Hi 4321,
I agree with the argument that Islamic fundamentalism in its pure form is dogmatic, hostile, divisive and nasty.
But I am not sure it is as threatening to the West as he thinks - in a broad sense. Human minds will make patterns out of isolated instances. Although it is clear there are a number of instances of individual nastiness performed by fanatical Moslems, these individuals have isolated rather than broad support. And without broad support, these things will collect no momentum.
It seems to me Moslem fanaticism has already moved past its apogee within the Moslem world, let alone in the West where it will never take. The horror that al Qaeda unleashed against their fellow Moslems and others in Iraq has revealed them for what they are. This even more than 9/11, which might have been interpreted differently by some in the Islamic world as an attack on Western imperialism.
The speaker seems to see nice, liberal, warm, pluralistic Western thinking as weak. But it is strong precisely because it allows people to express themselves, and because, over time, the quality of a poor argument is exposed.
Although this means we live with some level of fanatical action, in sum and over time, this will fail when exposed to the air of reason. So in this way I don't agree with him so much. I believe the Western enlightenment has nothing to fear in the long run from poor philosophy.
| 