higher than any other symphony, and is a testament to the unconquerable human spirit—of which Western civilization is the exemplar. I think that is the (subconcious) reason it is a threat to the Muslim tyrants.LA replies:
Exacto. He reduces the music to, well, formulaic liberal ideology. Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 22, 2005 02:06 PM | Send Email entry |