Radical Islam vs. Islam

It seems to be quite in vogue for demagogues to make much of the threat posed by radical Islam. As a Muslim myself, I entirely agree. The problem is how people define “radical” Islam. Personally, I define it as the rigid, culturally-based (as opposed to divinely-inspired) religion practiced by the so-called “Wahhabis” prevalent in Arabia and other pockets throughout the Middle East, as well as in the backward hinterlands of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

They insist on treating women as second-class citizens, despite the fact that Islam was meant to provide women more rights than they previously had; they believe that Jihad is something to be waged violently at the slightest provocation, and against innocents, despite Islam’s injunction against such barbarity and requirements of mercy and forgiveness by the faithful; they insist on certain modes of dress and facial hair for men, despite the lack of any reference to such things in the Qur’an; they issue “fatwas” about coffee, cigarettes, music, television, cartoons and anything else they can think of, calling for death to those who disagree, let alone disobey.

In short, they have allowed their cultural biases to overwhelm the very clear words of the Qur’an – upon which they allegedly base their worldviews – and then construe their own biases as the word of God.

And because these people are the most vociferous, most threatening, and most sensationalist faction of Muslims today, they get the most press coverage, which fools Americans into thinking they are the majority of the religion. They are not. They are despised for their uncompromising sense of personal rectitude and looked down upon for their fanatical adherence to brittle rules unreflective of modern society. But most of all, they are disdained because of their inability to recognize that Islam came into being as a paradigm-shifting revolution in a society that was mysogynistic, heedless of the poor and helpless, and greed-centered in the extreme.

Islam gave women rights they had never dreamed of and required mercy and charity to all society’s members – including one’s enemies – to an unprecedented extent. Given this context, the logical conclusion is that Islam’s mission to reverse and prevent injustice should continue to this day, rather than remain stuck in an outdated historical context that renders it a tool of oppression in the hands of its “official” interpreters, rather than a tool of liberation.

So where are the voices of the moderates who believe that historically contextualizing Islam is important to its proper interpretation? Where are those of us who believe that the United States of America is just as perfect an “Islamic” country as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, or Egypt? For the most part, we’re everywhere. But we hide and stay relatively quiet. Why? Because unless our lives revolve around denoucing the radicals and advancing the cause of moderates, we have other concerns (family, job, aspirations for a peaceful family life) that prevent us from wanting our lives turned upside down by death threats and fatwas from the fanatics.

Nonetheless, there are some things we can do. I wrote a novel, for example, that I hope makes a difference. It starkly – and entertainingly, I hope, makes the case for differentiating between the Islamofascists and the real Muslims.

jacket-front-cover1