D’Souza’s argument self-explodes

Robert Spencer is perhaps even more appalled by Dinesh D’Souza’s ludicrous and dangerous thesis than I am. He has a lengthy article rebutting a D’Souza interview in which D’Souza argues that historic Islam was never radical or threatening. “There is no ‘inherent conquering spirit’ in Islam, any more than there is one in Christianity,” D’Souza baldly asserts, sounding like Bernard Lewis on speed. Spencer goes into a lengthy historical disquisition showing the falsity of that statement.

Near the end of the interview, D’Souza says something that reveals the total self-contradiction at the heart of his thesis. He says that the traditional Muslims want to oppose the radical Muslims, but are driven to unite with them out of the shared conviction that Islam is threatened. Therefore if we Westerners get rid of our cultural radicalism and express our support for traditional Islam, the traditional Muslims will feel comfortable with us and ally with us against the radical Muslims. Conversely, if we Westerners harshly criticize Islam, as we’re doing at present, the traditional Muslims will feel that Islam is threatened and rush to make common cause with the radicals.

But, as Spencer points out, if the moderates really opposed the radicals, why would they feel threatened by the West’s critical statements about the radical nature of Islam? They would welcome that attack, seeing the West as their ally against the radicalism that they, the moderates, also want to oppose.

It’s a good point by Spencer, and unanswerable. But there is even more to it. First, let’s quote D’Souza directly:

What unites the radical and the traditional Muslims is not merely opposition to American values or culture, but a deep conviction that their religion is threatened. This is their unifying slogan: “Islam is under attack.”

What D’Souza is really saying is that the bottom line for the traditionalist Muslims is intra-Muslim solidarity. But if that’s the case, how could the traditionalists ever join with us against the radicals? The moment they saw our anti-radical policies, or the first time they heard any criticism by us of radical Islam that hit too close to home for the moderates’ sensibility, the moderates’ instinct would be to rally to the side of their radical brethren. What kind of allies could these moderates be, if we must walk on tiptoes to avoid the slightest implication that we are attacking Islam? “Oh, no, our traditional Muslim allies, when we attack sharia, when we challenge the belief that converts from Islam must die, when we screen immigration applicants for devout belief in the war verses of the Koran and the Hadiths, we’re not attacking Islam. We’re attacking radical Islam.”

Think that will mollify them?

It makes no sense for D’Souza to state that moderates and radicals are joined together in the deep conviction that their religion is threatened by the West, and then add that if the West attacks the radicals while making nice with the moderates, the moderates will join with the West against the radicals, instead of joining with the radicals against the West! D’Souza’s argument has self-exploded.

Here is the last part of the interview followed by Spencer’s comment. The whole article is worth reading, however.

D’Souza: The Islamic world is divided into traditional Muslims and radical Muslims. The traditional Muslims are the ones who have practiced Islam in the way it has been practiced since the days of Muhammad. The Islamic radicals are a new force that has gained power in the last few decades. My point is that we cannot win the war on terror without driving a wedge between these two groups. The reason is that the radical Muslims are recruiting from the pool of traditional Muslims. So no matter how many radicals America captures or kills, it’s no use if twice as many traditional Muslims join the radical camp. What unites the radical and the traditional Muslims is not merely opposition to American values or culture, but a deep conviction that their religion is threatened. This is their unifying slogan: “Islam is under attack.” What differentiates the two groups is that the radicals want to fight a jihad against America, using any means necessary, including terrorism, while the traditionalists would prefer to find a different approach.

tts: What should America do?

D’Souza: We should show them the other America, which is conservative and traditional America. When Muslims look at America, all they see is Hollywood and family breakdown. They don’t see the Americans who work hard, look after their families, and go to church. If traditional Muslims understood that there is a part of America that shares its traditional values, and that there are Americans who are working hard to combat the depravities of American society, then this would go a long way to diminish their attraction to radical and terrorist strategies. They will see, for the first time, that they have potential allies in Americans who share their respect for traditional values, and who have no problem with Muslims living by those values in their own countries.

Attacks on Islam, the religion, or on the founder of the religion are going to have the effect of alienating traditional Muslims and pushing them into the radical camp. The radicals are going to say, “See, we’ve always told you that Islam is the West’s real target. That’s what they want to get rid of.” So it’s very imprudent for us to blame Islam as a whole, even if Islam is to blame. But as a matter of fact Islam is not to blame. Remember that Islam has been around for 1300 years. It’s absurd to blame the prophet Muhammad or the Koran for something that’s quite recent.

Spencer’s comment:

Yet the jihadists routinely point to Muhammad and the Qur’an to justify their actions. We must ignore this because it will offend moderates? But why should moderates be offended if we point out the elements of Islam that they reject, or should reject, if their moderation is to have any substance and be able to withstand the challenge from jihadists?

Posted by Lawrence Auster at January 20, 2007 01:11 AM | Send