# Is Islams global image beyond repair? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 22, 2016, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824 "2016-02-22T19:56:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/41 "2016-02-23T13:46:54Z")
> [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > I and how the global narrative is that Muslim = Terrorist, how this has damaged Islams image globally… Unfortunatley you seem to think Gobal=N America and Europe. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Kumquat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4491bb/32.png) [@Gary\_Kumquat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Kumquat)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/42 "2016-02-23T14:03:55Z")
Ryan, let me ask you a question. In your opinion, who benefits most from the narrative that Islam is a force of evil and source of terror. ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/43 "2016-02-23T14:09:47Z")
Yes, Islam’s image, in my opinion, has fallen almost as low as Christianity’s. Of course, Islam hasn’t been around as long, so it will get there soon enough. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/44 "2016-02-23T14:10:20Z")
I, too, am not convinced of that this “global” view exists. In China (1/6th of the world), among Chinese, the view towards Uighers is pretty much the same as the view towards Tibetans. The problem is not seen as religion, but as them being insufficiently grateful for being brought in to the glorious Han civilization. The Hui, a Muslim minority that is ethnically pretty much Han, doesn’t have the same perception. China has had a large indigenous Muslim population for a heck of a long time, and they just have a completely different perspective. In Africa (1/6th of the world) you are going to find massively different views depending on where exactly you are. But again, Islam has a loooooooong history in Africa and the perceptions of Islam as a whole reflects that. You seem to be looking at the last 20 or so years, which is when Islam really came to the attention of the West in modern times. But much of the world has a thousand years at living with or having close contact with Islam. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/45 "2016-02-23T14:52:41Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Unfortunatley you seem to think Gobal=N America and Europe. Where does it seem I think this? Last time I checked, the Indians, Russians and Chinese weren’t Western. > [@](#): > > **even sven** > You seem to be looking at the last 20 or so years, which is when Islam really came to the attention of the West in modern times. But much of the world has a thousand years at living with or having close contact with Islam. It’s as if you didn’t even read my OP… Which I stated… > [@](#): > > I’m old enough to remember how Islams image was **different 20-25 years ago** , when it was just for lack of better words, **a ‘normal’ religion.** Now for my good friend **Ramira** > [@](#): > > **Ramira** > It’s the latest Chinese narrative to spin for the Anglosphere. A recent development, to fit into the Anglosphere narrative and take advantage. > > GLOBAL of course means not just in English and not just about what you anglophones read. ‘You’ Anglophones? This was Chinese speaking about Muslims, it wasn’t people speaking English I’m sorry to say. > [@](#): > > I am unaware that the Anglo-Americans are a race. > > Not is there blame of Anglo-americans - there is a blame on a certain kind of poster here who mistakes their narrow consumption, limited to the Anglosphere medias or the Euro medias, and information for Global. I didn’t have to read Fox news or the Mail to see these comments, the reason for my topic was to highlight how this view of Muslims was seeping into the conciousness of ordinary public opinion, and was damaging the image of Islam globally. But go ahead, just blame it on ‘narrow consumption’ > [@](#): > > from the same link, the full quote again since you avoid it What, like you avoided the very quote I responded back with? The main reasons for **Islam’s growth ultimately involve simple demographics.** > [@](#): > > So it is hard to see a logic which is saying the Islamic world is suffering specifically in this area having net positive on conversion unlike the major competing religions… It’s still small, and considering the image it has across large swathes of the world being synonymous with terrorism, it’s an unattractive religion to want to convert too (Not that any other is better) > [@](#): > > that most growth is by demographics is the effect of large numbers and does not say anything by itself on your ostensible topic. It is the comparative I quote that provides that. > > Doubtless the bad effects of the evil distortion that is the Takfiri movement and generally the Saudi supported Salafiste movements on the image of the Islamic religion (and beyond the image) in the Western world do indeed hurt any expansion of the islamic religion and conversion to the Islam. Which is what my point was in the OP. > [@](#): > > This is not the same as Global although the navel regarding mistake that. Africa doesn’t constitute ‘the rest of the world’ and you insinuate I’m ‘navel regarding?’ ---
**Author:** ![Ramira](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ramira/32/344_2.png) [@Ramira](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ramira)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/46 "2016-02-23T15:11:09Z")
> [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > ‘You’ Anglophones? > > This was Chinese speaking about Muslims, it wasn’t people speaking English I’m sorry to say. As even sven has pointed out this is your anglophone reading and misunderstanding of a discourse directed at you, where the Han Muslim Hui are not in that internal disocurse. So yes, you anglophones and a narrow vision you extrapolate to be Global. > [@](#): > > What, like you avoided the very quote I responded back with? > > The main reasons for **Islam’s growth ultimately involve simple demographics.** Avoided? How is it I avoided this when I point out directly in my post (1) The proper point of comparison is the relation of conversion, where unlike other major religions, there is still net positive (2) the effect of the large numbers that of course the main growth should be from the demographics given the high(er) birthrates. Your analytical confusion and inability to process these different issues I am sorry for. It appears you do not have a good understanding of the mathematics and are confused by the challenge of comparing different effects. The demographic effect says exactly nothing to the attractiveness… but your continued confusion and camping on it says very much about the quality of the analysis that is behind the proposition. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/47 "2016-02-23T16:23:34Z")
> [@](#): > > As even sven has pointed out this is your anglophone reading and misunderstanding of a discourse directed at you, where the Han Muslim Hui are not in that internal disocurse. > > So yes, **you anglophones** and a narrow vision you extrapolate to be Global. So what if they’re not? **Again** as I said in the OP, this is a recent phenomenon, as I said, and I’ll remind you, **AGAIN** Islam was considered a normal religion 20-25 years ago, and now it’s image has been distorted by terrorism, an example of which, was the persecution of Uighurs being labelled Islamic terrorists, encouraged by the Chinese government. I don’t see any ‘anglophone’ influence in that, despite your racist overtones. > [@](#): > > Avoided? > > How is it I avoided this when I point out directly in my post > (1) The proper point of comparison is the relation of conversion, where unlike other major religions, there is still net positive > (2) the effect of the large numbers that of course the main growth should be from the demographics given the high(er) birthrates. \*\*Statistical data on conversion to and from Islam are scarce. \*\*What little information is available suggests that **there is no substantial net gain or loss** in the number of Muslims through conversion globally; **the number of people who become Muslims through conversion seems to be roughly equal to the number of Muslims who leave the faith.** As a result, this report does not include any estimated future rate of conversions as a direct factor in the projections of Muslim population growth. > **[Related Factors](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2011/01/27/future-of-the-global-muslim-population-related-factors/)** > > The following factors are not direct inputs into the projections, but they underlie vital assumptions about the way Muslim fertility rates are changing > [@](#): > > Your analytical confusion and inability to process these different issues I am sorry for. > It appears you do not have a good understanding of the mathematics and are confused by the challenge of comparing different effects. Thank you **Ramira,** but don’t waste your time on me, your arrogant posturing can be used for good, instead of evil. > [@](#): > > The demographic effect says exactly nothing to the attractiveness… but your continued confusion and camping on it says very much about the quality of the analysis that is behind the proposition. So now you’re questioning the validity of the articles methods you used to disprove a point I made about the very portion of the article you used against me? You’re an amazing person **Ramira** , keep up the good work. ---
**Author:** ![l0k1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bb73d2/32.png) [@l0k1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/l0k1)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/48 "2016-02-23T18:13:33Z")
Regarding the Uighurs, if I’m remembering my central Asian history correctly, they have been fighting for their independence from Chinese rule since the Yuan (Mongol) Dynasty. Two or three times since the fall of the Qing they have succeeded for short periods of time. I would compare their culture to that of the Kurds, unluckily ending up without a modern nation state. The current program of oppression by China has nothing to do with jihad or Islam or Palestine or Global views about Islam, it’s just the Chinese making sure that the Uighur autonomous zone doesn’t secede from China or join some pan Turk central asian confederacy. ---
**Author:** ![Hooleehootoo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/eada6e/32.png) [@Hooleehootoo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hooleehootoo)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/49 "2016-02-23T18:18:51Z")
George Habash was a despicable person, from a Christian background, but at least he would not have had a problem with [women riding bicycles](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/world/middleeast/gaza-women-on-bikes-face-a-long-road-to-acceptance.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=mini-moth®ion=top-stories-below&WT.nav=top-stories-below&_r=0). Notice again in this article the point that in legal systems based on sharia, fatwas have the strength of law. OTOH, notice attitude of the quoted Abdul Hussein. Bully for him. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/50 "2016-02-23T19:32:04Z")
Why must we view Islam’s perception only through the lens of terrorism/jihad when there is so much more to dislike about it? Perhaps some of these factors are contributing to Islam’s bad image in the west: - Its treatment of women. - The fact that it does not desire a separation between church and state. - Widespread support in Islamic states for barbaric practices like female genital mutilation, cutting of the hands of thieves, honor killings, etc. - Widespread support among Muslims for severe punishments for apostates. - Its demand for free speech to be restricted when it comes to heresy/blasphemy. - It’s horrible attitude towards homosexuals. I could go on. All of these horrible things not only have plenty of textual support in Muslim religious literature and the support of major Muslim leaders, but they are also approved of by large percentages of Muslims around the world. We’re not talking about a lunatic fringe here, but sizeable minorities or in many cases majorities. Islam today is like fundamentalist Christianity taken to a completely different level. We can be outraged and demand ‘justice’ when a Christian couple refuses to bake a cake for a gay couple, but then turn a blind eye to the reality that in almost all Islamic societies that couple would have much bigger problems than worrying about a wedding cake. Being murdered, for example. Or being thrown in jail or executed by the state. Aside from its tendency to create jihadists, there are many other horrible things Islam should have to answer for. ---
**Author:** ![Hooleehootoo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/eada6e/32.png) [@Hooleehootoo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hooleehootoo)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/51 "2016-02-23T19:43:57Z")
For some balance, [here](http://brobible.com/life/article/biker-brooklyn-bullied-hasidic-jews/) is a video of some fundamentalists right here in the good ol’ USA objecting to bicycles. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/52 "2016-02-23T19:52:08Z")
> [@l0k1](#): > > Regarding the Uighurs, if I’m remembering my central Asian history correctly, they have been fighting for their independence from Chinese rule since the Yuan (Mongol) Dynasty. Two or three times since the fall of the Qing they have succeeded for short periods of time. I would compare their culture to that of the Kurds, unluckily ending up without a modern nation state. The current program of oppression by China has nothing to do with jihad or Islam or Palestine or Global views about Islam, it’s just the Chinese making sure that the Uighur autonomous zone doesn’t secede from China or join some pan Turk central asian confederacy. Exactly, where as two or three decades ago alot of sympathy would be generated, maybe even on the level we see in regards to Tibet, but because terrorism in the Islamic world and Islamic fundamentalism is so prevalent on the global stage, these people automatically lose alot of sympathy due to their religion. ---
**Author:** ![UberArchetype](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/2bfe46/32.png) [@UberArchetype](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UberArchetype)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/53 "2016-02-23T19:58:43Z")
I take a longer view of what I refer to as the ongoing Islamic debacle. It is the most troubling manifestation of religion’s decline - all religion - in general. Let’s hope it end’s up being the last gasp of the truly delusional religious lunatics from that strain of the disease. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/54 "2016-02-23T20:00:05Z")
> [@Ramira](#): > > Doubtless the bad effects of the evil distortion that is the Takfiri movement and generally the Saudi supported Salafiste movements on the image of the Islamic religion (and beyond the image) in the Western world do indeed hurt any expansion of the islamic religion and conversion to the Islam. > > This is not the same as Global although the navel regarding mistake that. One reason the image of Islam is suffering is that Muslims most often use this tactic to respond to the criticism that their religion drives terrorism.[You are committing takfir on the takfiris](http://www.thefridaytimes.com/tft/excommunicating-terrorism/) when you brand their version of Islam an “evil distortion”. Of course you know that they do the same to your version. And anyone who is familiar with the Koran, hadith, Islamic traditions, and current Muslim public opinions and beliefs can see that you have no firmer ground to stand on than they do. Your declarations about their religious beliefs and actions are no more factual than their declarations about your’s. When you commit takfir against them you are reinforcing the dangerous notion that there is a true, pure, version of Islam that is discernible by examining Islamic source texts. This concept, along with the concepts of jihad and martyrdom, are the bedrock upon which the modern global Islamic insurgency is built. Also, considering how incredibly strong and widespread Saudi Salafist influence has been, you can’t just hand wave away this strain of belief simply because you do not hold it. Do you consider the Ikwan to be Salafist in nature? There are good arguments on both sides of this question. The thing is, if you do include them, then you have to admit that the Salafist influence is very broad and mainstream. And of you do not then you are narrowing your criticism to exclude a profoundly regressive force with vast influence, the most powerful entity in the religious-radical-right on the planet today, in fact. You are certainly correct when you point out that the ulema regularly condemns the acts of individual Islamic terrorist groups.[As has been pointed out to you before](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18870724&postcount=23), however, they far less often condemn and disavow the jihadist rhetoric than underlies the violence. [MUSLIM SCHOLARS VS. ISIS](http://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2014/10/is-the-muslim-scholars-open-letter-to-isis-really-enough) (In response to [A Letter to Baghdadi](http://www.lettertobaghdadi.com/14/english-v14.pdf)) > [@](#): > > The statement is ambiguous in crucial areas, which not only weaken its argument, but also question whether it is truly a rigorous and valid refutation of ISIS’s deeds and claims. In what follows, I will focus only on two of them: the concept of jihad and the restoration of the Muslim caliphate. While this letter claims to present the correct version of the Muslim teaching, its imprecise description of important areas makes it subject to different, and sometimes opposite, understandings, leaving the reader, especially the non-Muslim, puzzled regarding correct Islamic teaching. > > First, concerning the concept of jihad, the letter reads: “The word ‘jihad’ is an Islamic term that cannot be applied to armed conflict against any other Muslim.” Okay, but what about non-Muslims? Can jihad be applied against them? The letter, though recommending jihad as a form of self-piety or a way to strive against one’s ego, does not specify against whom armed jihad should be applied. This leaves the door open for interpretation. > > Moreover, it states that “All Muslims see the great virtue in jihad,” and does not explain what “the jihad against the enemy” really means. In fact, the letter applauds and praises the “intentions” of the members of ISIS, noting, “it is clear that you [Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi] and your fighters are fearless and are ready to sacrifice in your intent for jihad.” The approval sends mixed signals. At the end, the reader doesn’t know what to think. Is armed jihad forbidden only against Muslims? The letter seems to convey so. If this is a true Islamic teaching, then it is seriously damaging to free societies, especially if we consider the non-Muslim groups marauded and slaughtered by ISIS under the banner of jihad. > > Second, regarding the restoration (or reestablishment) of the Islamic caliphate, the letter affirms that “There is [an] agreement (ittifaq) among scholars that a caliphate is an obligation upon the [Muslim] Ummah . . . [which] has lacked a caliphate since 1924 CE.” This is a serious point. In their attempt to refute ISIS’s claims regarding the caliphate, the Muslim scholars seem to affirm the ideology of the caliphate with some restrictions. They continue: “a new caliphate requires consensus from Muslims and not just from those in some small corner of the world.” This is puzzling. Does it mean that the restoration of the Muslim caliphate is an obligation upon the Muslim community worldwide these days? Is it only a matter of “consensus”? The letter does not specify. What one may understand of such statements is that ISIS’s caliphate is rejected by some other “Muslims” mainly because there is no “consensus” about it, but the Muslim caliphate and its restoration is a real Muslim commitment, and only needs an agreement among the Muslims in order to reestablish it. > > What the signers forget is that, historically speaking, it is difficult even to argue that there was a “consensus” among the Muslims in previous caliphates. On the same day of Muhammad’s death, Muslims disagreed about the caliph, and that is for the most part the reason why we have the Shia–Sunni division among Muslims today. Thus, the Muslim scholars, in their attempt to refute ISIS’s claims, create even more serious questions about Muslim teaching and ideology regarding the restoration of the caliphate. > > The ambiguity in this letter reflects the sensitive and critical situation of the Muslim scholars who signed it, and stems probably from at least three reasons: 1) It is obvious that original Muslim texts include statements and stories that could support ISIS’s claims and deeds if interpreted literally, so Muslim scholars try to be both sensitive in choosing their words and selective in their quotations from sacred texts, which results in ambiguity in some cases; 2) Scholars realize that outright denunciation of ISIS’s interpretation is quite difficult, as such interpretations run throughout Muslim history, in addition to the fact that Abu Bakr himself holds a PhD in Islamic Studies; and 3) In the Muslim perception and mindset, the concept of one unified umma (community) obliges Muslims to defend and support their Muslim fellows all the way. ---
**Author:** ![l0k1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bb73d2/32.png) [@l0k1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/l0k1)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/55 "2016-02-23T20:59:54Z")
> [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > Exactly, where as two or three decades ago alot of sympathy would be generated, maybe even on the level we see in regards to Tibet, but because terrorism in the Islamic world and Islamic fundamentalism is so prevalent on the global stage, these people automatically lose alot of sympathy due to their religion. OK, I’m 42. From what I remember, Islam has been labelled as the religion of terror since I was about 5. We may have supported Islamic extremists in Afghanistan, but we certainly didn’t in Iran. In fact we used the Islamic Republic as justification for the use of chemical weapons by our ally Iraq. The Chinese are using Islam as part of their propaganda campaign, but we in the US have been doing that for quite some time. I think the time frame of 20-25 years as in the OP and your time frame of 20-30 ignore the fact that Islam as terror has been the dominate theme of US involvement in the region of the middle east as far back as I can remember. We never mention Islam when we discuss Indonesia, where women can vote and ride bicycles with their genitals largely intact. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/56 "2016-02-23T21:32:49Z")
> [@UberArchetype](#): > > I take a longer view of what I refer to as the ongoing Islamic debacle. It is the most troubling manifestation of religion’s decline - all religion - in general. Let’s hope it end’s up being the last gasp of the truly delusional religious lunatics from that strain of the disease. But is it a decline? I don’t see any crisis of faith. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/57 "2016-02-23T22:08:26Z")
> [@l0k1](#): > > OK, I’m 42. From what I remember, Islam has been labelled as the religion of terror since I was about 5. We may have supported Islamic extremists in Afghanistan, but we certainly didn’t in Iran. In fact we used the Islamic Republic as justification for the use of chemical weapons by our ally Iraq. The Chinese are using Islam as part of their propaganda campaign, but we in the US have been doing that for quite some time. I think the time frame of 20-25 years as in the OP and your time frame of 20-30 ignore the fact that Islam as terror has been the dominate theme of US involvement in the region of the middle east as far back as I can remember. We never mention Islam when we discuss Indonesia, where women can vote and ride bicycles with their genitals largely intact. This is true, but it’s never been so intense as it has now. ---
**Author:** ![l0k1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bb73d2/32.png) [@l0k1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/l0k1)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/58 "2016-02-23T22:24:31Z")
I disagree. We always vilify those people that live where our foreign policy goals wish that they didn’t. As long as our foreign policy goals were to keep Turkey as a NATO base, we vilified the Kurds, when the Kurds could be used to further our goals in Iraq, we stopped vilifying them. We vilified the Japanese during WWII, and distributed racist caricatures showing the differences between those evil Japanese and the good Chinese. After the war, when Japan was under occupation and the Chinese had a communist revolution, we vilified the Chinese and people stopped going out for Chinese food for fear of, I don’t know, catching communism. Any bad feels you might have about Islam are due to the fact that the people that live where we keep sending our military happen to be Muslim. I brought up Indonesia because it is the perfect counter example to all the stereotypes about Islam. More Muslims live in Indonesia than in any other country, but we never worry about Indonesia being a terrorist state. Islam has nothing to do with it. If every man woman and child in Iraq and Syria and Lebanon and Libya converted to Scientology tomorrow, chances are they’d still prefer not to be killed in drone strikes, they’d still have disagreements over who should be in charge of the government, and still find some justification for preventing women from riding bicycles and possessing unmutilated genitals. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/59 "2016-02-23T22:37:49Z")
Sure, add Malaysia to the list too. ---
**Author:** ![l0k1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bb73d2/32.png) [@l0k1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/l0k1)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2016, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824/60 "2016-02-23T23:00:38Z")
Malaysia is a tiny country compared to Indonesia. I didn’t pick Indonesia because it’s a Muslim majority country, I picked it because it has 300 million people and more Muslims than any other Muslim majority country. Malaysia has like 10% of Indonesia’s population. Indonesia also doesn’t have Islam as it’s one and only official religion, Indonesia officially recognizes like ten religions and tolerates a bunch of regional belief systems. If Islam were hostile to other belief systems then Indonesia wouldn’t be so tolerant. My argument is that Islam is not responsible for the negative stereotypes that native English speakers (I think they’re called anglophones) attribute to it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-islams-global-image-beyond-repair/746824.md?page=4)