02-10-2017, 08:47 AM
(02-10-2017, 08:36 AM)Makween Wrote: We have talked about it before. To say that it 'pervades the religion' implies that that final circle of conservatives makes up the majority of Muslims worldwide.
'Clash of civilisations' rhetoric is normally based, among other things, on the idea that there's been conflict between the global West and Islam (which until recently was concentrated in the global East/South) ever since medieval times (but more specifically since the Enlightenment) because the two are mutually incompatible. The big difference now is the presence of large numbers of Muslims in the West - mostly treated as though their religion were the only cultural influence acting upon them. The idea of 'circles within Islam' isn't terribly relevant to that.
It doesn't imply it's a majority, just demonstrates that violent jihadism involves more than just a few bad eggs. The problem goes deeper than those that would actually carry out acts of terror or join militant organisations.
Not really sure what you're saying in the second bit.
I still stand by my view on 'Clash of civilisations' but would also point out that there are unquestionably clashes going on within Islam, not just down sectarian lines but intellectual and cultural lines too. This is more than just being about 'West vs Islam', we have friends and potential friends in these countries already fighting, arguing and protesting. I don't think it does them any favours to be in denial about the problem. There's a bit more to it than 'Islam bad', it's about supporting the democrats, the intellectuals, the secularists in their struggles against religious oppression rather than saying it's not our problem.
