Shopping Cart -

Your cart is currently empty.
Upgrade to today
for only an extra Cxx.xx

You get:

plus This issue of xxxxxxxxxxx.
plus Instant access to the latest issue of 460+ of our top selling titles.
plus Unlimited access to 39000+ back issues
plus No contract or commitment. If you decide that PocketmagsPlus is not for you, you can cancel your monthly subscription online at any time. Auto-renews at £9.99 per month, unless cancelled.
Upgrade for 99p
Then just £9.99 / month. Cancel anytime.
Learn more
Pocketmags Digital Magazines
GB
Pocketmags Digital Magazines
   You are currently viewing the United Kingdom version of the site.
Would you like to switch to your local site?
Read anywhere Read anywhere
Ways to pay Pocketmags Payment Types
Trusted site
At Pocketmags you get
Secure Billing
Great Offers
Web & App Reader
Gifting Options
Loyalty Points
38 MIN READ TIME

Dealing With Islamism

BY PETER BOGHOSSIAN AND JAMES A. LINDSAY

AS REFUGEES FLOOD TO THE WEST IN UNPRECEDENTED numbers, and in the wake of a series of terrorist acts directly linked to Islamism, the chorus asking Muslims to explicitly denounce the violence of Islamism is growing ever louder. Others decry this request as inappropriate, unnecessary, patronizing, or even racist (Muslims are not a race, but this goes under the banner of “Islamophobia”). Mainstream Muslims should denounce Islamism and violence, but not because of the reasons many take as obvious.

First, however, we must define Islamism as a fundamentalist and militant religious and political ideology that drives for global conquest of an extreme Islamic theocracy and the application of strict Sharia law under its dominion. That Islamism is inspired by Islam through certain literal readings of the Quran is unambiguous, yet it remains just one draconian and acutely regressive interpretation of the religion. Islamism is dangerous and often deadly, and its broad conflation with Islam—and thus association with all Muslims—is deeply unfair. The violence that is associated with Islamism, then, is best understood as Islamist terrorism, not Islamic terrorism. Islam may be adhered to by Muslims who embrace nonviolent secularism. Islamism does not.

The reason Muslims need to condemn Islamism and Islamist terrorism is due to what social scientists call costly signaling—the performance of a symbolic act to indicate to other members of a social group that one is playing for their team and doing so at a price. It evokes trust—an indispensible commodity currently in short supply. Costly signaling taps into fundamental aspects of human psychology. Many Westerners—those on both sides of the political spectrum, from liberals who accuse critics of Islamophobia to conservatives who lump all Muslims into one category—do not appear to distinguish between Muslims and Islamists. Yet this distinction is critical to Western acceptance of progressive Muslims— those who do not embrace the violence of Islamism. The condemnation of Islamism and Islamist terrorism is an important, if not crucial, costly signal by which progressive Muslims can demarcate Islamism from Islam and simultaneously generate trust.

Read the complete article and many more in this issue of Skeptic
Purchase options below
If you own the issue, Login to read the full article now.
Single Digital Issue 21.2
 
£4.49
This issue and other back issues are not included in a new Skeptic subscription. Subscriptions include the latest regular issue and new issues released during your subscription.
Annual Digital Subscription SPECIAL OFFER: Was £12.99 Now £9.99 billed annually
Save
44%
£9.99
PRINT SUBSCRIPTION? Available at magazine.co.uk, the best magazine subscription offers online.
 

This article is from...


View Issues
Skeptic
21.2
VIEW IN STORE

Other Articles in this Issue


COLUMNS
VACCINATION IS ONE OF SCIENCE’S greatest accomplishments; vaccines have prevented
MANY YEARS AGO, AS I WAS SITTING IN A courtroom
Ástor Alexander is a figurative illustrator and painter. He specializes
SPECIAL SECTION WHAT MOTIVATES EXTREMISTS?
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE RADICALIZED? IN A RARE
THE NATURE OF TERRORISM HAS CHANGED OVER TIME. The earliest
SPECIAL SECTION BRAIN UPLOAD
PETER KASSAN’S ARTICLE IN THIS ISSUE OF SKEPTIC argues that
THE NOTION OF UPLOADING YOUR MIND TO a computer has
VIRTUAL IMMORTALITY IS THE THEORY THAT THE fullness of our
ARTICLES
NEWS OF THE EXPLOSIVE DISCOVERY OF HOMO NALEDI in South
On January 29, 2016, HBO Real Time host Bill Maher
DURING THE WINTER OF 1692, FEAR SWEPT THROUGH the Puritan
A PHARISAIC JEW NAMED SAUL, ZEALOUS FOR THE Jewish tradition
IS IT AUDACIOUS OR FOOLHARDY FOR SOMEONE RAISED on Erector
Sunday, December 20, 2016 was the 10th anniversary of Judge
REVIEWS
THOSE OF US WHO READ EXTENSIVELY IN the field of
JUNIOR SKEPTIC
I’m Daniel, the Editor of Junior Skeptic. Today we’ll journey into jungles, push past tangled vines, and search for something sinister: trees that are said to eat human beings!
Plants and animals have been interacting with each other for
You’re probably familiar with plants that move and fight in
The search for rumored creatures such as Bigfoot and the
The New York World’s 1874 “Man-eating tree of Madagascar” was
It’s clear that the man-eating tree of Madagascar was a
The man-eating tree of Madagascar was only the first hoax
There’s no sign that giant man-eating (or cow-eating!) plants exist