69 million page views

Surprised Pipes has no complaints about Goodman's distinction between Islamism and Islam

Reader comment on item: Paul Goodman, MP, Analyses Radical Islam

Submitted by traeh (United States), Dec 4, 2006 at 03:53

Daniel Pipes in a New York Sun article of July 11, "What British Muslims Think," summed up the results of a number of polls of U.K. Muslims:

In sum, more than half of British Muslims want Islamic law and 5% endorse violence to achieve that end. These results demonstrate that Britain's potential terrorists live in a highly nurturing community.

If half of U.K. Muslims prefer Shar'ia law to democratic institutions and civil liberties, doesn't that make the distinction between Islamism and Islam a dubious one? The distinction between Islam and Islamism usually depends on the polite assumption that Islamists/extremists constitute only a tiny minority of Muslims. But if more than half of British Muslims support Shar'ia law and provide a "highly nurturing community" for potential terrorists, how can we legitimately speak of a "true," moderate Islam that the vast majority of Muslims supposedly believes in, and pretend there is this distortion called "Islamism" that is supported only by a tiny extremist minority?

Thus Islam and Islamism are more integrally related than Goodman suggests in the quoted speech, and I don't understand why Daniel Pipes offers no objections to that. Isn't this just perpetuating a myth, when what is needed is to open eyes to facts so they can be dealt with adequately?

Submitting....

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".

Daniel Pipes replies:

I not only don't object to Goodman's distinction but have myself made the same point over many years. See "Bibliography – My Writings on Naming Moderate Muslims."

Submit a comment on this item

<< Previous Comment      Next Comment >>

Reader comments (42) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
Nothing is better than the original [463 words]Dr RJPMay 2, 2007 15:2891381
The Kernal of the Problem [99 words]G.DiogenesFeb 21, 2007 10:0278171
UK's chances [451 words]bdoranJan 6, 2007 05:4471857
N Y Sun, Israeli Arabs [79 words]Al RamyDec 19, 2006 20:5670046
Too late for UK [105 words]S A KapadiaDec 19, 2006 09:0269969
Paul Goodman, MP [117 words]steven LDec 18, 2006 15:4369894
When will muslim tyranny end [136 words]micheal bareliJun 4, 2008 09:3469894
Radicals! [154 words]steven LJun 5, 2008 12:2269894
"Soft" Sharia in Britain [136 words]DM AndyDec 11, 2006 15:4969132
Think it through...... [92 words]Rob RoyDec 1, 2009 01:3569132
Surprised Pipes has no complaints about Goodman's distinction between Islamism and Islam [212 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
traehDec 4, 2006 03:5368205
The United Kingdom and Muslims [130 words]OctavioDec 11, 2006 16:4168205
Yes to Octavio [64 words]MichaelJun 4, 2008 09:2268205
Reactionaries [230 words]SafrazDec 3, 2006 15:3568147
OK, as per this analogy, how about ZIONISM, CHRISTIANISM, HINDUAISM? [55 words]Amir Ali TayyabNov 30, 2006 17:3267894
You are right Tayyab! [116 words]MosheDec 1, 2006 03:0467894
where did the USA come from in my earlier post? [16 words]amir ali tayyabJun 23, 2008 05:0267894
Tory Split [27 words]DavodNov 30, 2006 10:3367855
Re. There is no such creature as "Radical" Islam [75 words]Ronald BarbourNov 26, 2006 11:0267395
part truths [372 words]rwNov 26, 2006 04:3467381
..a common culture.... [172 words]donvanNov 27, 2006 11:2667381
Arabs and racism and sexism! [314 words]dhimmi no moreNov 22, 2006 16:3566997
Dhimmi no more [264 words]VijayNov 23, 2006 04:4166997
For Vijay; good points! [468 words]dhimmi no moreNov 24, 2006 17:3966997
response to Vijay [408 words]zakyNov 25, 2006 22:3866997
For Dali or is it Zaki and Arabs are racists and anti-blacks and the absurd! [414 words]dhimmi no moreNov 26, 2006 21:1666997
dhimmi no more [238 words]ZakyNov 27, 2006 03:4866997
Continuation to my previous post [61 words]zakyNov 27, 2006 04:0066997
For Zaki and Allah and polemics! [130 words]dhimmi no moreNov 28, 2006 07:0666997
For Zaki and Quranic tafseer/ta'weel! [179 words]dhimmi no moreNov 28, 2006 07:2066997
to dhimmi [126 words]dhimmiNov 28, 2006 15:5866997
dhimmi no [264 words]zakyNov 28, 2006 16:2766997
For Zaki and Allah and polemics part deux! [561 words]dhimmi no moreNov 28, 2006 18:1866997
For zaky and your credebility is on the line! [281 words]dhimmi no moreNov 29, 2006 07:4766997
For Zaky And I got news for you too! [326 words]dhimmi no moreNov 29, 2006 18:3366997
To dhimmi [167 words]zakyNov 29, 2006 22:2166997
To Dhimmi nomore [182 words]VijayNov 30, 2006 14:2966997
For Vijay Islam polemics and violence! [188 words]dhimmi no moreDec 2, 2006 08:1966997
For zaky and your credibility is on the line part deux! [226 words]dihmmi no moreDec 2, 2006 09:1566997
cheap delivery [35 words]cheap deliveryFeb 12, 2007 08:1666997
Reply [40 words]NadSep 13, 2007 16:5166997
Disagreement [153 words]SalwaMar 6, 2009 13:3466997

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)