Dean Esmay On Islam

Dean Esmay got an Insta-link to a bizarre post in which he called on Michelle Malkin specifically and conservatives generally to demonstrate their conscience with respect to Islam:

Question for Michelle Malkin: Does the Conscience of a Conservative Still Exist?

I'm publicly calling out Michelle Malkin, someone whom I often disagree with but usually respect. I hope she will think about it and respond thoughtfully and not angrily or flippantly.

...

Recently, I noticed that some of Iran's unelected and illegitimate leaders have said that Islam is incompatible with democracy. Gary Metz has more right here.

This very statement--that Islam is incompatible with democracy--is why I fight so hard with many of my friends on the Right: accepting that statement means we have to declare war on the entire Muslim world if we're to hope for human freedom to survive.

To me it would be akin to, in World War II, declaring ourselves at war with "Germanic People," "Latin People," and "Southeast Asians." Not Nazi Germany and Mussolini's Italy and Tojo's Japan. No, we would have declared that we were at war with anyone of Germanic or Latin descent, and anyone who happened to be short, yellow, and slant-eyed (to put it rudely and crassly).

There are some on the Right who believe this. But I think they're badly hurting our efforts. I think such people on the Right are hurting the war effort and not helping it.

...I'm making an open appeal to your conscience, Michelle Malkin, and to the conscience of conservatives everywhere: shouldn't you start making a distinction between Muslims who hate us and want to kill us, and Muslims who believe in freedom, democracy, and religious tolerance?

If the comment moderator at Dean's site ever sets me free, my response will appear roughly as follows:

(1) "Germanic" is an ethnic identity and hard to change; "Muslim" represents a belief system, which may be changeable.  Would it have been OK with Dean if the Allied goal in WWII was to kill or re-educate all the Nazis?

(2) Prior to the Reformation and the Enlightenment there was a serious question as to whether Christianity was compatible with democracy.  Now, Western societies have struck a balance amongst religion, art, science, politics, and the law.  However, many have noted that Islam has not undergone a similar transformation - does Dean allow for a discussion of the implications of this?  Max Boot follows the Pope into that very minefield and is optimistic about islam.

(3) Karzai of Afghanistan was an honored guest at a Bush State of the Union and was lauded (was it only yesterday) at both Hot Air and Ms. Malkin's site for his push-back against an AP reporter.  yes, we think he is one of the good guys.

Michell Malkin responds and rounds up others; Donald Sensing does a much better job of presenting my answer, but please pardon my redundancy.

And in the comments at Mr. Sensing's site was this gem:

Somebody, somewhere in all of the discussions spawned by Esmay’s post, has noted that the question is improperly framed: Islam is perfectly compatible with democracy: A majority-Muslim community can vote in Islamic law and live happily ever after. What Islam is *not* compatible with is individual liberty, the idea that the individual posseses rights that transcend the powers of the government under which he lives. *That’s* the real conflict.

And To Be Fair - there is also this comment from a regular at the Esmay site:

I see Instapundit linked this post. In case there are Instapundit readers who are new to Dean's world, and who bothered to read down this far into the comments, let me assure you that Dean's comments in this thread are not typical of Dean's normal posting style, nor are they typical of the level of discourse that usually graces these pages.

I think it is a mistake to judge a person by the most ghastly thing they have written, and it is certainly not a standard by which I would care to be judged.

Comments

[Phelps]

As someone who is a regular reader and commenter over there, I would say that this sort of behavior is not normal over there, but distressingly regular. If you know the difference.

[BumperStickerist]

Ix-nay on the Esmay

-

[Neo]

I have a problem with calling Islam a "belief system".

Islam's one-way street of proselytizing by the sword, without possibility of disbelief doesn't create a "belief system."
It's more akin to a religious political movement than a religion.

Advocating violence as a path (or the alternative) to belief, doesn't create belief, only fear. Without true belief, there is no religion, only convenience. The convenience of the proselytizer who is too lazy or ignorant to create real belief within those who he/she is attempting to proselytize.

[Oev]

Tribalism appears to be the answer.

Do Islamists beleive in visions and seeing with their eyes closed? Why would we have a conscience for those?

[rightnumberone]

I'll comment here, since Dean's site is being Insta-hammered.

The basic question seems to be: Is Islam compatible with democracy (as we know it).

For the answer, we must ask the Muslims. One of my favorite experts is the internet-connected "Ask The Imam."

Here's what he has to say about Islam and Democracy:

"The common form of democracy prevalent at the moment is representative democracy, in which the citizens do not exercise their right of legislating and issuing political decrees in person, but rather through representatives chosen by them. The constitution of a democratic country will be largely influenced by the needs and wants of its people. Thus, if its people want casinos, bars, gay marriages, prostitution, etc. then with sufficient public pressure, all these vices can be accommodated for. From this, it becomes simple to understand that there can never be scope for a democratic rule from the Islamic point of view." - Mufti Ebrahim Desai

So Dean, there you have it, direct from the internet's best-connected Mufti. "There can never be democratic rule, from an Islamic point of view."

Islam is incompatible with democracy not because I say it is so, but BECAUSE THEY SAY IT IS SO.

In a democracy, we can institute gay marriage if we choose, or legalize strip bars if we choose, allow the Indians to construct casinos if we choose.

How could such a system ever be compatible with Islam?

[Semanticleo]

Is it too early to go OT on this insipid
post?

Woodweird tries to regain some lost ground
on his iconoclasm;

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/28/60minutes/main2047607.shtml

[Jud]

Ask the Imam. Did'nt he know the terrorists who were going to blow things up in Canada or was it some other ones?

casinos, bars, gay marriages, prostitution? I don't see that happening.

[Gabriel Sutherland]

Look, TE Lawrence did for Arabs what they could not do for themselves in a thousand years to fight back against the Turks. Lawrence had to find a way to unite Arab tribes in order to push back. Was that a period where the British Crown was looking at Islam and saying "this system has to be changed"? Does Esmay think this was the view of the British Crown?

Today the Turks and British have strong relations. Certainly much better than in the days of TE Lawrence. And I'd beg for anyone to show me if Islam has declined one iota in that same period.

A balance of interests is what Esmay wants to pursue. That is what we are pursuing. But the days of Lawrence are over. Rather than the Turks fighting the Arabs, today is more like the Turks sending suicide bombers into London to fight against the Arabs.

Substitute Israel for the Arabs, the Arabs for the Turks, and the Americans for the British and you basically see the same story unfolding where a balance of interests are pursued. But today the dangers are far greater by means of modern transport.

[Appalled Moderate]

numberone:

Seems to me you could substitute the word Christian for Islam in your paragraph, and sound like a lot of Catholic apologists for Franco back in 1936. Just because this guy says what he says does not mean he has the only interpretation of Islam. It would surprise me if you could not derive something like this from the precepts of Islam.

Moreover, man, who was created for freedom, bears within himself the wound of original sin, which constantly draws him towards evil and puts him in need of redemption. Not only is this doctrine an integral part of Christian revelation; it also has great hermeneutical value insofar as it helps one to understand human reality. Man tends towards good, but he is also capable of evil. He can transcend his immediate interest and still remain bound to it. The social order will be all the more stable, the more it takes this fact into account and does not place in opposition personal interest and the interests of society as a whole, but rather seeks ways to bring them into fruitful harmony. In fact, where self-interest is violently suppressed, it is replaced by a burdensome system of bureaucratic control which dries up the wellsprings of initiative and creativity. When people think they possess the secret of a perfect social organization which makes evil impossible, they also think that they can use any means, including violence and deceit, in order to bring that organization into being. Politics then becomes a "secular religion" which operates under the illusion of creating paradise in this world. But no political society — which possesses its own autonomy and laws55 — can ever be confused with the Kingdom of God. The Gospel parable of the weeds among the wheat (cf. Mt 13:24-30; 36-43) teaches that it is for God alone to separate the subjects of the Kingdom from the subjects of the Evil One, and that this judgment will take place at the end of time. By presuming to anticipate judgment here and now, man puts himself in the place of God and sets himself against the patience of God.

This is John Paul II. He's not talking about Iran. Really. It only sounds like he is. But he makes the perfect Religious argument against theocracy -- man is a sinner -- how can it be known he will always speak for God?

[Neo]

I don't usually peruse Dean's World (I don't like to sign up in order to comment), so I have to ask anybody who does visit it often ..

Is Dean usually so free with the expletives ?

I don't have virgin ears or eyes, but I really don't enjoy reading anything that screams with the F-word or overuses words like "traitor" (I have a high almost legal threshold for unpatriotic and traitor).

[rightnumberone]

Appalled,

Let's remember the central beef Dean Ismay chastised Michelle Malkin for:

That we on the right are "claiming" that Islam is incompatible with Democracy (his suggestion being that this isn't true) and that we do so for some nefarious reason.

Ask ANY Islamic scholar this question. They will all give you the same answer.

It is the Muslims who will tell you that Islam is incompatible with democracy.

The reasoning is immaculate. Why else would they fight us if not to rid the world of this evil democracy.

[Neo]

Bill Clinton takes Rev. Jesse Jackson's message of opportunism international.

AND in a damning indictment of George Bush and his quickness to identify enemies, he [Clinton] urged understanding even for someone as vilified as the holocaust-denier, Iranian President Ahmadinejad.

[Appalled Moderate]

Numberone:

Try this site:

http://islamlib.com/en/page.php?page=archives&mode=author&id=1

It is Indonesian (so the English gets a little peculiar here and there), but it is an effort to put Islam into a democratic context.

I am no Muslim and have not read the Koran. But the concept of free will -- which is the source of all religious support of Democracy -- does not just belong to us Christians.

[noah]

No muslim can deny without risking death the plain commands of the Koran, This makes them an unstable ally at best...an enemy at worst.

[rightnumberone]

Appalled,

I will agree with you that the concept of free will does not just belong to us Christians, but it doesn't belong to Muslims.

That's why protected non-believers are "dhimmis" subject to a tax.

It's not free will. It's taxed. There's a cost to be a non-Muslim.

I encourage you to read the Qur An. It is the manual from which Muslims are receiving their instructions.

[JM Hanes]

I'm sorry, but can anyone tell me why Esmay is calling out Malkin for something asserted by the Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi? What strikes me as even stranger is that in my experience the dismissal of democratic aspirations in the Middle East has largely issued from the left, not the right. It's not the right that's been claiming that democracy can't compete with tribalism in Iraq, or theocracy exported from Iran, or that we & the Iraqis were better off with a strongman like Saddam in charge.

The only Muslims that the left insists don't hate us for our democratic values are the Islamist jihadis. As far as I can tell, the left believes that religious believers of almost any ilk are a threat to democracy -- with the possible exception of jaundiced Episcopalians.

[boris]

Not everybody in Stalinist USSR was a communist and not everyone in the communist party wanted to take over the world. Some probably just wanted an easier life at the head of the line. Still it was fair to say that Stalin's communism wanted to take over the world.

AFAIC that's about the situation with Islam.

[boris]

BTW Stalin's communism wasn't very compatible with democracy either.

[Sue]

Osama bin Bush or so says Meteor Blades at EW's site. I am speechless...that doesn't happen very often.

[PeterUK]

Bulletin for Scrollover Sam,the "Insurgency" in Iraq has pased the Grim Milestone,4000 dead this doesn't include those with serious limps.

[PeterUK]

"shouldn't you start making a distinction between Muslims who hate us and want to kill us, and Muslims who believe in freedom, democracy, and religious tolerance?"

A better question, shouldn't they be making the distinction?

[maryrose]

We have students who are muslims at our school. They are peace loving and freedom supporting people. They believe in democracy. The leaders of the peaceful Islam faith need to make their voices heard.

[danking70]

TM

"I think it is a mistake to judge a person by the most ghastly thing they have written, and it is certainly not a standard by which I would care to be judged."

Don't forget that 70/30 call. Dude, what were you thinking? Is there a 3 strikes rule or something?

[PeterUK]

JM Hanes,
Standard reversal by the left,they project their opinions onto the opposition then chastise them for it.
In this case Esmay is trawling for traffic

[Enlightened]

Did you know that:
26,074,860+ Iraqi's were not killed today?
29,928,900+ Afghani's were not killed today?

All Muslim I might add. A very small percentage of them want to kill me or you.
But WILL they kill me or you instead of becoming democratic? Yep. Indeed they will.

Does this small percentage that want to kill us speak for the majority? Of course they do - under threat of death.

Death to Muslim, Death to American. Death to Danish. Death to British. Death to Spanish. Death to Indonesian. Death to Balinese. Death to African.

It's not Death to Democracy, or even No Democracy.

It's Death to All That Do Not Believe in The Muslim Oath to Kill All Infidels and Unbelievers.

Shouldn't Esmay put forth his question of Conscience to the 56 Million Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan? Shouldn't those Muslims put forth the distinction of Good Muslim/Bad Muslim?

[eric]

I guess this is why the war on Isl..er, Terrorism is predicted to be a long war.

[sam]

WP: Contractor's Work Under Fire

"Company that created disastrous Baghdad police academy has botched 13 out of 14 projects."

Your tax dollars at work. Thank you sir, may I have another!

[rightnumberone]

WP: Bush sucks, war bad, money wasted

Thank you sir, may I have another.

pffft

[Enlightened]

Hmmm. And you lefties want to raise taxes even more. Thank you sir may I have another!

[Richard Aubrey]

An Australian government official told a group of imams that, since the terrs are committing terrorism in your name, it's your problem.

Good point. Put it in their laps and we'll see which side various folks are on.

[cathyf]

Let's remember the central beef Dean Ismay chastised Michelle Malkin for:

That we on the right are "claiming" that Islam is incompatible with Democracy (his suggestion being that this isn't true) and that we do so for some nefarious reason.

What Michelle Malkin "claims" about Islam's compatibility with democracy, what Dean Esmay thinks about Islam's compatibility with democracy, what I think about Islam's compatibility with democracy, what Dean Esmay thinks about what Michelle Malkin thinks about Islam's compatibility with democracy, doesn't matter. Because, you see, Muslims get to decide whether or not Islam is compatible with democracy.

Have you ever noticed that those who protest the loudest against western-centric white-male hegemony are the ones who seemingly have absolutely no self-awareness as they unhesitantly argue from the assumptions of western-centric white-male hegemony?

[clarice]

Good observation, cathyf.

For sure Wahabbism is inconsistent with democracy as we know it and so is the Mullahs version of Islam.

[TexasToast]

Islam is the belief system of Sauron and the Arabs are the Orcs.

Oh, if only life were so simple......

[reliapundit]

did you know esmay belives aids is NOT caused by HIV?

he's a wacky one.

[Chants]

Without western-centric white-male hegemony there would be no such thing as feminism, Marxism, communism, socialism, or other equality based ideologies.

That's a very good observation, Cathyf. Well done.

[sam]

All for f_ing nothing.

09/28/06 guardian: US war costs since September 11 exceed $500bn

"The Iraq war is currently costing US taxpayers around $2bn (£1.07bn) a week, as the military replaces damaged equipment and tries to establish more permanent bases, reports in US newspapers said today"

Your Islamobogeyman crap is not the least bit different from the nazi judeobogeyman crap.

[MayBee]

sam- your empathy for the Iraqi people is touching, as ever.

[SunnyDay]

Oh, come on, you know sam is very convincing. Aren't you changing your mind about things, after hearing the wisdonm of his words?

Don't you want to be like sam?

He is extremely effective in his arguments. I think he should post on every righty blog on the net, and convince even more people. :) Maybe we could get him on Hannity, or one of those debates on FNC - Kucinich was on today - why not sam?

[Chants]

Yes, Sam. Absolutely.

My older cousins tell me of the days when the Jews conspired to behead those not of thier faith, to fly planes into buildings, and to blow up embassies.

The comparisons you draw are uncanny.

[sam]

"sam- your empathy for the Iraqi people is touching, as ever."

Is that your version of sarcasm? How dare you be so glib about the deaths of more than 100,000 Iraqis. Is America's pain the only relevant pain on this planet? That is exactly the attitude that the rest of the world sees and reviles. If our country continues sending this message to the rest of the world then the islamobogeyman will soon be replaced by enemies
of significant potency.

[sam]

Chants

Why don't you try responding to something that I actual wrote.

[Syl]

I suggest people read Bernard Lewis. His conclusion is that Islam is compatible with democracy, it's just that the strain(s) currently in the ascendancy are not.

I read an excerpt recently where he described how the tribal system within Islam worked (before colonialism). Consultations with elders, who consulted with lessers, who consulted with the nobodies until a consensus was reached. That sounds more like a system where individual opinions matter, than a system where the imam on top consults nothing but the Koran.

I thought Esmay's arguments were weak. I thought Michelle got hysterical in response and used the same conflation I see a lot--that what the likes of Zarqawi believe is what all muslims adhere to. I call that cherry picking.

Look at Lebanon. It appears that the Christians, Druze, and Sunni there are cool with democracy. It's the violent strain of shi'ism as practiced by Nasrallah that is not.

And that's the fundamental problem. Not that all of Islam is incompatible with democracy, but that extremist elements within each country are not.

Yes, the fight is within the communities of Islam. I do not believe this is a war on the whole of Islam.

[sam]

Try reading The Far Enemy.

[Syl]

Sam

You come barging in here complaining about money spent and ignore the topic which is an important consideration in the entire strategy of the war.

To put it kindly, it makes you look seriously out of touch.

[sam]

You are just now contemplating a "strategy of the war" and you call me out-of-touch. At this rate you'll be in-touch in 2020.

[Mike G in Corvallis]

Poor sam ... The world is out of step with him!

[MayBee]

"sam- your empathy for the Iraqi people is touching, as ever."

Is that your version of sarcasm? How dare you be so glib about the deaths of more than 100,000 Iraqis. Is America's pain the only relevant pain on this planet? That is exactly the attitude that the rest of the world sees and reviles. If our country continues sending this message to the rest of the world then the islamobogeyman will soon be replaced by enemies
of significant potency.

What? So me being sarcastic toward you is somehow glib about the horrors faced by the Iraqi people. Me being glib about you is being glib about the WHOLE WORLD?
Criticizing you for using Iraqi trevails to post on a website to make whatever small political point you think you are making somehow translates to poorly representing America to the world?
Sam, it's you I criticize.

And Sam, I've seen the world. The world is a friend of mine. And you, Sam, are not the world.

[Syl]

Sam

You are just now contemplating a "strategy of the war"

You just proved my point that you are seriously out of touch. You haven't a clue what we're discussing.

The strategy is already being followed, we're just discussing whether a part of the strategy is actually workable or not.

Seems that should be something you're interested in thinking about.

But, no.

[JM Hanes]

sam:

"Your Islamobogeyman crap is not the least bit different from the nazi judeobogeyman crap."

And you're complaining about glib? When do you plan to start responding to the specifics of what other folks have said instead of posting one-size-fits-all generic complaints every time you show up?

[PeterUK]

"When do you plan to start responding to the specifics of what other folks have said instead of posting one-size-fits-all generic complaints every time you show up?"

Never,this is Sam's role at the hive.