[A]ll the other alternatives (most of them much stronger in “real-life” material terms than any Muslim country or party) like Great Russian Nationalism and its Orthodox Christian backstop, Chinese nationalism with Confucian and fascist characteristics, nascent Japanese nationalism, Hardcore Hindutva in India; all of them have become stronger because Islam has already wedged the door open and thrown open the possibility that the liberal project itself may be incoherent; that it does not map to the real world, that it may even be dangerous to non-Muslim groups to stick to it…
In short, here is the thesis question for the day:
If and when modern humanism and liberalism (broadly defined, you know the drill) crashes and burns (who knows, it may not), will future historians look back and say that Islam was the rock on which it first and decisively broke? Was Islam the kid who asked about the emperor’s clothes with sufficient naive determination and clarity, and stubborn unwillingness to accept “the facts”.. and thus opened the way to the future (which looks suspiciously like the illiberal past)…
Inquiring minds want to know.
From: Brown Pundits: Islam is the rock on which the liberal order broke?
