6 ms·

Yeah, this sucks. Another example of this is Southern Poverty Law Center's "Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists". They include Maajid Nawaz and Ayaan Hirsi A

Yeah, this sucks. Another example of this is Southern Poverty Law Center's "Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists". They include Maajid Nawaz and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, which is disgusting of the SPLC to do. https://www.splcenter.org/20161025/journalists-manual-field-guide-anti-muslim-extremists https://www.splcenter.org/20161025/journalists-manual-field-...

sudosteph 9y ago
Ouch, that article really hurt my respect for SPL. Nawaz especially, through his discussions with Sam Harris, really opened my eyes to the struggles of moderate and progressive Muslims when it comes to reforming Islam. Nawaz was himself radicalized as a young man, and much of his work today is around preventing other young Muslims from taking that path. It disgusts me that a man with such a important perspective is carelessly labeled anti-Muslim. Check out the audiobook discussion with Sam Harris if you haven't, "Islam and the future of Tolerance". It was a good, respectful discussion between two very different viewpoints, and Nawaz made very insightful and logical arguments for mainstream Islam being capable of undertaking certain anti-radicalization reforms and why those matter.
- rayiner 9y ago
  > Ouch, that article really hurt my respect for SPL. Nawaz especially, through his discussions with Sam Harris, really opened my eyes to the struggles of moderate and progressive Muslims when it comes to reforming Islam. This sort of thing from the Western left is incredibly alarming to me. Imagine hardline Christian conservatives took over America and now we live in Handmaid's Tale. You're one of the tiny minority trying to fight back. How would you feel about people in Europe apologizing for the hardliners and condemning anyone who speaks out against their culture? Obviously it's not Handmaid's Tale bad, but it's worse than you assume. My family is from Bangladesh. A third of the people from my country think I should be executed for leaving Islam: http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview.[1] http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religi... Bangladesh is a moderate country in the grand scheme of things--that number is 2/3 in Egypt, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Bangladesh was founded as a secular republic, but that was jettisoned and Islam was made the official religion the year before my family left the country. That was all part of a long societal shift away from the west towards the Islamic world. For years--long before any of this hit the radar of anyone at SPLC--my family used the number of women in Dhaka wearing head coverings as a barometer for the country's descent into theocracy (very rare in the 1980s, quite common today). I get its a fine line. You can't help people integrate if you can't let them adopt western values on their own terms. At the same time, some of this stuff from well-meaning liberals is really a kick to the gut of people fighting for modernity in these countries. [1] My family was never religious, but that's not a distinction they recognize over there. I can't count how many times I've gotten in a cab with a driver from south asia/the middle east, and someone has asked me "where are you from?" And if I reply "Bangladesh," the answer is invariably "oh so you're Muslim?"
  - tptacek 9y ago
    The Nawaz drama is more complicated than this, isn't it? It's not Nawaz's overt positions SPLC is objecting to so much as his actions, which appear to profit from anti-Muslim sentiment.
    - MichaelGG 9y ago
      Really? They list this as one of the examples of him being terrible: >Nawaz tweeted out a cartoon of Jesus and Muhammad — despite the fact that many Muslims see it as blasphemous to draw Muhammad. Looks like they're just upset anyone would upset Muslims.
      - tptacek 9y ago
        Yes, really. All you have to do is actually read the SPLC piece on Nawaz, which makes no mention of whatever this incident you're referring to is. I'm not defending SPLC, which again I think overstepped by targeting Nawaz. But the argument that they did so to prevent Islam from being criticized appears to oversimplify. Their problem with Nawaz is that they believe he's a profiteering fraud.
        MichaelGG 9y ago
        Hmm? I followed the link in this thread, then clicked his name and that was one of 3 incidents listed against him.
        emmelaich 9y ago
        Yep, the splcenter page mentions and links to https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/28/speaking-islam-loudmouths-hijacked https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/28/speaki...
      - emmelaich 9y ago
        > many Muslims There's the problem. Many other Muslims also have a representation of Muhammad on their walls on home so clearly have no problem with it. Why should we take any position at all?
forapurpose 9y ago
> Maajid Nawaz and Ayaan Hirsi Ali Why are these people necessarily wrong to include? I did a search and I found many articles on the issue, suggesting it's a semi-famous controversy, but no reliable sources (all partisan and either untrustworthy or unknown, from the far left and far right).
- rayiner 9y ago
  Imagine that instead of criticizing a religion, Nawaz and Ali were criticizing the Republican Party. Maybe they're a bit over the top, but would it be fair to label them "anti-Republican Extremists?" Would it be a good idea to shut down such viewpoints? EDIT: It's worth watching the guy speak for himself: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/449004/anti-radical-muslim-activist-group-targeted-hate-group-southern-poverty-law-center http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/449004/anti-radical-mus.... As an apostate I think this guy is a hero.
  - forapurpose 9y ago
    There's are fundamental differences between religions and political parties, especially in this context, and you are too sophisticated to not know them (a compliment and a criticism).
matthewmacleod 9y ago
Neither Maajid Nawaz nor Ayaan Hirsi Ali are particularly reliable or impartial commentators, to the extent that i'm surprised you'd find it 'disgusting' to describe either of them as 'Anti-Muslim Extremists' - the both almost by definition are.
- MichaelGG 9y ago
  Being anti Islam, which, as practiced by hundreds of millions, is simply not compatible with Western values, is not being anti Muslim. And extremeist? I'm not sure what they say is even remotely extreme.

sudosteph 9y ago

Ouch, that article really hurt my respect for SPL. Nawaz especially, through his discussions with Sam Harris, really opened my eyes to the struggles of moderate and progressive Muslims when it comes to reforming Islam. Nawaz was himself radicalized as a young man, and much of his work today is around preventing other young Muslims from taking that path. It disgusts me that a man with such a important perspective is carelessly labeled anti-Muslim. Check out the audiobook discussion with Sam Harris if you haven't, "Islam and the future of Tolerance". It was a good, respectful discussion between two very different viewpoints, and Nawaz made very insightful and logical arguments for mainstream Islam being capable of undertaking certain anti-radicalization reforms and why those matter.

rayiner 9y ago
> Ouch, that article really hurt my respect for SPL. Nawaz especially, through his discussions with Sam Harris, really opened my eyes to the struggles of moderate and progressive Muslims when it comes to reforming Islam. This sort of thing from the Western left is incredibly alarming to me. Imagine hardline Christian conservatives took over America and now we live in Handmaid's Tale. You're one of the tiny minority trying to fight back. How would you feel about people in Europe apologizing for the hardliners and condemning anyone who speaks out against their culture? Obviously it's not Handmaid's Tale bad, but it's worse than you assume. My family is from Bangladesh. A third of the people from my country think I should be executed for leaving Islam: http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview.[1] http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religi... Bangladesh is a moderate country in the grand scheme of things--that number is 2/3 in Egypt, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Bangladesh was founded as a secular republic, but that was jettisoned and Islam was made the official religion the year before my family left the country. That was all part of a long societal shift away from the west towards the Islamic world. For years--long before any of this hit the radar of anyone at SPLC--my family used the number of women in Dhaka wearing head coverings as a barometer for the country's descent into theocracy (very rare in the 1980s, quite common today). I get its a fine line. You can't help people integrate if you can't let them adopt western values on their own terms. At the same time, some of this stuff from well-meaning liberals is really a kick to the gut of people fighting for modernity in these countries. [1] My family was never religious, but that's not a distinction they recognize over there. I can't count how many times I've gotten in a cab with a driver from south asia/the middle east, and someone has asked me "where are you from?" And if I reply "Bangladesh," the answer is invariably "oh so you're Muslim?"
- tptacek 9y ago
  The Nawaz drama is more complicated than this, isn't it? It's not Nawaz's overt positions SPLC is objecting to so much as his actions, which appear to profit from anti-Muslim sentiment.
  - MichaelGG 9y ago
    Really? They list this as one of the examples of him being terrible: >Nawaz tweeted out a cartoon of Jesus and Muhammad — despite the fact that many Muslims see it as blasphemous to draw Muhammad. Looks like they're just upset anyone would upset Muslims.
    - tptacek 9y ago
      Yes, really. All you have to do is actually read the SPLC piece on Nawaz, which makes no mention of whatever this incident you're referring to is. I'm not defending SPLC, which again I think overstepped by targeting Nawaz. But the argument that they did so to prevent Islam from being criticized appears to oversimplify. Their problem with Nawaz is that they believe he's a profiteering fraud.
      - MichaelGG 9y ago
        Hmm? I followed the link in this thread, then clicked his name and that was one of 3 incidents listed against him.
        emmelaich 9y ago
        Yep, the splcenter page mentions and links to https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/28/speaking-islam-loudmouths-hijacked https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/28/speaki...
    - emmelaich 9y ago
      > many Muslims There's the problem. Many other Muslims also have a representation of Muhammad on their walls on home so clearly have no problem with it. Why should we take any position at all?

forapurpose 9y ago

> Maajid Nawaz and Ayaan Hirsi Ali Why are these people necessarily wrong to include? I did a search and I found many articles on the issue, suggesting it's a semi-famous controversy, but no reliable sources (all partisan and either untrustworthy or unknown, from the far left and far right).

rayiner 9y ago
Imagine that instead of criticizing a religion, Nawaz and Ali were criticizing the Republican Party. Maybe they're a bit over the top, but would it be fair to label them "anti-Republican Extremists?" Would it be a good idea to shut down such viewpoints? EDIT: It's worth watching the guy speak for himself: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/449004/anti-radical-muslim-activist-group-targeted-hate-group-southern-poverty-law-center http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/449004/anti-radical-mus.... As an apostate I think this guy is a hero.
- forapurpose 9y ago
  There's are fundamental differences between religions and political parties, especially in this context, and you are too sophisticated to not know them (a compliment and a criticism).

matthewmacleod 9y ago

Neither Maajid Nawaz nor Ayaan Hirsi Ali are particularly reliable or impartial commentators, to the extent that i'm surprised you'd find it 'disgusting' to describe either of them as 'Anti-Muslim Extremists' - the both almost by definition are.

MichaelGG 9y ago
Being anti Islam, which, as practiced by hundreds of millions, is simply not compatible with Western values, is not being anti Muslim. And extremeist? I'm not sure what they say is even remotely extreme.