Where Are All the Other Muslims?

The essay below was published at the “Ex-Muslims” blog back in June. Our Austrian correspondent AMT, who recommended it for translation, has this to say about the author:

Cahit Kaya is the leader of the Austrian chapter of Ex-Muslims. He is a very brave man. A Turk residing in the westernmost state of Vorarlberg, he speaks fluent German with a Vorarlberg accent.

He is perfectly integrated, which makes me wonder if that has something to do with his leaving Islam.

Many thanks to JLH for the translation:

Muslims Are Fascists, Frauds or Idiots

by Cahit Kaya

Once again, in my everyday life, I met an allegedly well-integrated Muslim who was revealed in a (political) conversation to be deeply reactionary and misogynous, who had the nerve not to accept ex-Muslims because only “genuine” Muslims could be good human beings, and people without religion could only be bad human beings.

Being contemptuous of wives, oppressing daughters, being reactionary, feeling hatred for non-Muslims, raising sons to be total macho a******s… everyone has his version of a good person. That does not work with my version. For me, respect for human rights counts among the things that make a good person. The more ineradicable the ignorance and the more distinct the firm belief that it is good to be subjected to an ideology of the backward, so much sharper must the criticism come out. Strong criticism of diehards is the clearest method of standing up for human rights and distancing yourself from them.

And if somebody blubbers that not all of them are like that:

Just where the hell are all those who aren’t like that? Why are they silent and why is only the critical person pilloried, when it should be so easy to dredge up “other” Muslims by the dozen, who could easily demonstrate the difference. Just by demonstrably living as a countervailing example? Where are these people, if all those who make a negative impression are “not genuine Muslims,” who interpret Islam falsely and yet can be the only ones who are allowed to make a public appearance? Why is Islam sheltered, even though all those who create a negative impression so happily emphasize their Muslimness and glorify Islam as what guides them?

I shall divide Muslims into three groups:

1.		Convinced Islamo-Fascists
2.		The frauds who, out of shame, do not confront the system, but pillory the critics of the system.
3.		The idiots who seriously believe they are good people although their mindset is a guarantee for more fascism and strengthens the convinced Islamo-Fascists.

Number 2 is the nucleus of the problem.

Their lies and excuses make solving the problem impossible, because they shift. The group constantly takes the soft approach with the patronizing do-gooders.

Their synergy can be described this way:

Do-gooders are in positions where they can condone demands; the frauds are in positions where they can accept demands. They need the requests to cover themselves from the shame to their own “cultural representatives.” and at the least to be able to provide a small media platform where they can live out their “otherness” (i.e., “other” than those under their protection). This otherness is quite praiseworthy, because they are preaching and living everything which their (former) countrymen largely reject and do not do. So it is real women’s rights (which are more significant than winding a cloth around your head while living the biological determinism of gender apartheid), standing up for homosexuals, for laicism and democracy and naturally for the country which has made their better life possible, which many still do not appreciate. And clinging to the country that originally drove them into exile , because nationalism and oppression were more important to it, more money was pumped into the military and propaganda than invested in its people.

So it is not the problem that is seen as a cause for the refusal of many Muslims. The criticism is made the problem. Criticism is not rebutted; immediate cessation of any criticism is demanded as a principle of minority right. Thus the fraud--who is actually a very nice person--is put out front by the Do-gooder, and criticism of the actual problems as one of the causes of racism is made so difficult that it is in danger of collapsing. So the shame is preserved, the stonewalling goes on, and every shameful worry get a boost, so that the only way out is to lie about everything.

What number 3 purports to be

Openly courting strict religious Islamo-Fascists and wishing for a war that is already being won by Islam, to put Westerners in their place. These idiots adorn themselves with 3 crescent moons, support Turkish fascism, are nationalists and dream of the revival of the Ottoman Empire. Their hypocrisy is not in acting as if they would reject everything that must be condemned in a secular and enlightened society. They support this fascism. They do not reject everything about Western life, just the fact that they are not the ones who are in charge here. Not secularly, but under the crescent moon, which shall serve to separate all “infidels” from a claim to power and to consolidate their own power.

So their duplicity is in rejecting the society which they hate and despise only because they consider themselves to be rulers chosen by God. Their macho demeanor and pushiness demonstrate their backwardness, but are not socially tolerated. Rightly so.

I am repulsed by the unadulterated duplicity of liars who are too cowardly to officially turn their backs on a lousy system, in order to create in their own surroundings a better one, cleansed of fascists; to finally be able to work forthrightly instead of always, out of ignorance, having to stand up for people who see this kind of “Muslim” as inferior. Unfortunately, I see the cause of all problems as the Do-gooderness of those who want to be good, but actually strengthen what is bad. And racism thrives on what is obvious but is banned from discussion by a prohibition of criticism. PC-ism and racism are two sides of the same coin, displaying anti-democratic tendencies and mutually supporting each other. And so long as they complement each other, and inch toward the social middle, it is a bad sign for democracy and even threatens its collapse if one of these surreal groups can establish a monopoly.

Ergo:

As long as the double-dealers deny the problem and are in the pay of the Do-gooders, I find it hard to accept the existence of secular Muslims. But since they are our only chance to resist Islamism, it is about time for them to uncouple and become their own, independent movement and take their place beyond the xenophobia of the nationalists and beyond the Do-gooders and, with all the secular, humanistic and democratic people, to fight for these values.

And so my call: If you exist, show yourselves! Take the criticism seriously! But show that it can be different! And show that only if people like you gain acceptance can it be really attractive for other immigrants, since recognition is what they most desire. Recognition which otherwise Islamists and nationalists dangle in front of them. Only when the hypocrisy falls away will the majority society be able to build trust and no longer view you as a vanguard of Islamism and the backwardness associated with it.

This article was also published in a shorter version: Aufklärung 2.0 (Enlightenment 2.0). A list is there with organizations of liberal or secular Muslims (or ex-Muslims). Yes, they exist. My anger can be explained by the fact that it is still laborious to bring them into the public arena, because the resistance of the racists as well as the Do-gooders is in the way. The Islamist organizations accepted by our governments as contacts, while secular groups are not, are the greatest problem here. And also the economic interests or our administrations with Islamic governments, who are also eager to establish the Islamic organizations as partners in dialogue.