May 27, 2010
Fundamentals
"Look here upon this picture, and on this …” In the left frame, a privileged young Swiss-Egyptian academic, whose father and grandfather were pillars of the Muslim Brotherhood and who has expressed strong sympathy for the jihadist preachings—and social and moral precepts—of Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, purveyor of fatwas and self-described “Mufti of martyrdom operations.” In the right frame, a young woman from Somalia who has endured genital mutilation and forced marriage, made her escape to Europe, spoken out for the rights of women, seen a colleague of hers murdered for the same advocacy, abandoned religion for the values of the European enlightenment, and now conducts her life under permanent police protection.
Which of these two individuals garners the most respectful attention from our liberal intellectuals? To phrase it more closely, which of them has attracted the sympathetic understanding, and which the contempt, of two of the contemporary writers who have best earned that title? I refer to Timothy Garton Ash and Ian Buruma, who in the years during and after the Cold War did a great deal to enlarge our understanding of Eastern Europe and Asia, and to demonstrate the incompatibility of civilization with the principles of totalitarianism.
Ian Buruma has written a long profile of Tariq Ramadan (the picture in the left frame) and taken many of his claims to be a reformist and modernizer at their own face value. Timothy Garton Ash was helpful in getting Ramadan a position at St. Antony’s College, Oxford. Both men have written disparagingly of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, as if she were an intemperate extremist. Oh, and one more thing. Garton Ash has written that “It’s no disrespect to Ms. Ali to suggest that if she had been short, squat, and squinting, her story and views might not be so closely attended to.” Perhaps that statement is indeed free from any hint of disrespect, but can the same be said of Garton Ash’s judgment that for all her courage she is no more than a “slightly simplistic Enlightenment fundamentalist”? (The appellation “Enlightenment fundamentalist” is itself borrowed from Ian Buruma; I should perhaps declare at this stage that I find the ideas of the Enlightenment to be superb in their simplicity.) Meanwhile, it’s hardly possible to read of a media appearance with Tariq Ramadan that does not describe him as arrestingly handsome and charismatic. No disrespect, of course, but I’d be the first to agree that it can’t be his writing that draws the crowd.
Posted by Robin Varghese at 06:42 PM | Permalink






















Comments
"They are generally opposed to the Western resistance to al Qaeda and its allies in Iraq and Afghanistan."
Ah yes, the great Western war of resistance in Iraq, I remember it well, or I think I do.
Posted by: markst7 | May 27, 2010 9:41:15 PM
Great minds think alike. Just posted on my own blog a few hours ago about Ayaan Hirsi Ali's all-sold-out appearance in Palo Alto on Tuesday night:
http://bookhaven.stanford.edu/2010/05/their-honor-is-between-my-legs/
I keep looking for some other press coverage of her Bay Area appearances. Not a word except from this one lone blogger -- moi.
Given her prominence -- kinda strange.
Posted by: Cynthia Haven | May 28, 2010 12:39:31 AM
It's true- I googled the event and no mention in the 'Chronic', just different interest groups listed it. Oddly, one listing was for richarddawkins.net, and previews a quote, "wonder if I should bring a towel to hear [Hirsi Ali], think I'll bring one just in case"! But it's posted on a memorial page for Douglas Adams (Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy author). It seems they were commmemorating him by wearing towels "be sure to wear it prominently to provoke questions". Is this a reference to something he wrote? Afraid I couldn't get into that book.
Posted by: Alice de Tocqueville | May 28, 2010 5:12:26 AM
Yes, The Two Essentials for any intergalactic wanderer were the Guide, and a towel. Carry things, keep you warm, mop up spills, make a hat. Endless uses.
Posted by: Carlos | May 28, 2010 9:33:30 AM
Hitchens writes: "Anti-Jewish propaganda, paranoia, and even incitement are now commonplace, at events like anti-war demonstrations where one might expect liberals and intellectuals to take notice of them."
This claim is unsubstantiated and reeks of the kind of left-baiting that Hitchens has turned to these days. Perhaps one or two nutjobs has made anti-Semitic statements at an anti-war demonstration, but they are hardly 'commonplace', and I know that as a 'left-wing intellectual' such statements would hardly escape my notice. Again, Hitchens makes no attempt to prove this generalization with evidence, but expects his authorial authority to be sufficient proof of the validity of his claims.
Posted by: rich | May 28, 2010 10:09:19 AM
@rich;
Yes, that statement is truly bizarre - sheesh, what percentage of 'left-wing intellectuals' isn't Jewish? Is he calling critics of Israel 'anti-Semitic'? If so, shame on him.
Posted by: Alice de Tocqueville | May 28, 2010 1:29:45 PM
@rich
I haven't been to an anti-war demonstration since a rather dissolute one in Sproul Plaza back in the early 70s (Dave was probably there, fall of 72?), so I have no idea, but...
Nowhere do you see or hear ANY fingers pointed at Israel for their role in Global destabilization (and not just by loons)?
Somehow this surprises me. Or are you distinguishing between Propaganda & Paranoia and the simple facts boldly stated.
Posted by: Carlos | May 28, 2010 1:48:52 PM
Carlos, I know lots that's been written about Israel's ignoring of UN resolutions, and their arming of South Africa during the anti-apartheid era (in that time-frame), and their nuclear program and persecution of Mordecai Vanunu for 'outing' it, as well as abundant criticism of all their actions against the Palestinians, and courting the help of the US in doing all this. Is that what you mean by global destabilisation? If not, please enlighten me. Or do you consider Noam Chomsky a loon?
"I haven't been to an anti-war demonstration since a rather dissolute one in Sproul Plaza back in the early 70s..."
Why not?
Posted by: Alice de Tocqueville | May 28, 2010 5:42:22 PM
I was just asking Rich about his disagreement with Hitchens. Not venturing an opinion?
Do you go to Anti-War rallies? Ever see any posters like what you just listed? Carry any? Perhaps that is what Christopher is referring to? That's what I mean though that I was surprised Rich had never seen signs like that.
"Why not?"
Hey I took pepper spray for you Alice.
Posted by: Carlos | May 28, 2010 6:21:56 PM
Well, thanks for that, Carlos, I mean it, because other than the streets what recourse do we have? I say that as one who talks to legislators and their aides as much as possible, every channel, etc, etc.
And, yes I go to anti-war rallies, and anti-police brutality rallies, and immigrant rights rallies, and environmental rallies, LOTS, and never, once have seen anti-semitic signs, except at tea party, right-wing ones.
They would be out of place, because among the organizers of every human rights campaign I have ever encountered or heard of, Jews are there at every level, including those for Palestinian peoples' rights. I personally don't know any Jews who are happy with Israel's policies, and they are definitely proud Jews - I think the self-hating ones are all academics or 'public' intellectuals.
I offered my comment in agreement with rich''s point - I find Hitchens' statement incomprehensible, absurd.
And I redouble my question to you! Why haven't you been in the streets? And if you had, you would know who does what, and not be dependent on a corporate third party to tell you some stupid lie that rings true with the other divide-and-conquer lies you've been sold on TV.
Are you angry that you were sprayed with pepper-spray, Carlos, or are you a self-hating American, and accept that as your due?
Posted by: Alice de Tocqueville | May 28, 2010 7:01:58 PM
Robin Varghese,
Thank you for this thought provoking and informative article. I love Hitchens' writing, even when I don't agree with him.
Regarding this sentence:
"She [Ayaan Hirsi Ali] joins a very honorable group of people—Salman Rushdie, Nadeem Aslam, Hanif Kureishi, Taslima Nasreen—who have tried to tell us that Islam has looked at our society and has other plans for it, plans which we can easily understand when we see what it has already done in countries like Afghanistan, Somalia, and Yemen."
To say that "...Islam has looked ... and has other plans ...", would suggest a monolithic and socially or politically coherent entity that is called "Islam," or at least a significant portion of all "Islam."
I ask the following question, which is not rhetorical: Is there such an "Islam?" If a case can be made for it, then that would support, in part, Hitch's position.
If "Islam," from a view of power politics and attitudes toward the West and Israel, is more regional, decentralized, and locally nationalistic, then a case can be made that Hitch is advancing an Islamophobia.
Do we need to fear "Islam" in Malaysia, for example? Should our fear be focused on specific subgroups and philosophies within "Islam?" Is there no "moderate Islam" because there is no single entity of Islam that could consider being moderate?
Does anyone have any ideas on this subject?
Posted by: Norman Costa | May 29, 2010 1:59:17 PM
"Hey I took pepper spray for you Alice."
Not in 1972 (an exceptional year) that would have been good old fashioned tear gas.
Yrs, the riot pedant.
Posted by: Jesse | May 30, 2010 1:02:05 AM
Post a comment