Hirsi Ali: “The problem is not going to go away. Confront it, or it’s only going to get bigger.”

Rod Dreher

The new issue of Reason contains a lengthy interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the brave apostate Muslim who fled the Netherlands and now lives in the US. Alas, it’s not yet online, but it’s definitely in a Baweresque vein. She pulls absolutely no punches. Like Bawer, she too blames the West for its craven passivity in the face of a violent threat. And she won’t have any of the false equivalence among Abrahamic religions. Though she is now an atheist and wishes everyone would be, she said that if people have to accept God, she would rather that they become Jewish or Catholic because both religions have a much more humane concept of God than “the fire-breathing Allah who inspires jihadism and totalitarianism.”


Ayaan Ali Hirsi
* She might profitably have discussed at this point those humane atheists Hitler, Stalin, and Mao, who had a bit to do with totalitarianism themselves, but — I haven’t see the interview.

When the interviewer asked her if she thought Islam could bring about positive social change in the same way that religious Protestants helped end US slavery, and Catholicism helped end communism in Poland, she responded sharply:

Hirsi Ali: Only if Islam is defeated.

Because right now, the political side of Islam, the power-hungry expansionist side of Islam, has become superior to the Sufis and the Ismailis and the peace-seeking Muslims.

Reason: Don’t you mean defeating radical Islam?

Hirsi Ali: No. Islam, period. Once it’s defeated, it can mutate into something peaceful.

It’s very difficult to even talk about peace now. They’re not interested in peace.

Reason: We have to crush the world’s 1.5 billion Muslims under our boot? In concrete terms, what does that mean, ‘defeat Islam’?

She doesn’t really answer, except to say that Islam must be resisted at every opportunity, “in all forms, and if you don’t do that, then you have to live with the consequence of being crushed.” She said that she believes we are headed to that point “because the West has been in denial for a long time.” We didn’t deal with the problem when it was easier, and now it’s much worse:

Hirsi Ali: …There is no moderate Islam. There are Muslims who are passive, who don’t all follow the rules of Islam, but there’s really only one Islam, defined as submission to the will of God. There’s nothing moderate about it.

Reason: So when even a hard-line critic of Islam such as Daniel Pipes says, “Radical Islam is the problem, but moderate Islam is the solution,” he’s wrong?

Hirsi Ali: He’s wrong. Sorry about that.

Robert Spencer comments:

Of course it’s true, as I have noted many times: there are moderate Muslims, but there is no moderate Islam. Every school of jurisprudence and sect that Muslims consider orthodox teaches that it is part of the responsibility of Muslims to subjugate non-Muslims under the rule of Islamic law. Consequently, Daniel Pipes’s formulation is valid only when it is understood that the moderate Islam that is the solution has to be invented — it is not a traditional form of Islam. I have spoken at conferences where Dr. Pipes was also speaking on several occasions, and have heard his answers when asked about exactly this point — and he has said essentially the same thing. He has also written at his website: “Robert Spencer and I have discussed the perceived differences in our view of Islam. He and I concluded that, although we have different emphases – he deals more with scriptures, I more with history – we have no disagreements.”

Later in the interview, the Reason interviewer points out that she’s in favor of civil liberties, but would appear to deny them fully to Muslims in the West. She responds by saying that to save civil liberties, you have to restrict them on those who would take them away from everyone. She even goes so far as to say that all Muslims schools should be closed down in the US. She says that the Western constitutions that allow freedom of religion are products of the Enlightenment, and were written at a time when no one could have conceived of the jihadi threat. She says passing constitutional restrictions on Muslims is going to happen because the problem of Islamic extremism is not going to go away, and in fact is going to get worse — though sensibly, she acknowledges at length that there are some pretty strong reasons why America doesn’t have the same problem as Europe (e.g., Muslim immigrants to America want to assimilate, there’s not a welfare system for them to grow dependent on, white guilt is different in the US, etc.).
She concludes that the West’s arrogance is its own worst enemy “because in the West there’s this notion that we are invincible and that everyone will modernize anyway.” And, she says, this mistaken notion that if we “indulge and appease and condone,” everything will work out in the end.

“The problem is not going to go away. Confront it, or it’s only going to get bigger.”

Truer words were never spoken.

* No Money To Keep Ayaan Hirsi Ali Safe in The U.S. 

Western Resistance has lots of background information

6 thoughts on “Hirsi Ali: “The problem is not going to go away. Confront it, or it’s only going to get bigger.””

  1. * “The problem is not going to go away. Confront it, or it’s only going to get bigger.”

    Unfortunately, like the Cox & Forkum cartoon below, we will get more disconnecting of the dots between Islam & terrorism, coupled with calls for more “education”, “Harmony Days”, “Social Inclusion Boards”, “Muslim Reference Groups” and other expensive & useless strategies.

  2. * “The problem is not going to go away. Confront it, or it’s only going to get bigger.” says Hirsi Ali.

    The real problem is we have allowed millions of Muslims to settle in the West. Hirsi Ali’s life is in danger mainly because of this, and yet she has failed to call for stopping Muslim immigration. She seems to think that it is the job of the West to “defeat” islam, her native religion. How? To defeat Islam, from what I can gather from her statements, we have to convince Muslims to abandon Islam and become athiests like herself. We have neither the resources, the will, or the power to bring about such an event, even if it was possible.

  3. Hirsi Ali: Islam, period. Once it’s defeated, it can mutate into something peaceful.

    What if Islam could be reformed without being defeated?



    * to educate Muslims about dangers presented by Islamic religious texts and why Islam must be reformed
    * to educate non-Muslims about the differences between moderate Muslims and Islamists (a.k.a. Islamic Religious Fanatics, Radical Muslims, Muslim Fundamentalists, Islamic Extremists or Islamofascists)
    * to educate both Muslims and non-Muslims alike that Moderate Muslims are also targets of Islamic Terror

    Acknowledging mistakes
    The majority of the terrorist acts of the last three decades, including the 9/11 attacks, were perpetrated by Islamic fundamentalists in the name of Islam. We, as Muslims, find it abhorrent that Islam is used to murder millions of innocent people, Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

    Inconsistencies in the Koran
    Unfortunately, Islamic religious texts, including the Koran and the Hadith contain many passages, which call for Islamic domination and incite violence against non-Muslims. It is time to change that. Muslim fundamentalists believe that the Koran is the literal word of Allah. But could Allah, the most Merciful, the most Compassionate, command mass slaughter of people whose only fault is being non-Muslim?

    The Koran & the Bible
    Many Bible figures from Adam to Jesus (Isa) are considered to be prophets and are respected by Islam. Islamic scholars however believe that both the Old and the New Testament came from God, but that they were corrupted by the Jews and Christians over time. While neither Testament calls for mass murder of unbelievers, the Koran does. Could it be possible that the Koran itself was corrupted by Muslims over the last thirteen centuries?

    The need for reform
    Islam, in its present form, is not compatible with principles of freedom and democracy. Twenty-first century Muslims have two options: we can continue the barbaric policies of the seventh century perpetuated by Hassan al-Banna, Abdullah Azzam, Yassir Arafat, Ruhollah Khomeini, Osama bin Laden, Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaeda, Hizballah, Hamas, Hizb-ut-Tahrir, etc., leading to a global war between Dar al-Islam (Islamic World) and Dar al-Harb (non-Islamic World), or we can reform Islam to keep our rich cultural heritage and to cleanse our religion from the reviled relics of the past. We, as Muslims who desire to live in harmony with people of other religions, agnostics, and atheists choose the latter option. We can no longer allow Islamic extremists to use our religion as a weapon. We must protect future generations of Muslims from being brainwashed by the Islamic radicals. If we do not stop the spread of Islamic fundamentalism, our children will become homicidal zombies.

    Accepting responsibilities
    To start the healing process, we must acknowledge evils done by Muslims in the name of Islam and accept responsibility for those evils. We must remove evil passages from Islamic religious texts, so that future generations of Muslims will not be confused by conflicting messages. Our religious message should be loud and clear: Islam is peace; Islam is love; Islam is light. War, murder, violence, divisiveness & discrimination are not Islamic values.

    Religious privacy
    Religion is the private matter of every individual. Any person should be able to freely practice any religion as long as the practice does not interfere with the local laws, and no person must be forced to practice any religion. Just as people are created equal, there is no one religion that is superior to another. Any set of beliefs that is spread by force is fundamentally immoral; it is no longer a religion, but a political ideology.

    Islam is one of the many of the world’s religions. There will be no Peace and Harmony in the World if Muslims and non-Muslims do not have equal rights. Islamic supremacy doctrine is just as repulsive as Aryan supremacy doctrine. History clearly shows what happens to the society whose members consider themselves above other peoples. All moderate Muslims must repudiate the mere notion of Islamic supremacy.

    Sharia Law must be abolished, because it is incompatible with norms of modern society.

    Outdated practices
    Any practices that might have been acceptable in the Seventh Century; i.e., stoning, cutting off body parts, marrying and/or having sex with children or animals, must be condemned by every Muslim.

    Outdated verses
    The following verses promote divisiveness and religious hatred, bigotry and discrimination. They must be either removed from the Koran or declared outdated and invalid, and marked as such.

    Outdated words & phrases
    Use of the following words and phrases or their variations must be prohibited during religious services:
    • Infidel / Unbeliever: these terms have negative connotation and promote divisiveness and animosity; Islam is not the only religion
    • Jihad: this word is often interpreted as Holy War against non-Muslims
    • Mujaheed / Holy Warrior: no more wars in the name of Islam
    • American (Christian / Crusader / Israeli / Zionist) occupation: these terms promote bigotry; at this point in time, Muslims living in non-Muslim lands have more freedoms than Muslims living in Muslim lands

    Islam vs. violence
    Islam has no place for violence. Any person calling for an act of violence in the name of Islam must be promptly excommunicated. Any grievances must be addressed by lawful authorities. It is the religious and civic duty of every Muslim to unconditionally condemn any act of terrorism perpetrated in the name of Islam. Any Muslim group that has ties to terrorism in any way, shape, or form, must be universally condemned by both religious and secular Muslims.

    Portrayal of Prophets
    While portrayal of Prophets is not an acceptable practice in Islam could be personally offensive to some Muslims, other religions do not have such restrictions. Therefore, the portrayal of the Prophets must be treated as a manifestation of free expression.

    The Crusades vs. The Inquisition
    While the Inquisition was a repulsive practice by Christian Fundamentalists, the Crusades were not unprovoked acts of aggression, but rather attempts to recapture formerly Christian lands controlled by Muslims.

    Brothers and Sisters!
    Do not make the next generation of Muslims clean up your mess!
    Fight Islamic Fascism now, so your children won’t have to!

  4. I live in Australia and after reading I agree and it is of great concern. I have ask the questin if we as Australian had to go to war were would you stand with our againts me after all you are Australia and on the other a Muslim I had no reply from any Muslims in Austalia how live here and call ithis place home./ What home I have been told we will bread you out as the people vote so they know white Australioa is indecline and they are having from 5 to 10 Children I see islam as a danger to the whole world and no goverment is taking the steps to help stop the cancer

    Cheers True Blue

  5. It’s not a question of defeat or destroying islam, it’s a matter of chipping away at it’s dogmatic tendencies and allowing scrutiny and criticism. More cartoons and questions of the obviously not perfect model of all times prophet with a touch of logical law enforcement when it comes to rabid muslims protesting against our god given right to question and ridicule. We have constantly appeased these hoods and criminals of islam which has emboldened their totalitarian agenda and severely hampered our way of life…

  6. Witch hunts were targeted toward an imaginary enemy. The umma is real. Interpretations of the Koran along with all other texts associated with Muslim piety are plagued by al-takyyia, the lie you are absolved of when done to further the umma. The Umma is the only natural religion of the world.

    A little study and the picture becomes quite clear. I wonder if politicians can read or just listen to their campaign managers. Having written numerous letters to political representatives and never having recieved more than a auto response I am convinced it is the former.

Comments are closed.