Dear @Haqiqatjou, It's really quite sad how much you've devolved recently. I actually followed you back before you had accumulated this internet notoriety you have now. At that time, I actually thought you were bringing forth some challenging ideas from a different perspective.1/
Even though I found your ideas to be extreme & dangerous, I at least respected you as a potential thinker with some serious ideas. But, then, it seems that you got obsessed with obtaining followers, which caused you to resort to clickbait, memes, & other antics... 2/
anything to get more likes, subscribers, & donations. You even recently described yourself as a "content creator," & this is really what you have become. It's quite sad. 3/
When I was talking to someone recently about our run-ins on Twitter, that person said, "Daniel is an idiot!" I told that person in response, "No, I don't think so. He's just sold out to the social media algorithm." I guess this is called grifting in today's lingo? 4/
It's better to focus on ideas & serious thinking than followers & subscribers. Kim Kardashian has many more followers than Shaykh Yasir Qadhi, but this does not mean that she is a better or more formidable thinker or interlocutor. 5/
There are some very senior scholars in the academy who have very little if any social media presence & many average people would have no idea who they are. Again, it's a strange metric to use for what you claim to be doing. 6/
There is, of course, an obvious irony in all of this. While railing against Western capitalism, materialism, & consumerism, it is you who has fallen prey to it & your "brand" is now fully commodified. It's changing you, my friend. This is bad. 7/
It's quite sad that you would also levy the charge of "native informant" & thereby diminish the value of this word. By conflating liberal/modernist Muslim with "native informant," you actually collapse the difference between the two, making Tarek Fatah equal to Reza Aslan. 8/
You might disagree with the worldview of Islamic modernism but it's a bit much for you to splinter the Umma so much that you strike with this blow. I would not, for example, call the FBI or CIA on you, nor would I think even your banning from Twitter would be justified... 9/
There are limits of decency one should observe. (Admittedly, I might have exceeded those in my recent comment to Farid, which was, however, meant to be hyperbolic. I should withdraw it.) More to the point, instead of calling people "native informants" & dismissing them... 10/
you should instead seek out a thoughtful interlocutor to put your ideas to the test. I am one such person for you. You look silly when you are demanding to debate everyone but dodging me based on bad excuses ("not enough followers" or "spreading heresy"). 11/
especially when these excuses don't pan out with other figures you have debated or wish to debate. On the other hand, it really seems that you are not interested in debating thoughtful people as much as finding people with large followership so that you can increase your own.12/
I am debating @jihadwatchRS not because of his large followership but because I consider him, to his credit, to be the "Shaykh al- (anti-)Islam." His thought permeates the blogosphere. This is why I am less interested in debating someone like Sam Harris or Jordan Peterson. 13/
The latter two would increase a person's following, but really, do we think Harris or Peterson know anything at all about Islam? They would, of course, be good people to talk to in order to push back on their ignorance, but I wanted to challenge myself so I picked Robert. 14/
Again, my focus is on ideas & I want to search for worthy interlocutors, not just people based on following. I think you are one due to your spearheading of an anti-modernist institute & your focus on the "modernist menace," plus your philosophy background. 15/
It's quite strange that you would avoid an actual Islamic modernist, someone who specializes in Islamic modernism at a school that shall not be named. You should have agreed to debate/discuss with me even if I had zero followers, which was the case a year ago. 16/
I literally just joined Twitter, so I wonder why you're obsessed with the idea that I am a "no-name," given that I don't care about that, I had zero followers a year ago--& zero for a decade before that--& I am just a guy who studies the subject you obsess over. 17/
Love me, hate me, find my style annoying, etc. that's all good. But, people who've seen me talk & write, know that I am not someone to take lightly. You know it too, which is why you are avoiding a debate, even though I would be the perfect interlocutor for you. 18/
Finally, I will just say that your claim of representing orthodoxy should serve as an example of why we shouldn't take claims of orthodoxy at face value or think such persons to actually represent the views of the masses. You (Daniel) are a fringe & extreme character... 19/
hardly representative of the Muslim community you come from, which is why you direct your ire at that very errant community. This is part of the Salafi worldview, where they & their small circle are the saved sect, with everyone outside of it errant, misguided, or deviant. 20/
My desire to debate you, Daniel, has nothing to do with your followers. I stopped following your "work" once you became a meme-generator, but before that, I actually listened to your stuff, even registered once for your site, & found some of your ideas to be challenging... 21/
in the sense of being a robust representative of a particular Islamic worldview that challenges my own. A dialogue between us would be worthwhile for both of us from this aspect. But, again, I have moved on, despite my recurrent jabs at your hypocritical cowardice. 22/
Lastly, I would say that not even I was rooting for "AP" when you faced him in debate & I actually praised your performance, although I felt that you lost hearts & minds with your extreme views. Similarly, however, perhaps you can move past your myopia & realize that... 23/
I am going into this debate with Robert knowing that I will represent the overall Muslim community & not just those with my own views. Just as I thought well of you in your encounter with AP--despite my strong misgivings--maybe you can do the same here.
Peace. 24/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Dr. Javad T Hashmi

Dr. Javad T Hashmi Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @DrJavadTHashmi

30 Aug
Remember how I said that Farid would join ISIS if he were living in Iraq? It was purposely hyperbolic but it spoke to an underlying truth: Farid is an anti-Shīʿa bigot, extremist, & sectarian fanatic. Worst yet, his sloppy analysis reveals why he can never be a scholar. 1/
It is a complete fantasy to imagine that this guy, no more than meme master @Haqiqatjou, represents "mainstream Islam." These guys are basement dwellers who spend all day putting out YouTube pages & PDF refutations. Farid is an absolute loser, who has a pathetic life... 2/
& so he tries to compensate by pouring out the failures of his life into bigotry for Shīʿas. It is a tale as old as time. Do you think @Haqiqatjou is any different? These are all losers. For almost two decades now, Farid has wasted the precious time of his life "refuting"... 3/
Read 27 tweets
28 Aug
The justified critiques of secularism & liberalism -- which traditionalists opportunistically & selectively borrow from Western thinkers, weaponize, & seek to deploy for regressive purposes -- do not, in any way, mean that the other solution is a so-called "Sharīʿa state"... 1/
... a utopic & ephemeral state that has either never or fleetingly ever existed -- or sometimes, depending on the argument, has always existed before the onslaught of modernity. This highly idealized utopic state is then compared to the worst features of secular liberalism. 2/
Whereas as a liberal communitarian I consider myself a critic of Western secular liberalism as it unfolded, it does not at all hold that many of these problems or other even worse problems have not existed in the historical Sharīʿa construct(s). 3/
Read 8 tweets
28 Aug
I am pleased to announce that a venue has been selected for the debate between Robert Spencer (@jihadwatchRS) & me. A prestigious European university has offered to host the debate this calendar year. Robert & I have shaken on it. 1/
I wanted the debate to be held in person, but due to Robert's security concerns, the debate will be virtual & live-casted by the university. Because it's the weekend, we will need to wait for the coming week to agree on a date. 2/
The debate thesis will be, "Islam is exceptionally violent compared to other religions, Christianity in particular." It is inspired by the title of one of Robert's books: "Religion of Peace?: Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn't." This may even go as the title of the debate. 3/
Read 8 tweets
27 Aug
Throughout your work, you are a proponent of what we academics call the exceptionality thesis. This is the idea that Islam is exceptionally violent compared to other religious traditions. 1/
That this is your recurrent thesis, sometimes explicit & often implied, is patently obvious by the title of your book, "Religion of Peace? Why Christianity is & Islam isn't." There are numerous other statements I can show of yours where you push this narrative. 2/
It is, in fact, a necessary thesis for you. If Islam was just as violent as other religions, then this would not be an amazing claim. It would be the most mundane statement ever, like saying, "one religion is violent like others." 3/
Read 9 tweets
27 Aug
You just exacerbate your problem even more, haha. Let's say that the Prophet is just a fictional character. Then, if that's the case, it follows from this that such a fictional character would have different constructions by various believers. 1/
This is necessarily the case when the sources are conflicting & require agency to decide which characterization to accept & which to reject. Again, at most, all you have is a criticism of the particular portrayal of conservative orthodoxy. 2/
If the Prophet is truly just imaginary/fictional, then in that case the construction of him by woke leftist Muslims would be just as "real" as that of conservative orthodoxy. Think of the many different Jesus's that exist (including Marxist Jesus). 3/
Read 8 tweets
27 Aug
Sorry, Bobb-o, but I never claimed that the Ḥadīth cannot be morally evaluated. In fact, I do that myself. Yet, what you elide is the fact that Ḥadīth skepticism of some sort or the other is rampant amongst Muslims, much to the chagrin of conservative orthodoxy. 1/
In other words, Muslims themselves--like myself--morally evaluate the Ḥadīth, reinterpret some, reject many of them (including those in the Ṣaḥīḥ collections), problematize others, & even display moral disgust at not a few of them. 2/
What you cannot do, however, is claim that the Prophet *was* something or the other when the source you get that from is one that you consider faulty. That's just shoddy logic. 3/
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(