A take at Mr. Auster's response
Reader comment on article: [The Search for Moderate Islam:] A Reply to Lawrence Auster

Submitted by Alain Jean-Mairet (Switzerland), Feb 4, 2005 at 00:46

Islam is evil at heart. It is a plain fact. Mr. Auster is right to see it that way. But he is nonetheless wrong to treat the problem at that level. Because everything, even Islam, generates reaction. And the reaction to Islam, from Muslims themselves, through the ages, has been, in great part, too, one of auto-appeasement. And that has a formidable value.

Of course, what we see is predominantly violence, coercion, cruelty. It is what moves the great events of history, what anybody sees, at it were, whereas the particular reaction has always been discreet, smooth, hidden, surrounded by a profound sense of shame, too. Shame in front of "official" good Muslims (jihadi killers), and shame in front of good people of other faith.

Today, our job now is not to destroy; it is to liberate. We have to see the good part of Islam(ic) civilization, to see that it resided in the heart of peaceful people, who have been able to integrate that evil religion into a personal faith made of peaceful relationships.

Consider how hard it is to be a good human being when your religion is Islam. Consider how truly good a Muslim has to be in order not to be perverted by that religion as he is living it day by day. We just need those wise and silent people. We have to put them into light, to put them to work, to power.

And the first step on that way is to realize that they do exist, and that they were able, at some periods of history, to inspire the bulk of Islam. We have to understand how they did that. For we will find just there the solutions we are seeking now. Possibly.

We have to fight Islamists with all the strength and firmness possible, but we must preserve the pearl that that ugly oyster has produced. Or we will just stir at hatred, and thus prepare ourselves some future woes.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited, before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments.