Sam Harris, A Liberal, Asks:
Do Liberals Have Their Heads in the Sand, or Someplace Darker?
By amba | Related entries in Foreign Policy, Ideas, Religion, The War On Terrorism
Crusader against religion Sam Harris (who, largely through his own tireless efforts, now merits our culture’s coveted prefix “bestselling”) in the L.A. Times:
Perhaps I should establish my liberal bone fides at the outset. I’d like to see taxes raised on the wealthy, drugs decriminalized and homosexuals free to marry. I also think that the Bush administration deserves most of the criticism it has received in the last six years â€â€? especially with respect to its waging of the war in Iraq, its scuttling of science and its fiscal irresponsibility.
But my correspondence with liberals has convinced me that liberalism has grown dangerously out of touch with the realities of our world � specifically with what devout Muslims actually believe about the West, about paradise and about the ultimate ascendance of their faith.
On questions of national security, I am now as wary of my fellow liberals as I am of the religious demagogues on the Christian right. This may seem like frank acquiescence to the charge that “liberals are soft on terrorism.” It is, and they are. [ ... ]
The truth is that we are not fighting a “war on terror.” We are fighting a pestilential theology and a longing for paradise.
This is not to say that we are at war with all Muslims. But we are absolutely at war with those who believe that death in defense of the faith is the highest possible good [ ... ] [and, from later in the piece: {A} terrifying number of the world's Muslims now view all political and moral questions in terms of their affiliation with Islam. This leads them to rally to the cause of other Muslims no matter how sociopathic their behavior.] ‘
And yet, despite abundant evidence to the contrary, liberals continue to imagine that Muslim terrorism springs from economic despair, lack of education and American militarism. [...]
At its most extreme, liberal denial has found expression in a growing subculture of conspiracy theorists who believe that the atrocities of 9/11 were orchestrated by our own government. [ ... ]
Such an astonishing eruption of masochistic unreason could well mark the decline of liberalism, if not the decline of Western civilization. There are books, films and conferences organized around this phantasmagoria, and they offer an unusually clear view of the debilitating dogma that lurks at the heart of liberalism: Western power is utterly malevolent, while the powerless people of the Earth can be counted on to embrace reason and tolerance, if only given sufficient economic opportunities.
I don’t know how many more engineers and architects need to blow themselves up, fly planes into buildings or saw the heads off of journalists before this fantasy will dissipate. [ ... ]
Given the mendacity and shocking incompetence of the Bush administration � especially its mishandling of the war in Iraq � liberals can find much to lament in the conservative approach to fighting the war on terror. Unfortunately, liberals hate the current administration with such fury that they regularly fail to acknowledge just how dangerous and depraved our enemies in the Muslim world are. [ ... ]
Unless liberals realize that there are tens of millions of people in the Muslim world who are far scarier than Dick Cheney, they will be unable to protect civilization from its genuine enemies.
Increasingly, Americans will come to believe that the only people hard-headed enough to fight the religious lunatics of the Muslim world are the religious lunatics of the West. Indeed, it is telling that the people who speak with the greatest moral clarity about the current wars in the Middle East are members of the Christian right, whose infatuation with biblical prophecy is nearly as troubling as the ideology of our enemies. Religious dogmatism is now playing both sides of the board in a very dangerous game.
Utter clarity. By all means, read the whole thing.
This entry was posted on Monday, September 18th, 2006 and is filed under Foreign Policy, Ideas, Religion, The War On Terrorism. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
September 18th, 2006 at 12:49 pm
So, basically, the failure of liberals to take the threat of Islamic terrorism seriously will not only lead to greater power for the Islamists but will also lead to greater power for the Christian right here at home.
I’d considered the first part of that, but never the second. But it makes sense. If there is no honest leadership coming from the left in regards to the biggest conflict of our day, then the average American will look to the one place where they can find real fortitude: the far right.
And yet, as I have so often learned, it doesn’t matter how many liberal bone fides you list, once you take the opinion expressed by Harris, much of the left will consider you an apostate and turn against you.
This is not a problem that will be solved quickly or calmly.
September 18th, 2006 at 1:02 pm
To be fair to liberals, and thus to myself, I think there are many of us who would honestly admit that we don’t know what to make of Middle East issues. I am leery of just how dangerous the Muslim world is because I don’t trust the current administration to be honest about that. I’m sure they are pretty dangerous, but I would like to hear the facts from an administration that is honest and full if integrity. It doesn’t have to be democrat; it just needs to be a group we can trust.
September 18th, 2006 at 2:11 pm
Meredith -
Do you really need an administration to help you see reality? On an issue like this, who waits every 4 years for someone to lay out the facts/issues for them before they form an opinion or come to a conclusion? This is like hearing about those undecided voters for the ‘04 election - IN SEPTEMBER ‘04! I think the Daily Show did a skit on these people. The crux of the skit was: WTF! What will it take for you to make up your mind!
Muslim extremists are a huge threat. Muslim moderates who are enablers of the extremists are a huge threat. GWB and the incompetent way he has conducted this war is a huge threat. Fundamentalist/Evangelical Christians in the US who believe in the End-of-Days are a huge threat. I can go one. There is a mountain of evidence to back these claims up. These issues are not necessarily mutually exclusive. This should not be an issue for anyone (Liberal or Conservative).
September 18th, 2006 at 2:16 pm
Perhaps one of the reasons people of faith tend to be more concerned about radical Islam is that we know how seductive that kind of dogmatic blindness can be, and just how easily one can justify the worst of attrocities in the name of a faith. And, of course just how completely immune such folk can be to logical, rational persuasion.
Anyone who has delved deeply at all into their faith knows about that doorway to fanaticism, and has a good idea of what lies beyond it. Not just knowledge in rational terms, but knowledge at the gut level. It’s that window into the soul of the jihadist which informs our opinion of their potential reasonableness.
September 18th, 2006 at 2:20 pm
I can see here by the softball replies to your Republican talking points blog that you don’t allow any real criticism, so I won’t try. SHAME ON YOU!
September 18th, 2006 at 2:53 pm
Carl,
Thank you for proving my contention “it doesn’t matter how many liberal bone fides you list, once you take the opinion expressed by Harris, much of the left will consider you an apostate and turn against you.”
Donklephant is not a Republican talking points blog and this post is not a Republican talking points post. To think otherwise is just willful blindness.
September 18th, 2006 at 3:34 pm
Harris is correct to identify the threat posed by religious extremism. He did so with his book and he does so again in this article. The outstanding question is how to address these threats. Racial prejudice may not be perfectly analogous, but I think it offers some insight into the perils of unbridled extremist ideologies on both sides of a conflict. Our own Civil War points out the potential for ideology to lead to violent conflict. How we address religious extremism may well demonstrate what we did or didn’t learn from our own experience.
However, identifying the threat and crafting the solution are two distinct endeavors. Harris clearly identifies the threat but seems more inclined to then pivot and blame liberalism for our inability to confront the issue rather that offer any reasoned solutions. By acknowledging that liberalism is “generally reasonable and tolerant of diversity” and at the same time blaming it for not combating religious literalism is incongruent logic. In reality, liberalism clearly understands the dangers of religious literalism which is exactly why it promotes reasonability and tolerance. Further, that understanding is why liberals believe that the war in Iraq and the war on terror will ultimately require political solutions rather than an ever expanding military strategy.
As world population and a world economy continue to expand, our abilities to prevent the inherent racial, cultural, and religious clashes that come with proximity will become more challenging. Succumbing to the absolutism that accompanies any us/them equation is certain to trigger accelerated conflict. It is essential we refrain from adopting a broad brush strokes mentality. A reactionary strategy is nothing more than the fuel for escalation. In the end, it is individuals who define the differences upon which conflict is predicated…whether they be Islamist, Liberal, or otherwise. It will be the politics of leadership that will eventually bridge the divide.
Read more here:
http://www.thoughttheater.com
September 19th, 2006 at 10:29 am
Just to echo my comment on the thread above — economic/educational success isn’t the cure to get rid of radical Islam as an inordinate amount of (international) terrorists are very well educated and normally well off. However, I do think economic issues are key to how the masses think. It is the masses that we should worry about because a) some of them will radicalize but most importantly b) their loyalties are conflicted and that gives the radical elements shelter. Sure there might be tens of millions of zealots, but the region has hundreds of millions of people. As it stands now, the vast majority of people don’t know who to trust. They know they can’t trust the radicals but don’t think they can trust the West either — and it’s the radicals that are going around killing them for disagreeing. The risk/reward ratio isn’t nearly strong enough for them to risk their lives, but if the option was between toiling in poverty and hardship or being prosperous, and all they have to do is stand up against the extremists, we would gain many allies. I think Liberals have done a terrible job of making the conversation be about the motives of the terrorists and extremists instead of about creating a wedge. When I look back on Nazi Germany that is the parallel that is clearest to me: the majority feels trapped by external forces and doesn’t stand up until it’s too late.
April 24th, 2007 at 9:18 am
Barbara Harris
Thanks for sharing points about music and entertainment. But I thought your visitors might want to learn more about where to download songs