Re Dr Pipes - why Matthew Yglesias thinks you approve - an added argument about legitimacy

Submitted by myth (Germany), Dec 1, 2009 at 06:30

quoting in reverse order to get the meaning right "(...)potentially legitimates(...)" "(...)anti-Islamic sentiments(...)" is what caught Yglesias' attention. Yglesias' standpoint is that nothing could ever legitimize anti-islamic sentiments. Even talking about other people who have those sentiments without condemnation, places Dr Pipes in the islamophobic camp, that is the logic.

Yglesias would not allow for a prediction based on facts because he is against the tone of the outcome. The logic I reconstructed is of ideologic nature. What are the facts, why use the word "legitimate" ? The swiss vote is not one out of many polls undertaken by some research institute. It is a democratic expression of a people, by legitimate means that is now on public record and bears real consequences on a legal level. This quality of democratic legitimacy is a very strong one.

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".