Agora

This is a letter to the editor from yesterday. Beautifully written.

Politiken, March 9, 2006

Letter to the editor

Verbal Sidearm

By Katrine Winkel Holm, Cand.Theol.

ISLAMOPHOBIA. A new, often used word. An effective verbal sidearm: That’s Islamophobia, they say, and the attacker is checkmate, for a while at least. Maybe it’s time to turn that weapon against those who use it. That is what this article intends to do.
But first: What does it really mean? Literally, it simply means fear of Islam. In my opinion there may be good reasons for such a fear. Just ask Salman Rushdie[1] or Ayaan Hirsi Ali. But in the context in which the self-proclaimed euro-islamist Tariq Ramadan uses it, it means a clinical fear of Islam. A delusion, in other words, because the implicit contention of Mr. Ramadan is that it is not reasonable to fear Islam. Islam can easily be reconciled with Democracy and Freedom of Speech. Islam is a religion of peace, not a religion of violence. If we assume that that is true, the mystery seems to be why lately there have been so many who advocate limiting the Freedom of Speech on account of Moslems’ feelings. Why do members of PEN want to make a law to protect religious minorities - Moslems - “against defamation due to their religion.”

WHY does EU-Commissioner Franco Frattini want to introduce a self-regulating set of rules to European media to hinder Freedom of Speech from being abused?
Why does Javier Solana state that he will do his utmost to prevent publication of further cartoons of Muhammed?
Why do grey-haired law professors suddenly become advocates of strengthening the moldering blasphemy law? Why do leftist intellectuals take special care not to offend Islam, when they have so far not shown such consideration to Christianity?
My guess is this: because they are afraid. Because the embassy burnings, the boycott, and the frothing curses which have hailed down upon our country have filled them with fear. Fear of Islam. They have met a steely determination - and yielded. They are the true Islamophobes.

CHRISTIANITY, whose founder was a peaceful king of donkeys who rejected all secular power, he has not enjoyed the same respect in leftist intellectual circles. Georg Brandes[2] said that he was filled with the most livid hatred of Christianity and since his time it has been considered good manners to criticise and scoff at holy men. As long as they were Christians. As long as they were harmless and easy to laugh at.

NOW another kind of holy men have arrived in Europe, a kind that doesn’t accept that their prophet is ridiculed.
“All who accuse Islam of being a violent religion shall be decapitated.” So said a placard at a Muhammed-demonstration in London. And in spite of the inherent humor of such a statement, the meaning of it can easily make Europeans who value their life reconsider their priorities.
Isn’t it, on further reflection, better to respect than to criticise Islam? And the uncountable - in their own opinion fearless - members of the République de Lettres join in this Islamophobic childrens’ logic. Their bile is, at no cost to themselves, poured upon Fogh and his coalition, whom they know have neither the will nor the opportunity to harm them. But in dealing with Islamism they walk softly indeed. They’re screaming at mice and grinning at wolves.

TAKE, for instance, the Historian of Religion Tim Jensen, who after the embassy burnings proclaimed on the TV2/Nyhederne news programme that in the future he would be more delicate in dealing with the Quran than he had been in the past - now that he knew how offended Moslems can get. Tim Jensen is a true Islamophobe.
What is more: The reactions from Jensen, Solana, Frattini and the members of the PEN club are proof in themselves that there is reason to fear Islam. Theirs is a reaction of fear. What they are really saying is that Islam is not dangerous - if you’re careful. Special consideration must be shown, special restriction must be put in place, especially respectless individuals must be silenced, because if the Europeans aren’t careful, the Islamists of Europe might become dangerous.

SUCH a reaction to the growing Islamist threat can only be called this: Cowardly lack of civil courage. Defeatist Islamophobia.
But, am I not an Islamophobe, then? If Islamophobia equals fear of totalitarian Islam, I will wear that badge proudly. But I am not so scared that I can’t admit to being scared. And I am not so scared that I dare not criticise the intellectual terror of Islamism - to loan a phrase from Fay Weldon.

WHEN one is faced with a threat as dangerous as Islamism, there are two basic ways in which one may react.
One can try to resist it and refuse to be subdued. Or one may try to accomodate it, make concessions to it in the hope of dampening its wrath and its dangerousness. The former reaction can be called the Churchillian reaction, the other the Chamberlain reaction.
Our Prime Minister has[3] - thank God - chosen the Churchillian reaction, the Islamophobes have chosen the Chamberlain reaction. Islamist-appeasement is what is practiced in the modern environs of Brussels. It’s lack of energy and fear that is the mark of the leftist intellectuals who daren’t unanimously stand firm in defense of the our liberties. Islamophobia and then some, a reaction which, considering the circumstances, brings with it mortal peril.

THAT is why it is time to say to leftist intellectuals;[4] Niels Barfoed, Mette Winge and Tim Jensen: Be Men, stop this defeatist Islamophobia and show will to resist the Islamist threat.

[1] See this article for details about the similarities between The Battle of Khartoon and the reaction to the Satanic Verses.
[2] Note: Georg Brandes was a social liberal commenter in Denmark who was Nietzsche’s Danish disciple.
[3] See this article for an excellent interview with Anders Fogh Rasmussen.
[4] See this article for details about some defeatist Islamophobes inDenmark