Back to Academic Freedom
Home Page
Organizational_vs_Pipes.doc
Organizational vs. individual application of Pipes's “Distinguishing
between Muslim Friend and Islamist Foe”
Posted by John Furedy on 20:09:28 2006/06/03
In Reply to: Distinguishing between Muslim Friend and Islamist Foe posted by July 2005
CCD Press Release
July 2010 note by JJF: The Canadian Coalition for Democracy (CCD) has apparently
ceased to exist. I have recovered these comments inasmuch as they may still be relevant
for the fight between regimes that favour freedom over totalitarian tyranny.
I think the list is great (perhaps improved by my suggested addition in my last posting) when
applied to organizations in public discussions, and provided one recognizes that, like most
distinctions, this is a continuum, just as the free-fear society distinction is on a continuum. And,
of course, to the extent that individuals are speaking on behalf of those organizations, what they
say is relevant for making the friend/foe distinction.
However, as far as individuals are concerned, unless there is evidence they intend to act on their
(to us, disgusting) opinions (as seems to have been the case in the recent Toronto arrests, and also
seemed to be the case in an Australian case, where the individual had explosives at his home), the
state should not apply the friend/foe distinction. Otherwise organizations like CCD degenerate
into yet another abuser of freedom of speech and thought, acts in a prejudicial manners against
individuals of a certain group (here, Muslims, but it could be Bahais, etc.). For the same reason,
although in the fifties it was reasonable to go after Communist organizations, and expose their
ideology to public ridicule, the imposition of the Loyalty Oath on individual faculty members in
the USA was an abuse of freedom of speech and thought, and an act that pushed the USA towards
the fear end of the fear-free society continuum. It also subjected individuals who, in my opinion,
were members of the loony left to unfair fear-society state-initiated persecution, i.e., velvet
totalitarianism.
Of course the list can be applied by one individual to assess another individual from the point of
view of whether to treat that individual as a relative friend or foe. Too many wrong answers
would put that individual into the foe category, but that is to be a decision left to individuals and
not to organizations.
Finally, among other organizations, SAFS has always been clear on the individual/organizational
distinction. Its newsletter contains the caveat that all articles except those official ones form the
board, are merely individual opinions rather than being part of official SAFS policy. I take it that
CCD's distinction between press releases and individual opinions makes the same point.
All the best, John
See Also:

Re:JewishDistinguishing between Friend and Judaist fanatics - Stephen Britton 20:43:35
2006/06/04 (1)
o Re: JewishDistinguishing between Friend and Judaist fanatics - Stephen Britton
20:47:51 2006/06/04 (0)







Re: Distinguishing between Muslim Friend and Islamist Foe - Gayl 15:57:55 2006/06/04
(0)
Canadian Islamic Congress responds - Mike 10:52:24 2006/06/04 (2)
o Re: Canadian Islamic Congress responds - Al Gordon 23:43:02 2006/06/05 (0)
o Re: Canadian Islamic Congress responds - alex 15:14:57 2006/06/05 (0)
You can't distinguish friend vs, foe - Jonathan Usher 10:35:41 2006/06/04 (0)
Fighting the enemy inside the gates - Editorial - Toronto Sun 10:25:48 2006/06/04 (0)
Organizational vs. individual application of Pipes's list - John Furedy 20:09:28
2006/06/03 (1)
o Re: Organizational vs. individual application of Pipes's list - martin doss
08:56:28 2006/06/25 (0)
Asymmetrical conversion as an added question to Pipes's list - John Furedy 19:52:00
2006/06/03 (0)
CAIR-CAN comments - Mike 19:09:35 2006/06/03 (2)
o Re: CAIR-CAN comments - Rank 20:23:24 2006/06/03 (1)
 No amount of CAIR PR will stop suicide bombers - Judeoscope
21:29:06 2006/06/03 (0)