Ironically speaking...

Submitted by ECAW (France), Jul 18, 2017 at 01:48

Daniel Pipes misuses the word "ironically" in the same way that Mehdi Hasan does, the difference being that Hasan does it wittingly as part of his never-ending campaign to confuse the kafir. There is nothing ironic in sharing the same view of Islam as the people called Islamists any more than it was ironic of Churchill to share Hitler's understanding of Nazism (oops, Godwin's Law infringement - sorry, but it couldn't be helped).

Dr Pipes is betting the future of Western civilisation on a distinction between Islam and Islamism which, while popular among non-Muslims, does not exist in the Islamic tradition, which Mohammed would not endorse and nor would Allah. But he dismisses taking Islamic scripture seriously as part of the "essentialist trap". I wish to suggest that although Islam has changed over the centuries, there are theological limits. Allah will never be part of a trinity and no Muslim will ever disgree with Allah's claim to have "this day perfected for you your religion". Likewise, mainstream Islamic thought has never discarded Islamic supremacism, only played it down when circumstances required it. I wish it would but in that case it would be Islam no more.

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".