At Public Discourse this week, an interesting trifecta: in Monday’s installment, Michael Novak, in “Religious Liberty and the Development of Doctrine in Islam,” predicts:
By the year 2020, rough and painful human experience will lead the Islamic nations of the Mediterranean Basin to resound with positive cries for democracy, human rights, individual liberty, and the dignity of every man, woman, and child. By 2020, Islamic peoples will be crying out publicly in favor of regimes that allow men and women to act from reflection and choice, and to live as peoples who are free and responsible, and who are eager to show initiative and unprecedented creativity.
Novak’s essay is adapted from a talk he gave after dinner on May 6 in Princeton, to the participants gathered together by the Witherspoon Institute (where I work) for a two-day conference on “The Case for Religious Liberty,” a project of our Task Force on International Religious Freedom, chaired by Dr. Tom Farr of Georgetown University’s Berkley Center.
Present for Novak’s talk were two Muslim scholars who were moved to respond to Novak’s prediction. On Wednesday, Abdullah Saeed wrote “Let Freedom Ring: The Muslim Call for Religious Freedom,” noting:
While many Muslims still do live in extremely repressive societies, a substantial number of those in Muslim-majority countries are enjoying a level of freedom comparable to that in the West. With such freedom, Muslims have been able to discuss, promote, and propagate ideas about intellectual, political, and religious freedom, topics that were taboo until recently. Debates on human rights are taking place on internet sites and blogs, as well as in academia. Even the most controversial issues, including religious freedom, apostasy, and blasphemy, are being openly discussed.
State censorship of writing and speeches, which managed to successfully eliminate any public call for freedom, is no longer as pervasive, and where it still exists, it is no longer as effective. People’s greater freedom to express themselves has resulted in an ever-rising level of intellectual output, in books, television programs, discussions, debates, and on the internet, which has further weakened the despots’ hold over Muslim societies.
And today, Mustafa Akyol concludes the week with “Islam Will Find Its Own Way to Freedom,” observing:
The modern Middle East . . . has been haunted by the vicious cycle between two extremes: secular authoritarianism and Islamic authoritarianism. Islamic liberalism, which had its roots in tradition, and which looked promising in the 19th century, was obscured.
But now, with the Arab Spring of 2011, we seem to be at a critical turning point. . . .
There is much to ponder in these three articles. Perhaps there is much cause for hope. But there is sure to be much dark turmoil and obscurity along the way, even if the future of the Muslim world is ultimately a bright one.
Akyol’s new book, Islam Without Extremes, has just come into my hands. Perhaps I can prevail on my friends at First Things to find a good reviewer for it . . . ?
July 1st, 2011 | 4:21 pm
[...] http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2011/07/01/three-optimists-look-to-islams-future/ Share a link to this post: This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. ← Why Christians in Syria support Assad, and why Israel is free not to [...]
July 2nd, 2011 | 7:50 am
Mercy as the foundation of freedom might help to open more hearts in the Islamic world , since they seem to want to practice same as a foundational principle .
False use of freedom which is what the West is promoting now , could make them shy away from true freedom ,to allow things to revert again !
Thus, our own ways can be looked at, as issues having to deal with ‘war on terror’ , recognising that the deep yearning , to have stable , healthy families need to be seen as a fundamental issue of freedom and anything that damages same , to be dealt with , in accordance !
July 2nd, 2011 | 8:09 am
In France, whwere I spend a lot of time, it is very noticeable that many Muslims, and especially Muslim women, are manifesting their confidence in the Republic and proclaiming their adherence to its values.
The president of the Muslim women’s movement Ni Putes Ni Soumises (Neither Sluts nor Door-mats) Sihen Habchi, in a forceful attack on “multiculturalism” has demanded “No more justifications of our oppression in the name of the right to be different and of respect toward those who force us to bow our heads”
Rachida Dati, herself a Muslim and former French Minister of Justice told the National Assembly that “The Republic is alone capable of uniting men and women of different origins, colours and religions around the principles of tolerance, liberty, solidarity and laïcité, making the Republic truly one and indivisible.”
Likewise, Fadela Amara, another Muslim and Secretary of State for Urban Policies has declared that “For this generation, the crucial issues are laïcité, gender equality and gender desegregation, based upon living together in harmony throughout the world, and not only in France.”
July 2nd, 2011 | 12:59 pm
Scripture describes the future of Islam in Isaiah 31:8-9. Islam will be overcome, but not by the sword, it will succumb to the Word of God.
Islam and the countries dominated by this and other pagan religions, where life is cheap and justice is distorted, cannot bear up under comparison to the quality of life and justice that is produced by following the Word of God, and that exists in those countries ruled by Bible-inspired principles (despite the Western decadence).
July 3rd, 2011 | 6:48 am
I can hope that these predictions are correct.
But I’m quite skeptical. Thirteen or so centuries of a religion spread by the sword, and lately showing its violent side again, is not likely to be reversed in 9 years!
July 3rd, 2011 | 1:04 pm
I suspect the ‘spread by the sword’ meme is overstated. An honest look at history would probably reveal religion to be highly unmotivational in terms of warfare. In other words, most wars happen for secular reasons…when religious reasons can be lined up ‘behind’ them, it may up the ante in terms of motivation and morale but religion very rarely decides the matter.
July 5th, 2011 | 5:17 am
Booton
Religion may have seldom been the principle motive for war, but it has often been an important instrument of conquest.
To adopt the old Roman definition that to conquer is to give laws, it is obvious that religion has often been used to bring the manners and customs of a vanquished people into conformity with those of their conquerors and why, on the contrary, tenacious adherence to their religion has often preserved the national identity of a people, subjugated indeed, but unconquered. Greece, Ireland and Poland furnish obvious examples of such resistance; the formerly Romanised and Christianised territories of Syria, Egypt and the Maghreb are examples of successful Muslim conquest. The latter furnish a rare example of civilised peoples adopting the manners and customs of barbarians.
July 5th, 2011 | 8:43 am
[...] Three optimists look to Islam’s future. First Thoughts, 7/2/11 [...]
July 6th, 2011 | 8:27 pm
“Spread by the sword,” I say, and I repeat it.
One of the difficulties of “honestly” looking at history is when we do it through the lens of our current culture. It can cause us to make serious errors in understanding–including of history being written this very day.
Take the idea of religious war, as interpreted by one living in our culture. Shucks, most people in the US would sooner go to war for their local NFL team than for their religion. They can’t possibly imagine anyone having religious concerns as an actual impulse to war.
And thus they are blind to important realities about past and present “history.”
July 7th, 2011 | 9:29 am
In line with what Michael PS said, and also in line with Joe DeVet’s point as well, the internal motivations of Muslims in initiating and pursuing the conquests (i.e., the degree to which they were fighting for Allah or instead fighting for themselves in the name of Allah) are less relevant than the fact that wherever the Islamic armies went, Islam was imposed top down and to a degree that effectively crushed resistance, except where the armies themselves were effectively resisted. It hardly matters how consistent or complex their motives were; Islam was in fact spread by the sword.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact