Independent Voices on the Middle East

Islamic taboos, the struggle for control of Islam and a hard look and modern Islamic thinkers were just some of the topics covered in the panel discussion, Independent Voices of the Middle East, co-hosted by St. Francis College and the Manhattan Institute on Thursday, April 15 in St. Francis Founders Hall. (Watch the whole lecture)

Frank J. Macchiarola 62, St. Francis College Chancellor offered a brief introduction for the panel which was moderated by Visiting Professor Fred Siegel, who is currently on sabbatical from Cooper Union for Science and Art and is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and contributing editor to City Journal.




On the panel were: Judith Miller, former New York Times reporter, Adjunct Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and Contributing Editor to the City Journal; Paul Berman, Author of Terror and Liberalism, Power and the Idealists and the Flight of the Intellectuals and Writer in Residence at NYU; Lee Smith, Author of The Strong Horse: Power Politics and the Clash of Arab Civilization and Visiting Scholar at the Hudson Institute and Ibn Warraq, Author of Virgins? What Virgins? and Other Essays and Senior Research Fellow at The Center for Inquiry in Amherst.

Lee Smith began the talk by focusing not on Islam but on Arabism, looking at terrorism under the wider umbrella of Arab nationalism and not on a country by country issue. He said that Islamic terrorism endures as a result of nation states that are friendly or supportive of terrorists and that we do not do enough to try to make this clear to the world.

The response by intellectuals to the fatwa declared against Salman Rushdie was a call to action for Ibn Warraq, who says that he took issue because so many thinkers blamed Rushdie for bringing the fatwa on himself. Warraq says that when dealing with Islam and the Koran, he now sees those same intellectuals and others refuse to speak out for basic rights like freedom of expression, some using the excuse of political correctness.

Paul Berman took issue with the way Swiss born philosopher Tariq Ramadan is handled by the media and critical thinkers, saying that while Ramadan calls himself an Islamic liberal, many of Ramadans far more conservative views are dangerously glossed over or ignored.




Looking for a larger context, Judith Miller painted the issues of terrorism as a struggle among Muslims for control of their own religion. She said that the militancy that she covered had little to do with the U.S. or even Israel, but rather it was small groups of Muslims who used the Koran as a weapon to try to silence supporters of tolerance and pluralism. Miller also sees the tide turning against extremism, pointing out that the three books published by the authors on stage with her were able to put out their books without the fear of fatwas being issued and without having to travel with bodyguards. Miller admitted, though, that just because extremism may be ebbing, it does not mean that social reform in the Arab world is on the rise.




After the on stage portion of the panel, several students from St. Francis College, including many members of the Muslim Student Association spoke directly with the panelists about their ideas and philosophies.

This is the fourth panel organized by Professor Siegel and co-hosted by St. Francis College and the Manhattan Institute, the first three were Journalism in the Age of the Internet, Can New York State Government be Reformed? and Keeping New York in the Black, Our Current Fiscal Woes In Light Of The 1975 Fiscal Crisis.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• st
• francis
• college
• manhattan
• institute
• ibn
• warraq
• paul
• berman
• judy
• judith
• miller
• lee
• smith
• middle
• east

[katheryncruz24]

Eye opener.

[sammyh1982]

I like Paul Berman a lot but he needs to learn how to speak properly: uh, uh, eh , eh a philosopher, and uh, eh, eh, western intellectuals, uh, eh, about an idea that uh, eh, uh, uh

[Kurtlane]

I thought I knew a lot about it, but he opened my eyes to so much.

[Kurtlane]

Certainly the ease with which fascist ideas were adopted by not only Muslim leaders but so many rank-and-file Muslims speaks of the similarity between Islam and fascism.

Still, I think the book is great, because it shows how much modern Islamic extremism has taken from fascists and Nazis (whether or not it's repetition of what was preached or happened earlier). It discloses Tariq Ramadan for who he is. Same with Hasan al-Banna and Hajj Amin al-Husseini.

(cont.)

[Kurtlane]

@12ut5, perhaps. I think Bergman sees things his own way. I also think he is deceiving himself, because the reality is too scary. I understand him; I did the same thing for a long time, checking if there might be some sort of Islam that is not like that and that we can live with. Until I ran out of excuses.

Eveyone needs their own time to run out of excuses.

(cont.)

[12ut5]

@Kurtlane I'm reading the book. Would like to know what you think of something. I find myself thinking Berman seems to suggest that the threat Muslims and Non-Muslims are facing from some Muslims, at least, is from something that crept into Islam/the Muslim world from Western veins of totalitarianism, ie Nazism. But, things like the goal of spreading Islam/Sharia the world over so it dominates clearly seems to predate the modern era. You pick this up? Berman engaged in own version of PC?

[Kurtlane]

I have just finished reading Paul Berman's "the Flight of the Intellectuals." The book is excellent.

[Judel100]

Said was and considered himself a Western intellectual. It takes more than a little anti-Western feeling to erase an English public school education! Ramadan likewise was born, raised and schooled in Europe. Both draw deeply from the Western canon in their writings. So unless you're employing an ethnic and political definition of the expression (is Western anyone who is white and criticises Islam) you have to include those in that category. My advice: ditch that lazy catchall concept of "Other."

[Judel100]

@ManACanadian There's a telling interview of Ramadan that was broadcast on French TV a while back where he his asked whether it is permissible for a Muslim to leave Islam. Rmdm responds that a Muslim CAN leave Islam (i.e. is it "physically" possible) but then adds that Islamic law would only permit this if the person were converting out to better spy on an enemy. In short, typical Ramadan sophistry. Dazzle liberals with what seems like tolerance but cleave to a rigidly conservative position.

[Judel100]

ManACanadian have you read Berman's extensive and well-researched study of Ramadan ("Who's Afraid of Tariq Ramadan")? Although it is impossible to understand Ramadan's ideology without looking at his kin and intellectual forebears Berman is at pains not to reduce Ramadan to Al-Banna. What he discerns in Ramadan's writings is not a Qutb style straightforward apology of violent Islamic radicalism but rather revisionist history and equivocation about what he stands for (liberal tolerance).