Dr. Pipes and Confucius

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Jul 3, 2007 at 11:58

Frankly speaking, I don't quite get Dr. Pipes' point. What Bush says and does seems to reflect closely Dr. Pipes' own ( extreme , in my private opinion) views : "Radical Islam (=Islamism in Dr. Pipes' phraseology)) is bad. Moderate Islam is good." We have to fight the former and back the latter.

When Bush says "I have invested the heart of my presidency in helping Muslims fight terrorism, and claim their liberty, and find their own unique paths to prosperity and peace." , what else can he mean except "moderate Moslems" in Dr. Pipes' definition? If so he follows Dr. Pipes' views as expressed e.g. in his recent enthusiasm about alleged one million "moderate Muslims" on march in Turkey and Pakistan. Bush's talk about "the great struggle against extremism that is now playing out across the broader Middle East" and "a group of extremists who seek to use religion as a path to power and a means of domination." resembles also Dr. Pipes' own phrases without using the pet term "Islamist".

Dr. Pipes states : "But we now harbor fewer hopes than in 2001 that he still can learn, absorb, and reflect an understanding of the enemy's Islamist nature."

Do we? My impression is that as long as we live in the linguistic dream world of facing "the enemy's "Islamist" nature" instead of seeing "the enemy's Islamic nature", we'll cherish as many pernicious illusions as ever.

Then Dr. Pipes concludes :

"Almost thirty years after Islamists first attacked Americans, and on the eve of three major attempted terrorist attacks in Great Britain, the president's speech reveals how confused Washington remains."

With advisors and Muslim "friends" and various guardians of PC telling Bush or any other future US president to see "Islamism" where there is nothing but "Islam" and to see in his soul's eyes "moderate Muslims" where there are out there but "Muslims" as a product of Islam's bloody past and irrational doctrine, there can reign nothing but confusion and disarray in Washington.

When Confucius was once asked where he would start the reform of the government he were given the power to do so, he replied : "What is necessary is to rectify names.(...) If names be not correct, language is not in accordance with the truth of things. If language be not in accordance with the truth of things, affairs cannot be carried on to success." ( The Analects , 13, 3)

How true !

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".