Tags
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Douglas Murray, ethics, Irshad Manji, Islam, Islamism, morality, Morals, Muslim World, politics, Reform, religion, Secularism, Theocracy, Western Civilization, Western Values
“I talk at a lot of campuses, and I was at one last night in London where a student got up and started protesting because I had said that an Islamist government was of itself a bad thing, which I think it is. I replied to this student — and it’s not a hard question to ask — ‘Well name one Islamist state that you would want to live in.’ And this is a serious question, ladies and gentlemen. It is also a personal question…
One of my best friends, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, is in hiding again tonight because of what she says, and she would be killed if she went into any Muslim country. And I think that matters… We have the great blessing of living under this system. And we take it for granted. And we spit on it. And we can because we’re living in that freedom. But I beg you ladies and gentlemen not to pretend that that means that we shouldn’t assert the superiority of that system, because that is what it is. It is a superior system…
And if we do not stand for our values, ladies and gentlemen, who will? Who will assert them across the Muslim world? Who are the reformers in the Muslim world going to look to when they want to see, and desperately need, separation of church and state? If we do not say that we believe this is the best way to live, who is going to do it elsewhere? As Irshad Manji said a few weeks ago when she was in London: ‘If you give up on us, people like me are dead.’
And ladies and gentlemen, I think we should take that call seriously. To assert the superiority of Western values is to state the obvious. It is to have faith in ourselves and it’s to have faith in other people.”
__________
Some highlights from Douglas Murray’s rousing opening remarks in his debate on the motion ‘Is West Best?’ – Should we be reluctant to assert Western values as superior?.
I’d never heard of Murray until I was just sent this video, and I have to note that it’s one of the strongest short bursts of public speaking I’ve seen in a very, very long time.
- In related news: Last week, I wrote an open letter to Brandeis University about the imperative to defend Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Lisa Lo Paro said:
This was wonderful, thank you.
xPraetorius said:
Reblogged this on The Praetorian Writers Group and commented:
Yes, this was darned well said.
— xPraetorius
john said:
OK, yes, I agree with the fact that Western values, for all its faults (and Lord there are many!) far outshines many other systems and places. Yes, yes, yes…but…
But… I was struck by the subtle distinction of talking about the West (a geographic related entity) versus the Muslim (a religious related entity) world. (‘Muslim’, aka. ‘Islamist’…they are bandied about as one and the same.) Why wasn’t the argument framed as ‘West’ versus ‘Middle East’? (Giving, for now, the ‘Far East’ a pass, lucky you North Korea and China.) Is there not a subtle prejudice in that?
Islam is not, in itself, the problem or the issue here. It is the fanatics and the insane that profess to by Muslim but who have, to its heart, betrayed it. Just like the nominally Christian land of Germany did in the 1930’s (not to mention its lackey, Italy) and as did the entire European continent did during the period of the Hundred Years War.
Ideas are complex because they try to explain a complex world. And in doing so they should not only be correct, well-formed, articulate, passionate and clear, they should also be humble, compassionate, understanding.and free from any hint of prejudice.
And by the way, that litmus test sucks: there are a lot of Christian countries and non-Christian countries I’d also not like to live in. But that’s just me.
jrbenjamin said:
I agree. I quote Murray out of context; the debate centers on Islam for several reasons. Tariq Ali and Ibn Wariq participate in it; it is being held in London, where there is significant Islamic immigration; and, most importantly, the great conflict of our time does seem to be one with radical Islam — a point that Murray highlights only during the Q&A period.
I do wholly agree with your point that the distinction between Islam and what we may call ‘Islamism’ is fundamental. That said, attitudes in even ‘modernized’ Islamic states toward women, homosexuals, Jews, Western cultural norms, etc. are carefully studied and hardly reassuring. A recent Pew poll showed that even in Turkey and Lebanon, roughly ~50% of adults believe a woman should be able to choose her style of dress. And such views generalize, and are not entirely shirked by devote, upstanding Muslims who emigrate to Western Europe. Again, this is not speculation on my part; it is ratified by piles of polls from reputable sources. I desperately wish it were not the case.
Thus, the argument would be frivolous if it were about Western values versus Confucian values or Hindi values, I think, since the apposition almost never appears.
That being said, I appreciate your point, agree with most of it, and, as always, wish you best.