Defeating Fundamentalistic Islam

From The Blaze.com (Mar. 23):

If the United States and its allies want to defeat radical Islamic terror and stop its growing threat worldwide, one former Islamic extremist says the way to accomplish that is by challenging extremists both ideologically and militarily.

Speaking on Fox News’ “Fox and Friends” Wednesday morning, Maajid Nawaz — who lived with world-renowned Islamists and jihadis in Egypt from 2002-2006 — reminded the show’s hosts that Tuesday’s attack in Brussels was actually the eighth attack by radical Islamic terrorists in March.

“What we’re witnessing, actually on a global level, is something unprecedented. I call it the ‘global jihadist insurgency,’” Nawaz said. “And it’s, in fact, an ideological struggle as well as a military struggle.”

…………….

When asked what the solution to the problem of radical Islamic terror is, Nawaz explained that first the problem must be identified then it needs to be challenged both ideologically and then militarily. However, according to Nawaz, President Barack Obama’s policy against radical Islamic terrorist groups isn’t correctly addressing the problem.  [read more]

Make sense to me. Wikapedia entry for him says “As a solution, Nawaz suggests building of global youth-led democratic movements that are above politics, and that build demand for democracy at the civilisational level.” He also says in that same article that the ideas, narratives, symbols and leaders of the Jihad movement need to be substituted with better ones. (Actually, the same argument can be applied to the Leftist movement too. But I digress.)

First, America has to define the problem as being Islamic. You don’t see Buddhists or Hindus blowing up people. Then you deal with challenging the extremism. Glenn Beck thinks we shouldn’t call these thugs belonging to “radical Islam” but to “traditional Islam.” He says Martin Luther in his day was called a radical Christian. True. Then there is Jesus. The Pharisees probably classified Jesus as a radical.  I remember watching the Lincoln movie in 2012 where the Democrats in the U.S. senate called the Republicans “radicals” because the Republicans were against slavery. Funny how things change. Beck has a point though. But instead of calling the Islamists “tradionalists” call them “fundamentalists.” That’s a more accurate term to use. In my readings of Islam I learned that traditional Islam is basically Sufism- a more mystical kind of Islam. The fundamentalists don’t care much for these Muslims either.

I suppose you could try to convert a muslim to a Christian by saying if the Quran is true, then Islam is false (I don’t know if this is what Nawaz meant by “challenging”) because the Quran says to trust the Gospels, but the four Gospels contradict the Quran.* The problem with this idea is that it is provocative and might get you killed especially if the Muslim you are talking to is a fundamentalist. Maybe a better idea is to talk a Muslim into being a traditionalist or a modern or Western muslim than a fundamentalist. At least he won’t be blowing himself up. That ideological shift would be easier than converting him to a Christian. Although, he or she would be more peaceful if he was a Christian I would think.

 

*Or you could tell the Muslim that Jesus received his instructions directly from God. Muhammed only through an archangel who was supposedly Gabriel. Who knows where the angel was actually from. Muhammed assumed it was Gabriel.