Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (39013)	4/11/2004 5:36:22 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 793843

I don't think the rest of us can wait centuries for improvement. So we come back to the point of the article that contained the classification scheme, which was that there are some categories of Muslims that are sufficiently modern and with whom we can collaborate. <<Benard then proposes a strategy for religion-building with several prongs: Support the modernists first. Support secularists on a case-by-case basis. Back the traditionalists tactically against the fundamentalists. Consistently oppose the fundamentalists. I agree with Benard's general approach, doubting only her enthusiasm for Muslim modernists... Instead of modernists, I propose secularists as the forward-looking Muslims who uniquely can wrench their co-religionists out of their current slough of despair and radicalism. >> If we attribute the sickness to Islam, as you do, rather than backwardness, not only are we missing the target, we are obviating opportunities to fix or at leass speed up the fixing of the problem, plus we are fostering bigotry. If the world is to get along, it will be the work of the more modern, who are more inclined toward tolerance and pluralism and who are forward-thinking. That goes for all religions.