George,

I'm afraid you're significantly mischaracterizng Henry Weinschenk's argument when you say he thinks he "thinks it is naïve of American liberals to think that militant Islamic fundamentalists will be won over by reason... " [see note, below]

But Henry's making a very much broader claim than that. It is not just militant Islamic fundamentalists he's talking about but Islam, the whole religion--and presumably, therefore, all its adherents. He writes,

Islam and its long standing traditions, want to subjugate us, the infidel world. It's actually a mandate of their religion... Hostility and animosity is embedded in the Islamic religion and traditions. We tend to not be fully aware of that...

[W]e are dealing with a culture that is opposed--for religious reasons--to civil rights, democracy, free markets, capitalism, civil society or fairness of any kind....

His lack of ability (or willingness) to draw distinctions among the various different--and always evolving--groups and trends within Islam is stunning. And that is, of course, a common tactic of people engaging in hate-propaganda: "All Jews are [this or that]" "All Blacks are [this or that]" "All Tutsis... " "All Whites... " etc.

The selectivity of the historical episodes Henry chooses to list is notable! (That is another key tactic used by perpetrators of hateful incitement.) Look, George and Henry, anyone looking at the history of any great religion or other social movement can pick out some bad things in their history or their writings. Even, yes, in the Hebrew Bible... But that goes nowhere to explaining how or why that movement survived, gained adherents, and gained influence. And it gets us nowhere if what we want to do (as surely we should) is to understand the movement's big historical trends, its different internal currents and their interactions--and also, the very long history of the interaction between "our" societies and "theirs". (Though the "us/them" opposition that Henry sets up is historically and analytically quite useless--as well as being yet another assumption used by propagators of hate speech. In truth, there have always been many interactions and interpenetrations between Muslims and non-Muslims... Why does he not speak of the Silk Road, or the long history of the indigenous Arab Orthodox churches, or the long social-political engagement of Muslim citizens here in the U.S.?)

Henry seems to be arguing that all Muslims are simply fanatics. I wonder, Henry, how many Muslims you actually know? I wonder how many Muslims you've actually talked deeply with, about their view of the world? I wonder, how much of the long and rich history if Muslim societies you are actually familiar with? I venture to suggest that just possibly I have talked to quite a few more Muslims than you have. I've likely studied the history of Muslim societies more deeply than you have; and worked in many more Muslim societies than you have.

On what selective use of evidence are you basing the alarmist and Islamophobic picture you paint?

... Maybe you should seek out and talk to local resource-people like the amazing Muslim scholar Dr. Abdul-Aziz Sachedina at U.Va., or read some good histories of Muslim societies... Or read some of what I've been writing throughout my 35 years of work in Middle Eastern issues, many of them involving Muslim believers and Muslim social and political movements.

But heck, maybe you couldn't really deal with actual evidence.

... Finally, your adducing the case of the US Marines' adventuristic overseas wars against distant Muslim navies as being some kind of an example of Muslim aggressivity is quite hilarious. Talk about blaming the victims!

Helena Cobban (Electronic mail, January 2, 2010)

Note: the reference is to a question raised in an email, about the Weinschenk letter. Here is the text of the question:

Henry Weinschenk thinks it is naïve of American liberals to think that militant Islamic fundamentalists will be won over by reason He points to a millenium and more of expansionism, and says “we fail to understand fully the risk posed by Islam.” Is Henry correct? Is continual confrontation inevitable?

These emails are sent regularly, to provoke discussion of issues raised in items posted to the Loper website and to provide updates about events in the Charlottesville/Albemarle area. If you wish to be included in this circulation, reply to the email address below--The Editors