olegna says:

"the cultural-leftist theory that militant Islam is merely an expression of authentic culture and thus beyond the judgment of oppressive-minded Westerners."

Huh? I realize accusing the secularists of being soft on "militant Islam" (which I define as people who blow up commercial airplanes and subway cars, not the sliver of 1.2 billion Muslims that think women shouldn't drive) is a fashionable platitude among the right wingers and the Hilary Democrats, but I have never met a secularist who is softer on jihadists than s/he is on all those poor, persecuted Christians and Jews living in America.

It's probably worth noting that the accusation that secularists are multi-culti defenders of terrorism (which is for all intents and purposes a synonym for "militant Islam") is a line right out of Karl Rove's notes on how to alienate the Real Left. And it's certainly the same BS that The Hitch has been blathering about for years. I feel compelled to ask the author of this article: Why criticize a man whose argument you've co-opted to paint secularists and defenders of terrorism under the banner of cultural sensitivity?

The Hitch has used the same argument, implying that if I advocate for religious tolerance (which all true secularists do, since it's in their interest as the world's ideological minority) then I somehow support genital mutilation and the overthrow of the West. I call bullshit.

Reply

The content of this field is kept private
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><br> <p> <i> <b> <embed> <img> <blockquote> <span> <strikethrough> <u>
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

By checking this box you are giving permission for Observer staff to contact you to obtain contact information and permissions required for publication.