no, listen.

this is what i need you to do.

if you go through my blog and replace the term "muslim" with the term "republican", you need to ask yourself if you're still upset or not - because my criticism of muslims is exactly the same as my criticism of republicans, or of christians in general, and if you react differently then you need to explain why. so, if it upsets you when i say it about muslims, but it doesn't upset you when i say it about christians, or republicans, then you need to ask yourself why that is.

& to be as clear as i can be, if i haven't already been, my opposition is to any kind of organized religion, or, more broadly, any kind of conservative institution - including the democratic party, itself. that is, i'm not making the argument you hear on the right that criticism of christianity should be held to the same standards as criticism of islam, but am rather introducing an argument from the left that criticism of islam should be as deep and as frivolous and normal and routine as the widespread criticism of christianity is. and, yes that is the correct argument from the left. if you want to argue that islam should not be criticized because it might offend some muslims, that is an exceedingly right-wing position.

i have pointed out before that there are two reasons that you might react differently to a criticism of islam than you would to a criticism of the republican party (and, again, i criticize both in this space). the first is that you don't actually realize that republicans and muslims are essentially the same thing, with the caveat that muslims are far more extreme than republicans, in general. there are neither moderate republicans nor are there moderate muslims. so, the first explanation is ignorance, and i suspect that this is the proper explanation when dealing with most activists on the ground - whether they've been taught to see the issue as racial rather than ideological, or they're just mindlessly following a trend, the basic point is that they actually don't have the slightest idea what they're talking about, they just think they're doing something good. this is a broader cultural problem that needs to be addressed at the organizing level - the debate that needs to be had here is about the longterm consequences of renormalizing these value systems. and, this is where the second explanation asserts itself - there may actually be some people organizing on the left that actually uphold these values, and see islam as a way to reverse a moral decline in society. it is these people that are most dangerous to the left-wing project, and that need to be defeated in open debate, not the mindless foot soldiers on the ground, who will shift allegiances with the wind.

i've spent my whole life fighting against religious value systems, and i'm not going to stop or tone it down or dial it back just because it is unpopular this month. rather, i intend to win the debate, over time, and put the left back on a proper footing towards increasing secularism.