Re the FrontPage symposium, ho hum, here we go again—the never ending hunt for the mythical moderate Muslim tribe.
This ongoing discussion since 9/11 on the existence moderate Islam or Muslims, as opposed to just Islam and Muslims, is predicated on the belief, or fervent hope, that moderate Muslims will somehow be able to civilise Islam, such that it no longer poses an existential threat to us. There seems to be no end to this debate. Let us therefore consider two scenarios where moderate Islam does actually exist, and there are sufficient numbers of Muslims to show this to be the case.
Case 1. Let us consider the situation that moderate Muslims prove that the correct interpretation of Islam was the moderate one (whatever that is). They even go further and make the changes in their teachings of the Koran and the Jihad. Such an outcome would no doubt come as a great relief to all. But I counter that all such changes were being done merely to protect the ummah while it grows at ever-increasing pace in the West. Once a near majority is achieved, that future generation of Muslims will simply revoke any changes and return to the traditions of the Koran. They will even praise this generation of Muslims for having done what was necessary to protect Islam.
The larger the number of Muslims, moderate or radical, the greater will be the demands for Sharia, and politicians will rush to accommodate that demographic. The distinction between moderate Muslims and radical Muslims is therefore meaningless; it is of no help to us.
Case 2. Let us suppose that moderate Muslims came out of hiding and utterly trounce their Jihadi cousins on what constitutes “true” Islam i.e., the moderate, non-violent one. Having got rid of “radical” Islam’s main reasons for waging Jihad would not be the end of the matter. Moderate Muslims will demand their price for having kept Jihad, the fundamental directive of Islam, at bay. That price will again be the implementation of Sharia, initially for Muslims anyway. This will come about since moderate Muslims have not abandoned Islam, but are still dutiful Muslims (we will end up with a kind of permanent social coalition government of non-Muslims and moderate Muslims). Even if we agree to this, the “radicals” will still be out there, and amongst us. To keep them at bay, moderate Muslims will be forced to make ever-increasing demands for greater Islamisation. “Good cop bad cop” scenarios come to mind. It will never end.
Placing the future of Western civilisation in the hands of Muslims by making an alliance or coalition with moderate Muslims will be a big mistake,—of the same magnitude as allowing Muslims to settle in the West—since future peace will be dependent on the good will of “moderate” Muslims. In other words, we would have placed the future of our civilisation in the hands of Muslims, in the hope that they do not become less “moderate” in the future.
Yet again, the distinction between moderate Muslims and radical Muslims, or the theoretical existence of a moderate Islam existing somewhere out there, continues to delay the day when action needs to be taken.
Meanwhile the demographic Jihad, the most pernicious one, continues. What funds and generates the Jihad within, is the total number of Muslims in an Infidel nation. The distinction between radical and moderate Islam, or between radical and moderate Muslims, is meaningless.
To reduce this self-inflicted existential threat, we have to start reducing the Muslim population in the West—that much is obvious. The real problem is what political and social measures we need to make now, to arrive at a social or political juncture where measures to start reducing the Muslim population in the West becomes politically possible.
Who knows? If Muslims are isolated from the West, it may even lead to the genuine reformation of Islam, and thus release millions of Muslims from the yoke of Islam. At present, though, we are heading toward a civil war.