69 million page views

Pipes is right but the clarity of his message is obscure

Reader comment on item: Debate in London: Radical Islam vs. Civilization
in response to reader comment: Problem is Islam itself

Submitted by Rick House (United States), Feb 2, 2007 at 16:41

What we see in Islam today is the creation of Islamic institutional structures. When Islam joins with political structures, it's forced to adapt itself and create corresponding structures of its own. When the Saudi Kingdom joined with Islam in Saudi Arabia, Islamic schools were created. When Islam joined the political movement to oust the Shah in Iran, Islam created a theocracy to replace it. When muslims fought French colonialism in Algeria, Islam created and maintained military cells to aid in the fight. It did the same thing in Palestine, Egypt, Indonesia, etc...

What I'm saying is...

Islam is the simplest of the Desert religions. It is focused almost entirely on an individual's personal relationship with Allah. The five Pillars define this relationship. Historically and textually, it has no institutional hierarchy. However, because of Islam's simplicity, it is also highly adaptable. With each new threat -- either perceived or actual -- followers of it are gradually creating Islamic institutions, perhaps even an Islamic church. .. Think about it. Today, when we talk of the conflict, we talk about newly created quasi-political and militant entities and personalities, not Islam. These selfsame entities and personalities are what Pipes is calling radical... The religion of Islam is something entirely different. It exists, as it always has, as one of the three major belief systems in the world.

Pipes and Bush are right. The problems we confront are not derived from Islam. The problems stem from the entities and personalities that are using the faith as a binding agent to achieve political, economic, sectarian, cultural, and criminal goals of their own devising.

Submitting....

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 and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Pipes is right but the clarity of his message is obscure by Rick House

Email me if someone replies to my comment

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 and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2022 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)