re: #20 Charles

Wilders is selling the view that all Muslims are evil and must be expelled from Western society, the Koran should be banned, and Islam should be outlawed as a religion.

Sorry. I am NOT down with that.

That’s not true. Wilders believes that Islam itself is an evil ideology, but in almost every speech and interview he makes the distinction between the people and the ideology - he says most Muslims aren’t terrorists or extremists, but he says that those who call themselves moderate Muslims are not really Muslim although they think of themselves as Muslims, because there is no moderate doctrine of Islam, so they don’t really follow what the Quran or Hadith preach or what is the “true” Islam. In a sense he’s right - Muslim reformists (who are not anti-Islam or anti-Muslim) also think that Islam is in dire need for reforms.

This is often compared to Jews not following all the biblical laws, but the difference is that in the evolution of the Jewish religion the reasons for not following these laws as they’re literally expressed in the bible were well established within authoritative interpretations that are part of the mainstream Jewish tradition - that’s why even the most ultra-orthodox Jews don’t stone adulterers to death and such other practices found in the bible (not to mention Reform Jews that are one of the most liberal communities in existence).

But the thing is his understanding of “true Islam” is the same as the fundamentalists’ understanding of “true Islam”.

Also he never said that all Muslims should be expelled from Western societies. He has some other controversial policy suggestions, but don’t make it worse than what it is.

As for free speech - his suggestion to ban the Quran (which I think - not sure - is not a part of his formal policy, but was rather a provocation he made in a newspaper article) was based on the Dutch law prohibiting incitement to violence, the basis on which Mein Kampf is banned in the Netherlands. His view on free speech has become sharper later following his own experience and then he started suggesting adopting the American first amendment (which is more absolutist than the Dutch law).

What I find the most problematic in his views is that he sees Muslim immigration as part of a stealth Jihad to islamize the West. I personally think that mass Muslim immigration year after year without a time limit plus higher birthrate will eventually result in a Muslim majority which is very likely to turn European countries into non-democratic Islamic countries, which is one of the reasons I think mass immigration should stop at some point - I don’t think it’s racism, but just common sense. I also think radical Muslims, when allowed to act and preach as freely as they do, do try to use the local Muslim communities, particularly the youth, to promote both terrorism and favoring sharia law. But there’s a difference between that and seeing Muslim immigration as part of a “conspiracy” to take over the West. Radical Muslims do want that, but most Muslims come to Europe for financial reasons, asylum and so on.