Finance
Sam Harris on Jew-Hatred, Radical Islam, and the West
Intro. [Recording date: July 2, 2024.]
Russ Roberts: Today is July 2nd, 2024 and my guest is neuroscientist, philosopher, and author Sam Harris. Sam is the host of Making Sense and creator of Waking Up. This is Sam’s second appearance on EconTalk. He was last here in February of 2023 talking about meditation, mindfulness, and morality. Sam, welcome back to EconTalk.
Sam Harris: Thank you, Russ. It’s great to see you. Happy to be back.
Russ Roberts: Our formal topic for today is an episode you did making sense on the situation on U.S. campuses. I’m sure we’ll get into other things along the way.
I want to warn parents listening with children: This episode may touch on adult themes or language.
Russ Roberts: So, let’s start with the protests. Although it’s funny, here we are in the end of June. Campuses are so quiet it feels like, is that, like, a historical event, those camp encampments? It seems like it’s just ancient history. But I think we learned something important. But you could argue that they’re not so significant. It was a small vocal minority, a lot of outsiders swelling the crowd. Do you find it worrisome what we saw at the end of the school year?
Sam Harris: Yeah, I do. I take your point that by sheer numbers and by a percentage of the students on campus, the actual details might not justify too much concern, right? But, the problem for me has always been that this far-left moral confusion that goes by many names–we often call it wokeness or a social justice, moral panic. I mean, it’s identity politics in its most strident form on the left. All of this, and the reason why it’s such a concern–even if it’s maybe 8% of left-of-center activist types–the problem is it has captured our most elite and heretofor influential institutions, right? So, we’re talking not about just random colleges: we’re talking about Harvard and Princeton and Yale and Stanford. I mean, just go from number one to number 30, and they’re all captured, right?
When we’re talking about media, we’re not talking about, you know, random blogs. We’re talking about the New York Times. We’re talking about–just the most important properties. In culture we’re talking about Hollywood, from Netflix on down. It’s elite institutions. And that worries me because I care about these institutions. I think we should all care about them. It is important that the New York Times, perhaps above any other paper on Earth, get its head screwed on straight. Right?
So there are obviously two ways of looking at this. You can always say that it’s a minority–in this case of American society–which is true.
A Harris Harvard poll done when those protests were at their height suggested that 75% of Americans wanted the IDF [Israeli Defense Forces] to go into Rafa, right? Seventy-five percent. So, we’re talking about–and yet our politicians were being bent not by the 75% near-consensus. They were being bent by what they were seeing on college campuses. And, I think we saw support for Israel visibly erode almost on an hourly basis from the Biden Administration in response to what we were seeing on campuses.
Russ Roberts: I’m not sure how significant it is that the so-called best colleges in America saw outbreaks of protests that were not just anti-Israel, but pro-Hamas. Which was kind of shocking for me. And I think you’ve alluded to it, as well, in your work. It was the response that these institutions had. Whether they’re captured or not, they’re slow to turn.
To me, they’re like large ocean liners. There’s a lot of people hoping that they’ll be different going forward, either because donations are down or other reasons, but it’s clear that their response to this challenge was feeble.
Now, you could argue it should have been feeble. You could have argued–you could argue, and let me make the case and let you agree or disagree.
Okay, I’m living here in Israel; of course, I think Israel has a right to exist. But, suppose you do think that Israel is an oppressive, apartheid, genocidal place and country? In which case, nonviolent protesting–blocking people on campus, supporting people who have fought against Israel–would be an honorable thing. And, a college campus is a place for that debate to take place. And so, why is it a problem that that extreme view, but defensible at some level, was tolerated?
Sam Harris: Well, with antisemitism, it really always seems to come down to the double standard. Right? And I think that’s the thing we detected in those Congressional hearings.
It wasn’t that you couldn’t make the case for something like free speech absolutism on a college campus wherein you could entertain any idea: No matter how apparently odious, you should be able to have a seminar on whether we should burn people for witchcraft, right? I mean, that’s totally fine, from my point of view.
But what was so obvious, glaringly so–and this is what many of us found so galling in those testimonies–is that the double standard was there and totally unacknowledged.
I mean, we all knew that, had the analogous protests in their extreme political orientation and moral obtuseness been launched against the black community, or the trans community, on any one of these campuses–if you had white supremacists–I mean, just imagine the day after Dylann Roof murders a bunch of black parishioners in–I think it was Charleston, South Carolina. Imagine you had white supremacist students at Columbia on the quad that day celebrating it as a victory for their ideology. We know exactly what would happen. Right? I mean, these kids would be kicked out of school. It’s so far outside the bounds of what that institution wants to be associated with, that–I mean, to say nothing of them actually, obviously breaking the stated policies of demonstration, I mean, they’re violently harassing people.
You can’t spit on people. You can’t prevent people’s movement. You can’t chase people through the corridors of a building so that they barricade themselves in fear inside of a library. Right? I mean, that’s just not the kind of demonstration that any one of these institutions supports.
And, yet they did tacitly support it because they pretended to just be infinitely open-minded as to the legitimacy of this whole project.
And, what was so clear is that they wouldn’t have been, had the targets been really anyone other than the Jews–right?–and Israel. So, it was that double standard that I think was just unsustainable.
Russ Roberts: And you gave the example in your episode about the Chinese, which put the Uyghurs in concentration camps. They’re worthy of being protested. But the idea that a Chinese American or a Chinese national, even, on a college campus should be harassed for that would be unimaginable.
Russ Roberts: Now, for me, the hypocrisy isn’t the worst part. I mean, it’s alarming as a Jew, but it’s not the worst part. For me, the worst part is the toleration of physical intimidation. You gave the example of chasing people through the streets, through the corridors of a building.
What we’re seeing in North America right now, and to some extent in Europe, is a slow–very slow, a boiling-the-frog kind of slow–uptick in antisemitic activity. It starts with slurs, yelling at people on the street, making them feel uncomfortable. And then, it’s an occasional–what’s happened a lot in Canada over the last few weeks is the shooting out of windows in synagogues, Jewish schools, when no one’s there.
I mean, it’s–so on some level it’s just a protest. It’s just a bit of vandalism in the name of a cause. But, and then it’s roughing somebody up on the street–but not killing them or bludgeoning them or kicking them and harming them.
My worry is that that’s what will happen next.
I was just in the United States for two weeks. People said, ‘How was it? Did you feel antisemitism?’ Not at all. None. I was in New York. I was in Washington, D.C. I was in Memphis, Tennessee; was in Huntsville, Alabama visiting family. I[?] didn’t feel anything. I did wear a hat. I did not wear my kippah out on the street–which I’ve done in the past. But I didn’t imagine–it really was kind of silly–there wasn’t any feeling of a presence of anti-Jewish or anti-Israel sentiment.
But, I worry it’s coming. And I’m worried that–and maybe I’m being paranoid. I don’t know.
Sam Harris: Yeah, well, I think we are wise to be alert to how this slow abridgment of liberties and the encroach of double standards just accumulates, and it gets normalized.
An example of this just came to mind. I was in New York recently, too, and I was walking down Fifth Avenue. And I passed that great Temple–I forget the name of it, maybe it’s Temple Emmanu-El–but it’s on Fifth Avenue, around 66th Street, somewhere around there. And, I’ve walked past that temple many, many times in my life.
And, this time I noticed that there are these giant blocks of stone on the sidewalk. I mean, each block is maybe the size of a dishwasher, something like that. It probably weighs 2000 pounds.
And, there’s a bunch of them just ringed around the entrance to the Temple. And, I bet most people who walk past those blocks are not alert to their significance. Right? I mean, what is their significance? If you take 30 seconds to think about it, more or less, everyone can figure out that what is intended there is to prevent someone from intentionally driving their car on the sidewalk for the purpose of murdering people who are gathered out in front of that, the entrance to that building, who can be safely assumed to be Jews. Right?
I mean, that’s normal life in Manhattan, which has to be one of the most, one of the safest cities in the world for Jews. But, there happen to be many of them there.
No one else has to do that in American society. This is completely standard in Jewish culture to have a level of security==to have metal detectors in your buildings–right?
That no one else does this. No one else thinks to do this.
And, there’s a reason for it. I mean, for every year after September 11th, 2001 in America–even the very next year, 2002, right?–Jews have been a greater target of hate crime than anyone else in American society. Including Muslims. Including African-Americans. I mean, there’s barely anyone in second place, right? It’s like a five x [5 times] difference in most years. Now, since October 7th, it’s probably a 15 x [15 times] difference, right?
Excuse me. And, I was always someone who discounted the significance of this.
The big change in me since October 7th is that I’m finally taking antisemitism seriously. I really felt that it was behind us in some significant sense. Certainly in any Western city and in open societies I just felt that there’s just no reason as a Jew to worry about the significance of antisemitism.
And, the thing that October 7th changed for me, and for many of us, is that no safe assumption. And, there is this ratchet effect that you’re alluding to, where you just see this incremental change in the wrong direction. Which, if you are alert to the historical echoes of that–if you imagine what it was like to be a Jew in Germany in 1930, right? If things look bad–but they didn’t look so bad that people packed their bags and left, right?–which obviously they should have–but it’s easy to see that they couldn’t see it. Right?
And, you read these heartbreaking editorials from the time where, in Jewish newspapers, they would talk about how Hitler is never going to do what he says he’s going to do, and there’s going to be this moderating effect on society. And, it was, in retrospect, pure delusion. But, no one could imagine such a thing as possible.
Well, now we should be able to imagine it, because it happened, right?
We know how–and it happened, again, not merely because there was some unique evil born in Nazi Germany in the 1930s, which created this killing machine that was rolled out to the rest of Europe. That’s not how the Holocaust happened. I mean, that’s half of the story. We have the concentration camp system, and we had what the Nazis themselves did both within it and outside of it with their killing squads, the Einsatzgruppen.
But, that’s 3 million of the 6 million deaths of Jews in the Holocaust, right?
The rest were killed in a wide variety of other ways, and many, many were killed by their neighbors. Who were not German. Right? They were Lithuanian and Latvian and Ukrainian and Polish and Croatian, and even Greek. Right? I mean, this is what happened.
And so, we know that it’s possible from one day to the next, as a Jew, to discover that your neighbors want to kill you. Right? And they want to kill you, not because the Nazis came from outside and are forcing them at the point of a bayonet to kill you. No, they want to kill you all of a sudden because they realize it’s possible, right? That no one’s going to hold them accountable for it.
And, again, that sounds completely paranoid in the context of the life in which I’ve lived, which I lived prior to October 7th.
But, when you look at –in Los Angeles people beating Jews up for trying to enter a synagogue just last week in the most densely Jewish neighborhood in the city, the Fairfax area, that’s not far from–I mean, that’s an explicit historical echo that we shouldn’t, we should have absolutely no patience for as a society.
And, as people have pointed out, we already have too much patience for it in the sense that no one’s talking about it.
If there were–this is a point that Noah Pollak made in the Free Press–if you change the complexion of that situation, if you imagine MAGA [Make America Great Again] Republicans ringing a mosque in Los Angeles and not letting Muslims enter and then beating them up if they tried to enter their mosque, in Los Angeles, we would never hear the end of this. This would be wall-to-wall coverage. There would be a Presidential Commission to investigate this. But this happened to Jews 10 days ago, and it’s completely fallen out. It’s been completely memory hold.
Yeah: It’s not totally irrational to worry about society suddenly becoming fundamentally hostile to Jews even in the West.
Russ Roberts: I’ll just add a few comments to that. You and I have corresponded via email about The World of Yesterday, which is Stefan Zweig’s memoir, his autobiography. It’s really a remarkable book. I recommend that everyone read it, for a hundred reasons. I mean, it’s a incredible garden of delight, intellectual delights.
But, one of the things that he writes about is the rise of the Nazis and the role that physical intimidation played. The way that a truck would pull up to a peaceful gathering and brown shirts would pour out of it, and they’d beat up a bunch of people and get back in and go away. And the other folks who were the victims, plus the bystanders, would go, ‘Well, that’s too bad. That’s unfortunate. It’s a bad thing. Thank God they’re a small minority, and their leader is an insane man who, of course, will never come to power.’
But, there’s an incredible asymmetry of influence and power when you have a group willing to use force and violence to get their way in a group that’s uneasy about confronting that violence because they’re civilized.
Russ Roberts: So, the uncivilized have a tremendous advantage there.
Now, that’s the bad news. The good news, as a friend of mine points out when I start getting worried about Kristallnacht–which is what Toronto feels like lately with a synagogue’s windows being blown out, shot out–the police remain pretty much on the Jews’ side in America. England, don’t look so much. But in general, the police are pretty clearly not so sympathetic to thuggery against Jews or anti-Israel or pro-Hamas protesting that turns violent. So, that’s somewhat comforting.
But, I think you have to be kind of vigilant about it from the very beginning. And how you do that, how you stand up to it–we talked–I’ve probably mentioned in the program before–but when people were tearing down the signs of hostages in the early days of the aftermath of October 7th and the Hamas kidnappings, I found it infuriating that people would photograph, video, with their phone, these people tearing them down and try to identify them and shame them, but no one tried to stop them.
And, there was a viral video of a construction worker somewhere in New York–I want to say Queens, I don’t remember–who stood up to a guy and said, ‘You’re not doing that.’ And the guy got terribly uneasy and ran away, basically. And, no one wants to be that guy. Most people don’t want to–he did, but most people don’t want to be that guy. They don’t want to put their body on the line. They don’t want to take a group of people and say, ‘This is our campus. We’re walking across. I don’t care what you say about Zionists. We’re Zionists, we’re Jews. We love Israel, and we belong here. You can’t stop us.’ That just generally didn’t happen, other than UCLA [University of California, Los Angeles] where there was a physical confrontation, which I think had complicated backstory. Anyway, any thoughts on that?
Sam Harris: Yeah. Well, obviously you take a significant risk, not just physical, but legal, whenever you engage in any kind of use of force. I mean, we have created a monopoly on the use of force in society for good reason, right? And, when you decide to reclaim that right for yourself, things can go haywire in lots of ways that are unintended, right?
I mean, we know this from encounters where, on a subway in New York, not that long ago, you had a mentally ill person harassing everyone in sight. And finally, some bystander who quite rationally thought he was in a position to solve this problem–I think he’d been a Marine–decided to choke this person unconscious in front of everybody. And he got the help from other people–like, the other people were helping him subdue this person. But, he didn’t know enough to know–this guy was not a black belt in Brazilian jiu jitsu, and he choked him unconscious for too long and the guy died.
So, unless this is really your wheelhouse–which is to say you’re a highly trained combatant of some sort–you don’t know what’s going to happen. If you punch someone in the face and they fall down and hit their head on a curb and die, you’re probably going to prison unless you can prove that you were in fear for your life imminently, and that any rational person would have been in fear for their life imminently in that moment. And, that’s not the usual situation you’re in at a protest where you have a bunch of people with signs and bullhorns and they’re shoving each other.
If you shove someone too hard or you punch them in the face and you really harm them, the rest of your life can be spent untangling that mess, at best. And, so, yeah, restraint is–to say nothing about the wisdom of de-escalating situations whenever that’s possible.
But, it is kind of a game-theoretic problem here because it is rational for each individual to avoid violence and to avoid conflict. I mean, that’s just: your life is better that way. It’s far less unpleasant at a minimum, and you’re not open to legal jeopardy, etc., etc. So, just drive away from the protest and ignore these people with signs who are not letting you get into the building you thought you were going to go into that day. And just avoid the whole thing, right?
But, of course, that is to cede society to the thugs. And, if you’re just–if you just replace the windows of the synagogue every time someone throws a brick through it and you do nothing else–right?–well, then maybe the problem will go away.
But, I think at a deeper level, we have to convince the rest of society–I mean, certainly to speak from a Jewish point of view now–I think we have to convince the 98% of, in an American context, the 98% of American society that’s not Jewish, that there’s much more at stake here than just conserving the concerns of yet another beleaguered minority–now the Jews, right? I mean, this is why I’m not especially a fan of looking at this exclusively through the lens of a rise in antisemitism, because I think it’s a much bigger problem.
The fate of open societies are at stake here. It’s not just that there’s this global rise in Jew-hatred.
Russ Roberts: In your comments on the campus situation on your podcast, you made the observation somewhat similar to what you did a minute ago, but you said it more dramatically. You said: ‘Basically, Jews at some point in their history and various countries have been driven out.’ And, certainly that includes the countries of the West: Spain, England, Germany, etc. And, it certainly includes most of the countries in the Middle East, in the aftermath of establishment of the state of Israel, other times before that, Jews become–after for a variety of reasons, sometimes religious, sometimes political–they become the scapegoat. They get–they are persona non grata, whatever the plural is. And they get driven out. And on the way they’re often killed and treated badly.
So, one response to this moment–and I direct at you because I’m a so-called religious Jew, and I think you’re not–you’re a very famous non-believing Jew, a famous atheist–wouldn’t it be a better thing rather than standing up and risking all the violence we’ve just been talking about, wouldn’t be a better thing to just say: ‘Look, nobody likes us. Let’s just stand down. Let’s take off our kippot. Let’s change our names. Let’s mingle even better and assimilate even more. And, this little country in the Middle East where we have this little tiny bit of land: true, we have this historical connection to it, but they don’t like it. The Muslims don’t like it that non-Muslims rule there. It sticks in their craw–theocratically it sticks in their craw; emotionally. I should just move out of here. I should leave Israel and I should become a citizen of the world. I should become a Nova Scotian or wherever I decide to settle. And, while it’s true that Hitler didn’t care whether you were religious or not, I think we could probably assimilate pretty effectively. And, let’s just stop–let’s just give up on this.’ I’m curious. That doesn’t appeal to me. That doesn’t appeal to me. I’m curious–
Sam Harris: I get it, yeah–
Russ Roberts: why it doesn’t appeal to you.
Sam Harris: Well, it did at one point, and I could be argued back into that position again. I’ve said as much in the past that I thought it would be a fitting final chapter to all of the secular gains and secular wisdom that the religion of Judaism has produced or the tradition of Judaism has produced, to have the Jews be the first to recognize that the end game for civilization can’t be all of our separate tribal loyalties vying for dominance or inclusion. Right? That we need to unravel our religious tribalism finally. And, for the Jews to say: ‘Listen, we’re done playing this game. We’re human beings and we have a common project, and we’re not going to bang on about the significance of our sectarian ideology anymore, much less our chosenness as a people, because we don’t believe these things anymore. Humanity has got to choose itself at this point, and we’re going to fight, we’re going to evaporate. We’re just going to disappear into the rest of culture.’ I could–I can still get behind that project.
The problem is that it doesn’t solve–and it might well solve the problem for all the Jews that are alive, and their descendants. Right? They’ll just be people. And, honestly, that’s pretty much the way I’ve lived my life. So, I speak as one who has a very tenuous connection to the Jewish tradition. And, while I’ve gone to my share of bar mitzvahs and bat mitzvahs, it’s not–I know what it’s like to live a radically secular, deracinated life from the perspective of religion. And, I recommend it. I mean, it is not without certain problems. So, there are things that I think we need to reinvent, and we haven’t reinvented them in secular culture, but it does not have the downside that many religious people would imagine, or at least not all of the downside.
But, the problem is that if you just imagine what would happen if Israel–if all the Jews of Israel woke up and had that epiphany tomorrow, and they said, ‘We’re out of here. We’re moving to America. We’re moving to Europe. We’re, we’re going to take all of our wealth and our intellectual property and just have fun in New York and LA [Los Angeles] and etc.’ What happens? Well, I think in the Muslim world, you get an instance of Islamist and jihadist triumphalism of the sort that we have never seen, right? This is yet another victory for the one true faith. Reclaiming Jerusalem for Islam will be a block party of a sort that we have never seen the world over. And, what will that signal to 2 billion Muslims? Will it signal that now it’s time for the lion to lay down with the lamb and we’re all going to get along? No: It will signal the coming triumph of Islam. Right?
And so, when you look at the radical core of that faith, how big that is is anyone’s guess. But, it’s not 5 million people and it’s probably not even just 50 million people. It’s a very large number of people who view the course of human history as tending toward just the final triumph of Islam.
This would be Data Point Number One that that is imminent. That it’s just–it’s going to be the best thing that has ever happened for Jihadism and Islamism globally.
So, it wouldn’t solve the problem. It would just move the problem to every border of every open society. Do you think Charlie Hebdo cartoonists would be alive if Jerusalem had been ceded to Islam in the 1970? No. This is not–the wind in the sails of Jihadism and Islamism would be that much stronger had they won their contest over that land.
Russ Roberts: Salman Rushdie would still sleep poorly at night, I think.
Russ Roberts: So, this is consistent with the view–and I want to turn to this now–that somehow, Israel is on the front lines of the West, defending the West, not just itself in this current moment. We’re under attack by Hamas in the west, Hezbollah in the north, the Houthis in the South, Iran in the northeast. It’s a frightening moment for Israel and our existence is actually at stake, which is, I think, unappreciated by most people other than those who live here and some who live elsewhere. But, before we get to the question of whether this is we’re bulwarking for the West and saving the West, I want to get to one small thing you mentioned that I think bears mentioning, that you mentioned in your episode: which is Qatar. You just mentioned in passing in that episode, that when we think about what’s going on on campuses, we shouldn’t miss sight of the fact that Qatar has donated, I think, billions of dollars to American campuses–
Sam Harris: Yeah. Yeah: tens of billions, yeah–
Russ Roberts: Part of me says: Well, I guess, it’s not unusual that people who give money want something in return. That’s normal, as an economist, to assume that. But, until I was listening to you, it never really crossed my mind: Why is a country giving money to a university? It’s such a strange thing. It’s bizarre.
Sam Harris: It’s not just–they give more money to American and British–I mean, Western–universities than any other country on earth. I think they’ve got something like 300,000 actual citizens in Qatar and they have something like a million foreign workers or 2 million foreign workers.
But, that’s just an amazing fact. And it’s accomplishing something. If you’re paying attention to the intellectual exports of Middle East Studies departments–if you’ve been paying attention for the last couple of decades–you can see what it’s accomplishing. There’s an Islamist obscurantism that comes out of those departments that exonerates the truly peaceful religion of Islam on all counts at every opportunity and seems to move in lockstep with organizations like the Council on American-Islamic Relations, CAIR, which is a none-too-stealthy front group for the Muslim Brotherhood.
There’s a theological agenda clearly evident in what purports to be, on the one hand just academic scholarship, and on the other hand, benign social activism meant to protect a minority group in the United States. The stench of Islamism is everywhere to be seen–and by Islamism I mean the political agenda of theocrats, essentially, within Islam.
Russ Roberts: It’s also worth mentioning that Qatar is the host of the leadership of Hamas, which is one of the stranger things about this moment. That somehow, we pretend Qatar belongs along with other nations in the civilized world: They’re helping us with negotiating and try to get some of the hostages out. They are the hosts of these people’s leaders. They’re not objective. They have an agenda. And, you know, they bought the World Cup, the last World Cup. And they seem to be just like a normal country, but they’re not. They’re a strange–they have an agenda.
Russ Roberts: Anyway, let’s move on to the least pleasant part of this conversation, which is–I apologize, I don’t listen to you every week, but I listen to you occasionally, and you make me jealous. Your eloquence and clarity on many, many issues is, I think, unparalleled. And, in addition to the episode on campuses that we’ll put a link to–we’ll put a link up to your episode, The Bright Line Between Good and Evil. In that episode and in the second one as well that I mentioned, you lay out the case against radical Islam.
And, I have to say: It makes me uncomfortable when I hear it. It is blunt. It seems uncharitable. It is really, actually, totally unacceptable. When you brought it up again in the campus conversation, you said, ‘Now, I know you’re sick of hearing about this from me, but trust me, I’m even more sick of it than you are.’ And, I’m thinking, ‘Well, that’s because you’re an obsessive, strange person,’ Sam Harris. You’ve got this bee in your bonnet, which has got to be the least appropriate metaphor for how frightening radical Islam is to you.
It’s–emotionally, even to me as a Jew living in Israel, it creeps me out. But, when I heard it the first time, which–no one has the courage; very few people have the courage alongside your intellectual vitality and credibility and care–no one else says this. No one. What you say is unmentionable. And I’m sure it’s cost you many listeners and many friends because you don’t sugarcoat it. So, I want to give you a chance to lay it out here why the West is at stake here–not just Israel–because of the nature of radical Islam.
Because, as you point out, it’s very easy–and most people fall into this, what you would call a trap–they look at the Middle East right now: ‘The Arab-Israeli conflict is a standard political fight over land, just like Ireland had it. It’s a zero-sum game and it’s hard, but eventually there’s a compromise because most people want to live better lives. They want their children to live better lives. And let’s stop this ridiculous posturing. And although I really like my narrative, I have to accept the narrative of the other. And let’s sit down and live together.’ I think most Israelis very much want that. I like to believe most Palestinians want that.
I don’t think you agree. And you certainly don’t agree that many parts of the Arab world don’t want that. So, go at it.
Sam Harris: Yeah. Well, I should say that there are many people–there are not enough of them–but there are many people who have quite a bit more courage than I have in that they’re making the same sounds on this topic that I make, but their lives are much more in jeopardy as a result. And these are ex-Muslims. Right? So I mean, these are people who are officially considered apostates within the faith. They were born in Pakistan or in Saudi Arabia or in Gaza or wherever.
And I know many of these people–and people like Yasmine Mohammed and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and “I’ve Become a Christian,” but, you know, Yasmine is an atheist. But, the penalty for apostasy everywhere under Islam officially is death. Now, whether or not people–any given community–wants to carry it out, what’s the fine print on that, we can argue about? But, no one can tell you that you’re perfectly safe in the Muslim community worldwide changing your religion–because you’re not, right? And, there’s a Hadith that covers that explicitly.
I just recommend to your listeners to spend some time listening to ex-Muslims. Because one thing that that will accomplish that I can’t accomplish for you is it will cut through any intuition you might have about the role of identity and the fact that I don’t have direct exposure to the culture. I’m not an native Arabic speaker. I’m not an Arabic speaker at all. I can’t read the Quran in the original; therefore, etc., etc.
Just take the list of complaints you might hear from someone about why I should be disqualified as an authority on this topic. You can’t do any of that with an ex-Muslim who comes from one of the relevant countries in the region. And Yasmine Mohammed is a great example of that. She’s got her own podcast.
So, yeah–one irony here is that someone like me is often accused of lacking empathy for Muslims worldwide, and that my critique of Islam is coming from a place of just being dangerously detached from the lived experience of Muslims anywhere.
And, in my view, that gets it almost exactly backward in terms of how I actually think about this, because I perceive myself to have much more empathy or a truly committed spiritually awake Muslim than most people. Right?
Most people I encounter–most secular people–certainly, simply don’t know what it’s like to believe in God. They tacitly imagine that no one really does. They think that everyone is bluffing. I’ve met anthropologists who think–anthropologists who focus on this terrain–I mean someone like a Scott Atran, right? Jihadism is his major area of focus. He doesn’t think anyone believes in paradise. Right? He thinks all of that’s just bluffing. It’s all just propaganda. What they really believe in is just the necessity of male bonding with what he calls fictive kin–a wider social network than is strictly predicted by the evolutionary rationale of bonding with kin: How is it that young men form these bonds and gangs and soccer teams, et cetera? And, in the case of Jihadist organizations, they form bonds for which they’re willing to die? [More to come, 42:57]
