Why Liberals Cannot Denounce Radical Islam
On June 24, the New York Times published an article with the headline "Homegrown extremists tied to deadlier toll than jihadists in U.S. since 9/11." That very same day, the Huffington Post doubled down on the Times' stupidity, while adding their own special twist with a piece titled "White supremacists more dangerous to America than foreign terrorists, study says." Both articles cite the number of people who were killed in America following the attacks on 9/11 by non-Muslim extremists (48), compared to the number killed by self-proclaimed jihadists (26). On Thursday, democrat senator Sherrod Brown also argued that it is "generally white males' to blame for terror attacks.
What neither article or Mr. Brown mentions is that if one - just one - of the numerous thwarted Islamic terror attacks like those attempted by the “Underwear Bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, or the “Shoe Bomber” Richard Reid had been successful, the death tolls would be heavily skewed in a far different direction. Those are just two examples of unsuccessful terror attacks among many we know about and countless others we are not privy to. It may be “too soon,” as they say, but we can be sure that right now, liberal activists are compiling data on the amount of people murdered in Paris by non-Muslims. (Most of whom are white and probably grew up with a Christmas tree in the house. )
So what is the point attempted to be made by the senator and these icons of liberal "journalism"? Does the New York Times and Huffington Post truly believe that white supremacist groups are a bigger terror threat to America than radical Islamists? Why do they consider completely random acts of violence some sort of organized effort by right-wing extremists but organized efforts by Islamic jihadists are considered random acts of violence? Why can't they bring themselves to condemn radical Islam? Why do they often feel compelled to seemingly defend it by citing acts of violence perpetrated by non-Muslims, sometimes going back centuries as a means to deflect focus away from the threat of Islamic extremism? Would the New York Times editorial board endorse a proposal that would divert the majority of funds allocated to fighting Islamic terror threats and use them to monitor white supremacists in America? Don’t answer that.
There are several reasons why those on the left cannot bring themselves to condemn radical Islam. While the United States is considered one of the more religious nations in the world, we are still a relatively secular country. Most Americans identify with a religion, namely Christianity, but do not conduct their daily lives strictly in accordance with the teachings of Jesus Christ.
Many folks, particularly those in the liberal bastions of America, cannot grasp the concept of people living faith-based lives. To them, all religion is equally crazy and equally dangerous. They cannot differentiate between the "radical" Christians in middle America and the Islamic jihadists in the Middle East. Their level of disdain for Joel Osteen and Jerry Falwell is almost on par with their disdain for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Usama bin Laden. The only difference is that they didn’t spend all day on social media ridiculing the latter. Religious extremism is religious extremism, right?
Liberal philosophy creates an almost involuntary compulsion to defend everything and anyone that is perceived to be an oppressed minority. Even though there are over 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, in America and the West they are a minority. Therefore, practically by default, they are oppressed and must be defended. Even in the aftermath of a horrific terror attack, the left's initial reaction is to defend the rest of the Muslim population, compile a list of all attacks perpetrated by non-Muslims, blame guns and the NRA and sometimes even look for excuses to justify their actions.
In reality, the left finds Islam as absurd as any other religion, but liberal constraints prevent them from denouncing it and often force them to defend it. In the progressive world they live in, it's easy and safe to criticize Christians. It is dangerous to criticize others. You believe the son of God came down from the heavens to offer you the forgiveness of your sins and salvation for mankind? What an idiot! Chief Running Bear believes that the spirit of the Great Wolf looks over his people as they dance around the fire? What a spiritually enlightened wise man!
Why would a self-proclaimed Christian like Barack Obama say "the sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer"? He does not say things like that because he is a secret Muslim. He says things like that because he is a devout liberal who feels the need to defend people of the Muslim faith against perceived attacks from "right-wing extremists."
The final reason that liberals cannot condemn radical Islam is quite simply, politics. After all, the "war on terror" is a Republican thing. If we want to get everyone on board with this war on terror and get Democrats to join Republicans in opposition to the settlement of Syrian refugees in America I have a suggestion. When vetting Muslim refugees, ask them what their opinion is on gay marriage.