No Muslim Martin Luthers But Many Solzhenitsyns
By Ali Sina
Magazine’s columnist Robert Spencer, reported several
heart-wrenching stories of Muslims’ barbarities in the name of Jihad,
from rape and genocide in Darfur to the rape of 15 year old girls and the
massacre of children in Beslan. He reminded his readers that similar
atrocious acts of crimes against humanity were perpetrated by Muhammad the
founder of Islam too and then in a desperate tone cried out “Where
are the reformers who will dare to say that Muhammad’s example must not
be followed in this case? Who will acknowledge that the world has
developed principles of human rights that must supercede those forged in
? …The much-lionized “Muslim Martin Luther,” Tariq Ramadan, now
banned from entering the
, can so far only bring himself to call for a moratorium, not a definitive
ban, on stoning for adulterers. Rape of captives? His sentiments are not
known. Where is the Muslim Solzhenitsyn,
who will speak honestly about the aspects of Islam that so desperately
need reform, and call for the overhaul that the system so obviously needs?"
My response to Mr. Spencer is that Islam does not have reformers. There
are no Martin Luthers in Islam. But the Solzhenitsyns of Islam are
everywhere. Solzhenitsyn was not a reformer of communism. He was a
dissenter and he spent many years in exile for his opposition to
communism. He would have been completely neglected and forgotten had it
not been for the free world that remembered him and made his voice to be
Today the dissenters of Islam are ostracized and scorned by the ummah
and they are in hiding. Nonetheless they are active and express their
dissent unreservedly. The majority of Muslims are not going to hear them.
They are ignored. It is again up to the free people to provide a venue for
these voices of dissent to be heard.
Don’t ask; “where is the Muslim Solzhenitsyn”. It is these Muslim
Solzhenitsyns who ask; “where are the free people”. “Why no one is
listening?”, “Why they are we ignored?”
The truth is that Islam cannot be reformed. It is unrealistic to search
for Muslim Martin Luthers. There are no Martin Luthers in Islam. But there
are many Solzhenitsyns.
Moderate Muslims do not exist. No Muslim can disagree with Jihad which
was practiced by Muhammad and instituted by him as a pillar of his faith.
No Muslim can support equality of rights between men and women for this
goes against the teachings of Muhammad. No Muslim can support the secular
laws vis-à-vis the “divinely” ordained Sharia law. Muslims can’t be
for democracy or for human rights, because they are against the explicit
teachings of Muhammad.
The “Moderate Muslim”, is either one who lies to gain acceptance
among the civilized people or is one who does not know Islam or does not
care about it.
We can’t call tepid water, boiling because unless it does not reach 100
degree Celsius it is not boiling. Likewise we can’t call a moderate
Muslim, Muslim because unless he does not agree with all the teachings of
Muhammad, he is not a Muslims. A moderate Muslim is a person who does not
follow, or does not agree with parts of Islam. This person is not
moderate; he is a confused unbeliever. This is a person who has left Islam
but cannot sever his umbilical cord from it yet. Unless he cut that
umbilical cord and call himself proudly an apostate, there is a great risk
for him to be sucked back into the womb of Islam.
People often make the mistake of comparing Islam to Christianity and
assume that since Christianity underwent reform, Islam can do the same.
The problem is. Christianity had the potential for reform because the
corruption was in the church and not in its teachings. Islam on the other
hand cannot be reformed because the corruption stems from Muhammad himself
and his teachings. There is an enormous difference between the two
systems. Unless we see this difference, we keep searching in vain for
mythological moderate Muslim reformers that do not exist.
Communism and Nazism were also systems that could not be reformed. They
had to be eliminated. Islam has even less chance for reformation than
these two other fascistic ideologies because unlike communism and Nazism
that were manmade philosophies, Islam claims to be divinely ordained and
hence no man can change an iota of it. The only way to mitigate the danger
of Islam is to oppose it and to eradicate it.
That is why the free world should not waste its time searching for
Muslim Martin Luthers. Rather it should find the Solzhenitsyns of Islam.
They exist in huge numbers and they are growing very fast. We should not
put our bets on the reformation of Islam. This will bring nothing but
disappointment. Rather we should work towards its eradication. In this,
lie our best hopes and excellent chances of success.
During the darkest years of the cold war, it was the free world that
lionized Solzhenitsyn and made of him the symbol of resistance against the
Soviet dictatorship and the Empire of Evil. This moral support instilled
hope in the hearts of other dissidents and the voices of discontent
started to be heard even inside Kremlin. But today the
is afraid of taking up the cause of the Muslim dissidents. They are afraid
that their support of the Muslims dissidents, could stigmatize them as “Islamophobes”.
Therefore the question is not, “where are the Solzhenitsyns of
Islam”; they are everywhere. The question is why the Media is so silent
about them. Why their movement is ignored? Why the major newspapers do not
talk about them?
One thing is certain and that is Islam cannot be reformed. Islam is a
poisonous snake that will never become a pet. We can’t be safe by
feeding it and pleasing it but by smashing its head and the only people
who can do that effectively are the dissidents. They are the best hope the
world has. They are the ones that have to be lionized, not the chameleon
opportunists like Tariq Ramadan who give lip service to reform because
this pleases the Westerners but in reality are Islamists to the