Opinion of Ayaan Hirsi Ali

[TDAS04]

FF.

But I think there are a lot of people who like her for the wrong reasons. That is, they're more attracted to her general hatred of Muslims than the fact that she generally hates Muslims because she was victimized as a woman by their patriarchal, regressive religious power structure. Many of the people who like her have no problem with patriarchal, regressive religious power structures as long as they are their own (the Catholic Church comes to mind).

True.  This is why it can be hypocritical for Pat Robertson-type Christians to refer to Islam as "intolerant".  Not all Muslims are bad people.

Having said that, even if this woman is wrong to generalize about an entire religion, how can we be so hard on her?  She grew up in an oppressive community and suffered genital mutilation.  Who could blame her for not liking the culture that she grew up in?  If a gay youth has a bad experience growing up with the Catholic Church, he probably won't feel all warm and fuzzy about his religious background.  Many "liberals" here are being absurdly judgmental.

[Indy Texas]

To those who are voting HP,

Would you feel the same way if Ayaan Hirsi Ali was a lesbian woman from sub-Saharan Africa who had been victimized by the anti-gay policies of right-wing Christian leaders in places like Uganda and was severely anti-Christian as a result?

If not, why do you think there is something different about Islam that allows you to hold it to a different standard?

I've noticed that the American Left has a bizarre tendency to do this. I'm not legitimizing people who think liberals are out to destroy Christianity, but I find it interesting that there is a tendency among secular liberals to view Islam as some special, fragile thing that needs to be protected while Christianity is an insidious force trying to leap over the wall between church and state. A vigorous defense of a secular public square is abandoned for the sake of "diversity" or wanting to seem educated or cultured.

My only explanation is that a logical fallacy is happening where if conservatives are criticizing something or don't like it, it can never actually merit criticism. "Fox News commentators like Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Therefore, Ayaan Hirsi Ali must be a stupid, racist bigot by virtue of being liked by people I consider to be stupid, racist and bigoted."

[Maxwell]

HP.

[PPT Spiral]

FF. Islam gets a free pass often and I'm seeing it in this thread once more.

[Indy Texas]

"Islam is not a race" = a common refrain of racists.

Are you saying Islam is a race?




Queen Rania, Suharto and this Senegalese politician would probably beg to differ.

[Lief 🗽]

It's certainly treated as one in Western Europe at least, yeah.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

To those who are voting HP,

Would you feel the same way if Ayaan Hirsi Ali was a lesbian woman from sub-Saharan Africa who had been victimized by the anti-gay policies of right-wing Christian leaders in places like Uganda and was severely anti-Christian as a result?

If she was as severely anti-Christian as the actual Ayaan Hirsi Ali is anti-Muslim and by some weird turn of events her political views ended up intersecting and interacting with those of other people in Western Serious-Person circles in the same ways, then yes, absolutely.

[Indy Texas]

To those who are voting HP,

Would you feel the same way if Ayaan Hirsi Ali was a lesbian woman from sub-Saharan Africa who had been victimized by the anti-gay policies of right-wing Christian leaders in places like Uganda and was severely anti-Christian as a result?

If she was as severely anti-Christian as the actual Ayaan Hirsi Ali is anti-Muslim and by some weird turn of events her political views ended up intersecting and interacting with those of other people in Western Serious-Person circles in the same ways, then yes, absolutely.

What difference does that make? This is what my mean when I say liberals use the "guilt by association" test when it comes to religious bigotry. If she is as severely anti-Christian as she is anti-Muslim, then that in and of itself should make her a bigot. Why should the fact that anti-Muslim views may be held by a separate third party (the Serious-Person circles, which I honestly don't know what you're referring to when you reference) mean one's degree of anti-Islam sentiment ought to be evaluated differently than one's degree of anti-Christian sentiment?

Ayaan Hirsi Ali tends to hold anti-Muslim viewpoints. Far-right fascist groups tend to agree with her views for a different set of reasons. Therefore, Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a HP for holding anti-Muslim views.

Liberals tend to oppose free trade agreements and relaxed labor laws. Far-right fascist groups tend to agree with their views for a different set of reasons. Therefore, liberals are HPs for disliking free trade agreements and relaxed labor laws.

See what happens?

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

...because...because the question isn't solely one of personal bigotry but also one of geopolitics, and because what I was getting at is not 'guilt by association'. It's not that she just knows the wrong people or something; it's that she herself has a bellicose, unapologetically imperialist view of international relations. Criticizing someone for happening to believe some of the same things as someone else who is unsavory is not 'guilt by association' if the beliefs that make those other people unsavory are among the ones that are shared.

[Indy Texas]

...because...because the question isn't solely one of personal bigotry but also one of geopolitics, and because what I was getting at is not 'guilt by association'. It's not that she just knows the wrong people or something; it's that she herself has a bellicose, unapologetically imperialist view of international relations. Criticizing someone for happening to believe some of the same things as someone else who is unsavory is not 'guilt by association' if the beliefs that make those other people unsavory are among the ones that are shared.

Are you seriously telling me that I'm not allowed to dislike Group X even if I have a justifiable reason for doing so simply because Group Y dislikes Group X for no reason other than being mean and bigoted?

Someone who was victimized by politicized, radical Islam has no right to vocally dislike politicized, radical Islam simply because there are a lot of people who also vocally dislike politicized, radical Islam for less compelling or explainable reasons (i.e. Oklahoma Tea Partiers living in perpetual fear of Sharia law because we have a Kenyan president)? Because...geopolitics?

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

...because...because the question isn't solely one of personal bigotry but also one of geopolitics, and because what I was getting at is not 'guilt by association'. It's not that she just knows the wrong people or something; it's that she herself has a bellicose, unapologetically imperialist view of international relations. Criticizing someone for happening to believe some of the same things as someone else who is unsavory is not 'guilt by association' if the beliefs that make those other people unsavory are among the ones that are shared.

Are you seriously telling me that I'm not allowed to dislike Group X even if I have a justifiable reason for doing so simply because Group Y dislikes Group X for no reason other than being mean and bigoted?

Someone who was victimized by politicized, radical Islam has no right to vocally dislike politicized, radical Islam simply because there are a lot of people who also vocally dislike politicized, radical Islam for less compelling or explainable reasons (i.e. Oklahoma Tea Partiers living in perpetual fear of Sharia law because we have a Kenyan president)? Because...geopolitics?

No, that's not what I'm telling you. I'm telling you you're not allowed to say things like

You must be logged in to read this quote.

and Get Taken Seriously as a public figure and be treated with kid gloves because your (partially fabricated) personal story is different from those of someone else who might say the same sorts of things. You may be an object of sympathy, and you certainly don't deserve to have to live in hiding for a period of time or be subject to death threats or anything like that, but you're still an HP.

(From here, if you think the context will somehow help.)

If you can't see the difference between 'dislik[ing] Group X' and saying things like that in your capacity as a public figure then I don't know what else there is for me to say.

[Indy Texas]

I don't really see how that excerpt makes her inherently some kind of bigot. She states that she believes peace-loving Muslims exist but that political Islam is currently in control of the religion as a whole.

If there are Westerners who are bigoted against Muslims, you can't say there aren't many Muslims who have done nothing to alleviate that. There are a lot of Americans who have never met a Muslim in their life. They don't know any. The only exposure they have had to Islam is having their country attacked by Muslims on 9/11. Does that mean all Muslims supported that? Of course not.

But the problem with Islam is that even though it's oversimplifying to say they're all monolithically jihadists, they made the choice to structure their religion in such a way that it's next to impossible to culturally and socially target the "bad" Muslims without targeting the "good" ones as well.

Christianity has very clear subdivisions and denominations, most of which are very hierarchical. That's why when a Catholic priest rapes a choir boy, people don't get mad at Christians in general. They get mad at Catholics. That dividing line is there. When a fundamentalist megachurch pastor embezzles his congregants' money and buys drugs and prostitutes, it's not a problem with Christianity, but rather with evangelical Christianity or specifically with that church.

My advice to the moderate Muslims who don't want to have a violent clash of civilizations with the West, who believe God gave us both faith and reason to guide us, and who don't adhere to a literalist interpretation of the Koran is this - stop calling yourselves Muslims. When Catholics couldn't agree on how people should be baptized and which bishop would have final say over church affairs, some of them stopped calling themselves Catholics. And that is where we got the Eastern Orthodox Church. When some Anglicans become disillusioned with strict High Church tradition and wanted to incorporate the teachings of John Wesley into their doctrine, they stopped calling themselves Anglicans and started calling themselves Methodists.

But to the extent that that has not happened, and the "bad" Muslims are very much in the driver's seat, I honestly don't think what Ms. Ali is saying is bigoted or hateful. It's simply the reality in which we live.

I happen to agree with Ms. Ali's overall assertion that Islam as a whole has a net negative influence on the world currently. That hasn't always been the case - we have things like algebra to remind us of that. But I'm not going to ignore the fact that there is only one religion in the world that is currently producing the lion's share of terror attacks; there is only one religion in the world that has a significant share of its members more or less declaring open warfare on the rest of us. And that religion is Islam. There is no moral equivalency between Islamic jihad and the crazy rantings of fundie Christians like Michele Bachmann who don't actually do anything to harm people who don't share their views. I'm sorry if you think making the judgment, with evidence in my favor, that Islam is a "bad" religion somehow makes me a bigot. At least I don't serve as an apologist for terrorists and misogynists for the sake of being politically correct.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

So you can't, in fact, see the difference between 'dislik[ing] Group X' and saying things like what Ayaan Hirsi Ali has said in her capacity as a public figure--or, apparently, between criticizing her for being or at least coming across as an unhinged, time-serving warmonger and 'serv[ing] as an apologist for terrorists and misogynists for the sake of being politically correct'. That being the case I'm not even sure where to begin here so with respect I'll demur. I'm tempted to try to find a clip of the Dude from The Big Lebowski saying 'you're not wrong; you're just an asshole' to link to but the problem is that that isn't strictly speaking accurate.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

If someone is a devout follower of a religion, you can't expect them to give up the name of that religion due to the power of others in that religion who have an opposing and destructive stance.  Islam/Muslim (from the same root in Arabic) is a term found in the Koran, and it's been used for hundreds of years to refer to peaceful and thoughtful traditions alongside those of a more violent and intolerant variety. 

I have to respect Ali for her courage, and she is standing up against some things that are really evil and pose dangers to liberty that she knows from her experience.  But then she takes from her experience that this is the definition of what Islam itself is, and can't imagine transformation from within Islam, or through any kind of dialogue, as a possibility. And every aspect of that religion, or even religion in general, becomes suspect.  This emphasis on defeating a religion itself turns into a threat to liberty and a threat of intolerance and even violence. 

[opebo]

If someone is a devout follower of a religion, you can't expect them to give up the name of that religion due to the power of others in that religion who have an opposing and destructive stance.

Yes, you can. In other words, their unwillingness to stop being a devout follower of that religion marks them as your enemy.

[Oakvale]

The fact there's not only a net FF result but a clear majority makes it evident that this forum is a ridiculous joke. Continue bravely fighting "political correctness" by otherising people, guys

[Oakvale]

~60% of this forum, apparently -

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

The fact there's not only a net FF result but a clear majority makes it evident that this forum is a ridiculous joke. Continue bravely fighting "political correctness" by otherising people, guys

Why do you hate women and homosexuals?

[Antonio the Sixth]

As much as I despise her bigoted views and her association with movements that are anything but progressive and secular, I voted FF because I want to believe that she is (mis)guided by genuine feminist concerns rather than by sheer bigotry, and that it's fair to cut her some slack considering her background. Still, it's sad to see she chose to be part of the problem rather than of the solution.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Well at least we can safely say that  doubling down on "Western " imperialism will surely win hearts and minds!!!

Oh, and HP.

[Reginald]

If there are Westerners who are bigoted against Muslims, you can't say there aren't many Muslims who have done nothing to alleviate that. There are a lot of Americans who have never met a Muslim in their life. They don't know any. The only exposure they have had to Islam is having their country attacked by Muslims on 9/11. Does that mean all Muslims supported that? Of course not.

But the problem with Islam is that even though it's oversimplifying to say they're all monolithically jihadists, they made the choice to structure their religion in such a way that it's next to impossible to culturally and socially target the "bad" Muslims without targeting the "good" ones as well.

Christianity has very clear subdivisions and denominations, most of which are very hierarchical. That's why when a Catholic priest rapes a choir boy, people don't get mad at Christians in general. They get mad at Catholics. That dividing line is there. When a fundamentalist megachurch pastor embezzles his congregants' money and buys drugs and prostitutes, it's not a problem with Christianity, but rather with evangelical Christianity or specifically with that church.

This seems to be condoning that wonderful mindset of "Islam is just so hard to understand." I'm no Islam scholar (nor will I pretend to be one, which I know is a stark deviation from the Forum's usual operations), but I guarantee you there's a more nuanced distinction going on within Islam than "Black and White." And Christianity may avoid some of these generalizations in our still-largely-Christian culture, but it doesn't avoid everything: it as a whole is still very much Anti-Gay and Anti-Woman despite certain denominations being wholly tolerant in that regard.

So saying something like "the bad Muslims are in the driver's seat" comes across as over-simplification, to say the least… at least to my civilian eyes/ears/whatever-bodily-metaphor-works-best-on-a-computer. But what an easy way to get the American public to negatively characterize a huge religion!

I happen to take issue with much more of your post (policing identity is never a good thing, etc.), but I'll stop there since I'm interjecting a bit. The import of your post definitely deserves more consideration though than the tried-and-true Atlas Forum Technique of "I can't bring myself to respond to this. But into the Deluge it goes!" precisely because it's so perniciously common.

[bedstuy]

My concern with Ali is that she's allied with nativist types who want to use the more bizarre , morally reprehensible elements of Islam as a cover-story for their xenophobia and racism for various types of brown people.  My other concern is that she tends to speak too broadly about Muslims and Islam and inflames people in an unhelpful way.   

But overall, I think she's doing a great service by pointing out the plight of women in the third world.  I think that's the biggest human rights issue in the world right now and for whatever reason, it's off limits in the eyes of many. 

[Lurker]

I considered voting Freedom Fighter for the same reason as Antonio, despite misgivings.

Then I remembered that she is married to Niall Ferguson. HP.

[Darth Plagueis]

To those who are voting HP,

Would you feel the same way if Ayaan Hirsi Ali was a lesbian woman from sub-Saharan Africa who had been victimized by the anti-gay policies of right-wing Christian leaders in places like Uganda and was severely anti-Christian as a result?

If not, why do you think there is something different about Islam that allows you to hold it to a different standard?

I've noticed that the American Left has a bizarre tendency to do this. I'm not legitimizing people who think liberals are out to destroy Christianity, but I find it interesting that there is a tendency among secular liberals to view Islam as some special, fragile thing that needs to be protected while Christianity is an insidious force trying to leap over the wall between church and state. A vigorous defense of a secular public square is abandoned for the sake of "diversity" or wanting to seem educated or cultured.

My only explanation is that a logical fallacy is happening where if conservatives are criticizing something or don't like it, it can never actually merit criticism. "Fox News commentators like Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Therefore, Ayaan Hirsi Ali must be a stupid, racist bigot by virtue of being liked by people I consider to be stupid, racist and bigoted."

Agreed 100%. Great post.

[Darth Plagueis]

She and her husband are both awful people.

The liberal coddling of a religion which when implemented as law invariably horribly oppresses women, the LGBT community, and political/religious dissidents worldwide is absolutely sickening, especially coming from someone so sharply critical of conservative Christianity (which FTR isn't much better than Islam).

Agreed. But Radical Islamism is 500X worse easy. ANY religion or extremist that supports oppression/killing of gays, women, and people with different religious views is evil period.