"“The West is not an enemy," he said. "We think about Western Civilization as part of the whole human experience. We would like to help you reform it, but we do not want to destroy it. We are not violent. We support civil mechanisms for change.”My take is that "moderate Islamism" like this is only possible someplace like Kurdistan. They have striven for 51st statehood for so long that they have actually escaped the grip of the thugs. Amazing...
"What do you think about Sayyid Qutb and the Hideous Schizophrenia?" I said. [ My little ditty on Qtub here. -ed. ] Sayyid Qutb is considered the founder of modern Islamism and the intellect behind Al Qaeda theology. He believed - until he was executed by Gamal Abdel Nasser in the dungeons of Egypt - that the liberal post-Christian West threatens Islamic civilization because it promotes, among other things, the separation of religion and the state. Qutb believed this separation triggered an epidemic psychological breakdown in the West that he dubbed the Hideous Schizophrenia, and that this breakdown is spreading to the Middle East.
"Qutb was wrong," he said, parting ways with Osama bin Laden on the most elementary level. “Compare Islam and Christianity. In the Middle Ages, Christians were burning scientists. Then Muslims had a great civilization. The Christians were theocratic then. Muslims were not. We do not believe in a theocratic government that rules the people in the name of Allah. Power should come from the people. Christianity wasn’t weakened because it was separate from the state. Christianity was weakened when it supported oppressive states. The same thing is happening in Iran. [ Lewis talks about this! See p.109 of "What Went Wrong?"! -ed. ] Iranians are turning against the religion itself along with the theocratic oppressive state."
“Are you opposed to theocracy then?” I said. “If you win power in Kurdistan will you not govern according to Islamic law?”
“In Islam we have stable things and changeable things,” he said. “80 percent of Islam is changeable things.” Say what you will about Islamists. Ali Muhammad’s religious-political ideology is a long way from the iron rule of 7th Century Taliban.
“Should alcohol be legal or banned?” I said. When I asked this question of Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood spokesman Essem El-Erian he refused to give me a straight answer.
“In Islam it is prohibited to drink alcohol in public,” Ali Muhammad said. “Drinking at home is fine. If someone wants to buy alcohol and drink it in his house, we should not chase him. We prefer to treat alcohol the same way we treat cigarettes when we create non-smoking sections.”
“Should women be required to wear the hijab over their hair?” I said, referring to the modest Islamic headscarf worn by conservative women in public.
“We don’t force people to wear the hijab,” he said. “There are two types of Islamic rules: personal and general. Individual matters are advised, not required. Advisements by Islam should not be imposed. Islam prohibits only things that harm an entire society.”
Ali Muhammad believes this is the right balance, that Islam is therefore superior to Judaism and Christianity.
“The Koran includes both regulation and advice,” he said. “The Torah included only regulation. The New Testament included only advice.” [ Arguable of course but a credible take on the Law and the Gospels... -ed. ] "
Monday, July 03, 2006
You still haven't read Michael's interview with the KIU, have you?