This entry was posted on March 13, 2010 at 3:25 pm and is filed under Articles. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
On Aayan Hirsi Ali, Buruma wrote: ‘one can’t help sensing that in her battle for secularism, there are hints of zealousness, echoes perhaps of her earlier enthusiasm for the Muslim Brotherhood’. The intellectual laziness, the careful obfuscation in that sentence is quite something.
to be fair max, this is something that has also been pointed out not only by ian bruma but by ed husain majid nawas…young men who know about islamist theocracy, the mentality behind it and what it feeds off; young men who are committed now to democracy, secularism and are as anti-islamist in their views as you max or myself.
I wouldn’t be surprised that Husain said that. Husain and Hirsi Ali have very different views. Husain argues convincingly that Islam is benign. Hirsi Ali abominates Islam, not just Islamism. They have clashed swords in debate a few times. I think Husain’s heart is in the right place but, as you know, I’m with Hirsi Ali on this (as in most things)
for me i agree with ian, ayaan is just to ‘absolute’.
read the link below in which she makes crystal clear the nature of her views and erases forever any thought that the perception of her as a “clash of civilizations” extremist might be the result of misreporting or looseness of expression….
But a true ‘clash of civilisations’ thesis denies the existence of Muslim democrats and secularists, and also the idea of Muslim apostates and atheists. Hirsi Ali fights for the people within Muslim communities who don’t go along with the community leaders and tend to get ignored or harmed as a result.