The Secular Islam Summit

Someone asked me recently what I thought of the Secular Islam Summit. I was chided for taking Svend White’s comments at The House of Apostasy personally because apparently, White was talking about the Secular Islam Summit, not the blogs that were being quoted there.

I don’t think there is any official connection between The House of Apostasy and the Secular Islam Summit, so I don’t understand why White commented there about the Summit. Perhaps because he dislikes any gathering of ex-Muslims and secular Muslims on principle? And this stuff REALLY gets to him. I don’t really understand why because I’ve never felt moved to rail against the ’silly’ conferences of Muslims. In fact, I actually listen when Muslims talk, and for three years, I debated Muslims directly on many message boards (particularly those of www.islam.com). He doesn’t seem to have any real criticism – he just thinks the fact that it’s even happening is ludicrous. All the speakers are ’shrill’ (White’s favorite word for ex-Muslims) and ‘marginal,’ utterly without worth in the Islamic or Western world. Really? Even Amir Taheri, whom I grew up reading in the Arab fucking News?

Be that as it may, I had not heard of the Secular Islam Summit until I was asked about it directly. I had even not noticed the passing mention of the Summit that The House of Apostasy makes in the first paragraph introducing ex-Muslim blogs. Now I know a little more about it and thought I’d give my opinion.

I’m kind of excited about seeing these people – whom I’ve read but never heard speak – actually move their hands and talk. I don’t have a TV so sometimes my imagination is overtaxed. I like the YouTube videos of these apostates and secular Muslims. I’m also impressed by the line-up – a lot of intellectuals, many engaging minds – and the diversity was lovely.

And I was thinking, we really are very much in need of visibility. There are all these voices, liberal Muslims, ex-Muslims, secular Muslims – and nobody really hears them. When it comes to Islam, there is only the wretched defeaning silence of the miserable third world, punctuated now and then by mass protests over cartoons or other tomfoolery.

This is not all about ‘reforming’ the Islamic world and doing it according to White’s decree. It’s also about diversifying the discourse that comes under the rubric of ‘Islam.’ I and other apostates are technically not part of Islam any more but because of our heritage, close association and personal experience, we too form part of that wider community. White is dismissive of some of us because the Islamic world rejects us. Well, the greater visibility we have, the more people who listen to us, the more the conservative Islamic world – the mainstream Muslims – will be forced to engage with us. They need to engage with us. They need to acknowledge Irshad Manji’s homosexuality. They need to acknowledge Asra Nomani’s ‘illegitimate’ son. They need to acknowledge Schrodinger’s apostasy and self-exile, typical of so many of us.

This is actually one of the reforms we need in the Islamic world. Their refusal to grant us relevance is a fault in their intellectual life. The fact that they hate us and any association with us retards reform (which White fears is so fragile that it must be protected from our sullying influence) is something that itself needs to be reformed. And the only way to reform that is to force them to engage with us on OUR terms, for once. For all of my life, I have engaged with Muslims on their turf, by their rules. Now it’s their turn.

These ‘outsiders’ are not so by choice. Many of them are being forced away and out by Muslims. To make us outsiders and then mock us for being so and calling us ‘irrelevant’ is pretty rich. Whether our styles of dissent displease Muslims or not, we are an integral part of Islam’s reform, even if that is not our explicit agenda. In a way, White’s constant anxiety about image and how something is going to impact the mainstream Muslims is really patronizing. His instinct is to protect this infantilized Islamic world from our brutal assaults, not to let Muslims learn to handle unsavory criticism. They’ve been shielded long and hard enough – it’s time they joined the real world.

Look, Muslims are not going to be reformed by being dragged, kicking and screaming, into the twenty first century. They need to take some initiative too. They need to basically wake up, stop being defensive, and start asking, “What went wrong? And how can we fix it?” Enough with the colonialism and imperialism talk. Enough with pretending they get to decide who says what about Islamic reform, and unless they give legitimacy to a voice as sufficiently inoffensive, that voice must be denigrated and silenced. Wafa Sultan is right: The Jews got nearly wiped out, but did they get progress and respect by whining? No, they built, they contributed. Typically, from all of her powerful words, Muslims (progressive, White ones) enthusiastically pounce on one sentence about church burnings and ignore everything else she’s saying. She’s a quack. Nothing there to hear or learn.

There is altogether too much talk of the offense caused to a billion people. You know what? Learn to be offended along with the rest of us.

You know what would NOT lead to reform? No, not a harmless and much-needed conference, but this contemptible endless whining.

Watch Wafa Sultan – deeply moving, preternaturally powerful. What a formidable woman.

Update: I just read an insider (one of whom White would approve) Muslim’s account of the Secular Islam Summit. It’s quite positive, even though the writer was coming at it prepared to be offended by all the “Islam bashing.” A picture of civilized debate emerges between people of varying levels of religiosity. I wish White would actually read/listen to whatever he is criticizing.

6 Responses

  1. They don’t get me mad. They make me laugh. Heartily.

    If anything were to get me mad, though, it would be the incompetence of the officials and leaders who are building up these clowns up. (These people are so extreme and, yes, marginal vis-a-vis the Muslim community, that even Irshad Manji felt the need to distance herself from their Islam-bashing platform.)

    I noted that I was not familar with all of the participants at the conference, so I concede that there might be a few decent sorts who ended up participating. (I wouldn’t be surprised at all if many of the international participants didn’t realize how extreme these guys are. )

    I was referring to the headliners, if you will. They, in my opinion, are vacuous talking heads who would be flipping burgers were it not for the so-called War on Terror and its need to hide behind sell-outs and fools willing to sing the Islamophobes’ tune.

    I’ve also made it crystal clear that that my broadside was at these specific individuals and their ilk, not at ex-Muslims per se.

    Yes, I focused on one particular point in Wafa Sultan’s talk because it highlighted a recurring problem in the rhetoric of her and her comrades.

    Sweeping, offensive generalizations are constantly made about Muslims based on the most superficial analysis of current events, analysis which overlooks how most “Muslim” problems are seen in other communities as well when they find themselves in comparable circumstances.

    A close review of the rest of her talk would no doubt yield many more gems of bias and propaganda. It’s something I’d like to do, but don’t have the time right now.

    Finally, I’ve admitted (graciously, if I do say so myself, given how nasty the discussion’s been) that I regretted posting that initial comment on The House of Apostacy and did not intend to implicitly malign ex-Muslims merely for not believing in Islam.

    Basically, I inadvertantly invaded your space and picked a fight when all I wanted to do was alert people to this other perspective. Were I to do it over again, I’d post on my own blog and leave it at that.

    But sometimes you don’t realize how something will seem until after you hit the send button. Call me Epimetheus.

  2. You wrote:
    This is not all about ‘reforming’ the Islamic world and doing it according to White’s decree. It’s also about diversifying the discourse that comes under the rubric of ‘Islam.’ I and other apostates are technically not part of Islam any more but because of our heritage, close association and personal experience, we too form part of that wider community. White is dismissive of some of us because the Islamic world rejects us.

    Now, I did not decree anything. I merely pointed out how unlikely they are as reformers.

    Also, you’re wrong about my views of ex-Muslims. Reread my article I wrote on the PMU that you mentioned in the context of Asra Nomani.

    I made the following remarks about the need of mainstream Islamic orgs to reach out to non-traditional Muslims.

    From http://www.altmuslim.com/perm.php?id=1555_0_25_0_C23 :
    On the one hand, I want to make some allowances for PMU in this regard, as I realize that they are trying to do something extraordinarily difficult, namely updating the Muslim community’s norms of tolerance to address thorny contemporary realities. For example, in our era of fragmented globalized identities, postmodernism, and widespread secularism, the idealistic assumptions about a Muslim’s identity and practice found in Islamic tradition do not always correspond to the reality of contemporary Muslims. Historians might debate whether the Ummah is more doctrinally diverse or less practicing today than in the past, but it’s safe to say that modern Muslims must face unheard of pluralism when dealing with their fellow Muslims. The days when most Muslims lived in a community in which a single madhab, culture, language, race, or even denomination predominate and block out other competing Islamic paradigms are long gone. Also, however one views or explains this phenomenon (i.e., secularization, decadence, modernism, materialism, etc.), it is a sociological fact that a significant segment of contemporary Muslim populations is made up of “cultural Muslims”. There are, unfortunately, large numbers of Muslims today who do not accept the need to practice Islam as laid out in Islamic tradition and fiqh. From a traditional perspective, they are not normal Muslims, but it is no less problematic to categorize them as non-Muslims, as they have not renounced Islam and they clearly are part of modern Islamic civilization in some meaningful sense.

    To PMU’s credit – and unlike many mainstream Muslim organizations – it has tried to grapple with this conundrum and create a space where Muslims who do not conform to mainstream expectations (however legitimate most such expectations may be) or who are struggling with their faith can participate without fear of knee-jerk takfir or harassment by self-righteous vigilantes.

    How many times have you seen Muslim writers talk about this problem?

  3. Svend, point taken re your attitudes to nominal Muslims (though your broader point was that the PMU was giving a bad name to being progressive and if I recall, you especially disapproved of a sex column which the mainstream ummah would not identify with). But you still don’t address why you think the diversity of discourse – of ALL kinds – is bad for Islamic reform. Forget the western media for a moment. Forget the war on terror. From an “inside Islam” perspective, why is my ‘Islam-bashing’ so bad for Islamic reform?

    Why do you want to pander to this mainstream that is the cause of so much of this stultifying lack of progressive change in the Islamic world?

  4. even Irshad Manji felt the need to distance herself from their Islam-bashing platform.

    Apparently not. She was there, wasn’t she? Just because she didn’t sign a statement doesn’t mean she refused the platform. And the platform is important.

    She’s a media savvy person – a lot of the other participants aren’t. They say what they think. Manji is coming at this from a sophisticated angle aimed deliberately at appealing to a certain kind of Muslim. I’ve also noticed that she has modified her stance and tone since she first came on the scene – shows you ‘these people’ will learn the effective ways of coming at the issue of reform if you let them. Meanwhile, they are still important voices of dissent in the too-uniform intellectual climate of Islam.

    I was referring to the headliners, if you will. They, in my opinion, are vacuous talking heads who would be flipping burgers were it not for the so-called War on Terror and its need to hide behind sell-outs and fools willing to sing the Islamophobes’ tune.

    Which would these headliners be? Ibn Warraq? Apparerntly, per our Saudi Muslim Insider, he was Islam-friendly.

    I found the St. Petersburg Declaration to be very sensible and beautifully worded. What did you think of it?

    What did you specifically find objectionable in this whole conference? While I watched the clips available on YouTube, I kept you in mind. I couldn’t think of much you could object to. Maybe I’m wrong. So tell me – what do you specifically find so horrible about this?

  5. Remember: The post that led to a thousand arguments was written *before* the summit. It focused on the political and ideological affiliations of the summit’s prominent personalities and the unfortunate implications of the event’ patronage by the MSM for dialogue and reform.

    As has been made obvious, most of these people aren’t observers whose analysis I find is profound or well informed, so sitting through their lectures isn’t exactly top priority for me. Still, given all the exchanges perhaps it would be worthwhile. If I find time and the stamina to do so, I’ll follow up.

  6. [...] 1st, 2007 · No Comments When I originally posted about the Secular Islam Summit, Svend White – who was vociferous in his criticism of the summit – backed out of the discussion [...]

Leave a Reply