What do you think?
Rate this book
Surrender: Appeasing Islam, Sacrificing Freedom
There is a new form of jihad to fear—one that threatens the very values on which our freedom rests Bruce Bawer’s While Europe Slept sounded the alarm about the dire impact of Muslim immigration in Europe. Now, in Surrender, he reveals that a combination of fear and political correctness has led politicians, intellectuals, religious leaders, and the media—both in the United States and abroad—to appease radical Islam at the cost of our most cherished freedom of speech and freedom of the press. And the cost could ultimately be even higher—the imposition of sharia law in places where liberty once reigned.
In Surrender , Bawer writes of a new form of jihad that began with the fatwa against Salman Rushdie in 1989, a death sentence born of Muslim outrage over a work of literature. It marked the dawn of an era of pressure and intimidation designed to crush the ability of non-Muslims to resist Islamic encroachments on Western freedom. In a sweeping survey of recent history and current events, Bawer traces a pattern of heightened sensitivity to Muslim reactions and a reluctance to look honestly at the human-rights deficiencies of the Muslim world. This pattern can be seen in the widespread denunciation of the Danish cartoons and of the editors who printed them; in the glowing media coverage of the supposedly moderate Muslim icon Tariq Ramadan; in the decision of major newspapers to ignore or soft-pedal terrorist “dry runs” on American airplanes; in the international uproar over a single sentence about Islam in a lecture by Pope Benedict; and in attempts by certain parties to silence criticism of Islam by suing writers who have dared to speak forthrightly about the religion.
Bawer argues that people throughout the Western world—in reaction to such events as the Danish cartoon riots and the murder of filmmaker Theo van Gogh—are surrendering to fear. And he observes that Muslim extremists have found unexpected non-Muslims who, motivated by the misguided doctrine of multiculturalism, refuse to criticize even the most illiberal aspects of Islamic culture. The resulting accommodation undermines the values of individual liberty and equality on which our nation was founded.
Fearless and excoriating, Surrender is an essential wake-up call for everyone concerned about the preservation of our most fundamental freedoms.
In Surrender , Bawer writes of a new form of jihad that began with the fatwa against Salman Rushdie in 1989, a death sentence born of Muslim outrage over a work of literature. It marked the dawn of an era of pressure and intimidation designed to crush the ability of non-Muslims to resist Islamic encroachments on Western freedom. In a sweeping survey of recent history and current events, Bawer traces a pattern of heightened sensitivity to Muslim reactions and a reluctance to look honestly at the human-rights deficiencies of the Muslim world. This pattern can be seen in the widespread denunciation of the Danish cartoons and of the editors who printed them; in the glowing media coverage of the supposedly moderate Muslim icon Tariq Ramadan; in the decision of major newspapers to ignore or soft-pedal terrorist “dry runs” on American airplanes; in the international uproar over a single sentence about Islam in a lecture by Pope Benedict; and in attempts by certain parties to silence criticism of Islam by suing writers who have dared to speak forthrightly about the religion.
Bawer argues that people throughout the Western world—in reaction to such events as the Danish cartoon riots and the murder of filmmaker Theo van Gogh—are surrendering to fear. And he observes that Muslim extremists have found unexpected non-Muslims who, motivated by the misguided doctrine of multiculturalism, refuse to criticize even the most illiberal aspects of Islamic culture. The resulting accommodation undermines the values of individual liberty and equality on which our nation was founded.
Fearless and excoriating, Surrender is an essential wake-up call for everyone concerned about the preservation of our most fundamental freedoms.
321 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2009
12 people are currently reading
141 people want to read
About the author
Bruce Bawer
44 books27 followersTheodore Bruce Bawer, who writes under the name Bruce Bawer, is an American writer who has been a resident of Norway since 1999. He is a literary, film, and cultural critic and novelist and poet who has also written about gay rights, Christianity and Islam.
Bawer's writings on literature, gay issues and Islam have all been highly controversial. While championing such authors as William Keepers Maxwell Jr., Flannery O'Connor, and Guy Davenport, he has criticized such authors as Norman Mailer and E. L. Doctorow. A member of the New Formalists, a group of poets who promoted the use of traditional forms, he has assailed such poets as Allen Ginsberg for what he views as their lack of polish and technique.
Bawer was one of the first gay activists to seriously propose same-sex marriage, notably in his 1993 book A Place at the Table, and his 2006 book While Europe Slept was one of the first to skeptically examine the rise of Islam in the Western world. Bawer's work is cited positively by Anders Behring Breivik in his manifesto.
Although he has frequently been described as a conservative, Bawer has often protested that such labels are misleading or meaningless. He has explained his views as follows: "Read A Place at the Table and Stealing Jesus and While Europe Slept and Surrender one after the other and you will see that all four books are motivated by a dedication to individual identity and individual freedom and an opposition to groupthink, oppression, tyranny."
Bawer's writings on literature, gay issues and Islam have all been highly controversial. While championing such authors as William Keepers Maxwell Jr., Flannery O'Connor, and Guy Davenport, he has criticized such authors as Norman Mailer and E. L. Doctorow. A member of the New Formalists, a group of poets who promoted the use of traditional forms, he has assailed such poets as Allen Ginsberg for what he views as their lack of polish and technique.
Bawer was one of the first gay activists to seriously propose same-sex marriage, notably in his 1993 book A Place at the Table, and his 2006 book While Europe Slept was one of the first to skeptically examine the rise of Islam in the Western world. Bawer's work is cited positively by Anders Behring Breivik in his manifesto.
Although he has frequently been described as a conservative, Bawer has often protested that such labels are misleading or meaningless. He has explained his views as follows: "Read A Place at the Table and Stealing Jesus and While Europe Slept and Surrender one after the other and you will see that all four books are motivated by a dedication to individual identity and individual freedom and an opposition to groupthink, oppression, tyranny."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
December 4, 2019
I have mixed feelings on this book. It is almost as if the author is screaming at the reader – it should have been written with “CAPS ON”! I am all for free speech but the author sees no limitations. Is it really necessary to defend (or even mention) someone who would flush the “Quran” down a toilet to make a point? There are more rational and articulate ways to make a statement. For instance, Time magazine had a horrific picture of a young girl who had been disfigured by Taliban extremists for leaving her abusive in-laws. This is a fact and makes a powerful and provocative presentation of the evils of fundamentalist Islam. A silly and impolite provocation just creates hurt and little value.
Also he bashes and thrashes Ian Buruma. I did find “Murder in Amsterdam” an excellent book and did not sense outright appeasement to the teachings of Islam. Mr. Buruma is not so much “in your face” as Mr. Bawer. He interviews a wide variety of individuals (from imams’ to Ayaan Hirsi Ali) and allows the reader to make up his own mind. He presents a range of ideas and personalities. Mr. Buruma had an excellent article in the New Yorker on January 3/2005 – “Death of a Filmmaker”.
Mr. Bawer paints the New York Times as appeasing Islam. I have read articles that were informative and hardly conciliatory. Here are a few: “Honour Killings in the New Europe” by Peter Schnieder, December 4/2005, NYT Magazine; “The Undefeated”, October 22/2007 by Elizabeth Rubin, NYT Magazine; “The Opening of the Wahhabi Mind”, March 7/2004 by Elizabeth Rubin, NYT Magazine. “Reflections on the Revolution in Europe” by Christopher Caldwell was reviewed in the NYT books on August 2/2009. And to top things off the authors own “Surrender” was reviewed favourably by Stephen Pollard on July 24/2009!
Mr. Bawer complains about a pro-Islam faith article in the New York Times Books review by Tariq Ramadan. Isn’t that part of free speech? A reader can judge the syrupy contents for himself. For more on obfuscations by Tariq Ramadan see his debate with Christopher Hitchens. Also the author paints all Muslims with a terrorist and intolerant brush. There are Muslims who function in the normal world and who have jobs in large or small companies.
He speaks of the growing religious presence of Islam in the U.S., like on college campuses. In the U.S. over the last twenty years the religious presence has been steadily encroaching on secular society – and I am referring to Christianity. Presidential candidates cite the Bible as a most important book and tell us what they pray for. This has been accelerating since the 1990’s. So American Muslims can say “tu quoque”.
As for the Canadian terrorists arrested in Toronto (page 250), even though the Muslim religion was not mentioned, Canadians connected the dots.
He discusses the expression “jihad” as all out war, but there are many interpretations of this within Islam.
However Mr. Bawer does make many valid points. Why don’t Muslims protest against obvious human rights abuses like honour killings in their communities? How can they tolerate something like the Taliban who bomb schools for girls? The list can go on. Mr. Bawer gives several examples where the media is unable to call a “spade a spade”. A definition of a “moderate Muslim” by media figures may just be someone who doesn’t want to commit suicide. Is the reaction of Muslims to the Danish cartoons a prelude of things to come? As he says artists, journalists, and satirists are becoming fearful for their lives. He comes down on those Western academics of Islam for their constant political correctness. Some Universities and Colleges are being funded from Saudi sources. In many ways this could be the silent unopposed advancement of Sharia in our democracies. Mr Bawer has a great quote from George Orwell (page 261 of my edition).
Mr. Bawer demonstrates throughout that it is not “discrimination” or “racist” to question religious values and teachings. The attempt to incorporate “defamation of religion” into the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights is sordid beyond words.
My favourite quote is from Rowan Atkinson (Page 232): “For telling a good and incisive religious joke, you should be praised. For telling a bad one, you should be ridiculed and reviled. The idea that you could be prosecuted for the telling of either is quite fantastic”.
I wish to end my long review with a quote from Winston Churchill in a speech he gave after the Munich agreement (October 5, 1938):
“Every position has been successfully undermined and abandoned on specious and plausible excuses… In a very few years, perhaps in a very few months, we shall be confronted with demands with which we shall no doubt be invited to comply. These demands may affect the surrender of territory or the surrender of liberty. I foresee and foretell that the policy of submission will carry with it restrictions upon the freedom of speech and debate in parliament, or public platforms and discussion in the Press, for it will be said – indeed, I hear it said sometimes now – that we cannot allow the Nazi system of dictatorship to be criticised by ordinary, common English politicians. Then with a press under control, in part direct but more potently indirect, with every organ of public opinion doped and chloroformed, we shall be conducted along further stages of our journey.”
Also he bashes and thrashes Ian Buruma. I did find “Murder in Amsterdam” an excellent book and did not sense outright appeasement to the teachings of Islam. Mr. Buruma is not so much “in your face” as Mr. Bawer. He interviews a wide variety of individuals (from imams’ to Ayaan Hirsi Ali) and allows the reader to make up his own mind. He presents a range of ideas and personalities. Mr. Buruma had an excellent article in the New Yorker on January 3/2005 – “Death of a Filmmaker”.
Mr. Bawer paints the New York Times as appeasing Islam. I have read articles that were informative and hardly conciliatory. Here are a few: “Honour Killings in the New Europe” by Peter Schnieder, December 4/2005, NYT Magazine; “The Undefeated”, October 22/2007 by Elizabeth Rubin, NYT Magazine; “The Opening of the Wahhabi Mind”, March 7/2004 by Elizabeth Rubin, NYT Magazine. “Reflections on the Revolution in Europe” by Christopher Caldwell was reviewed in the NYT books on August 2/2009. And to top things off the authors own “Surrender” was reviewed favourably by Stephen Pollard on July 24/2009!
Mr. Bawer complains about a pro-Islam faith article in the New York Times Books review by Tariq Ramadan. Isn’t that part of free speech? A reader can judge the syrupy contents for himself. For more on obfuscations by Tariq Ramadan see his debate with Christopher Hitchens. Also the author paints all Muslims with a terrorist and intolerant brush. There are Muslims who function in the normal world and who have jobs in large or small companies.
He speaks of the growing religious presence of Islam in the U.S., like on college campuses. In the U.S. over the last twenty years the religious presence has been steadily encroaching on secular society – and I am referring to Christianity. Presidential candidates cite the Bible as a most important book and tell us what they pray for. This has been accelerating since the 1990’s. So American Muslims can say “tu quoque”.
As for the Canadian terrorists arrested in Toronto (page 250), even though the Muslim religion was not mentioned, Canadians connected the dots.
He discusses the expression “jihad” as all out war, but there are many interpretations of this within Islam.
However Mr. Bawer does make many valid points. Why don’t Muslims protest against obvious human rights abuses like honour killings in their communities? How can they tolerate something like the Taliban who bomb schools for girls? The list can go on. Mr. Bawer gives several examples where the media is unable to call a “spade a spade”. A definition of a “moderate Muslim” by media figures may just be someone who doesn’t want to commit suicide. Is the reaction of Muslims to the Danish cartoons a prelude of things to come? As he says artists, journalists, and satirists are becoming fearful for their lives. He comes down on those Western academics of Islam for their constant political correctness. Some Universities and Colleges are being funded from Saudi sources. In many ways this could be the silent unopposed advancement of Sharia in our democracies. Mr Bawer has a great quote from George Orwell (page 261 of my edition).
Mr. Bawer demonstrates throughout that it is not “discrimination” or “racist” to question religious values and teachings. The attempt to incorporate “defamation of religion” into the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights is sordid beyond words.
My favourite quote is from Rowan Atkinson (Page 232): “For telling a good and incisive religious joke, you should be praised. For telling a bad one, you should be ridiculed and reviled. The idea that you could be prosecuted for the telling of either is quite fantastic”.
I wish to end my long review with a quote from Winston Churchill in a speech he gave after the Munich agreement (October 5, 1938):
“Every position has been successfully undermined and abandoned on specious and plausible excuses… In a very few years, perhaps in a very few months, we shall be confronted with demands with which we shall no doubt be invited to comply. These demands may affect the surrender of territory or the surrender of liberty. I foresee and foretell that the policy of submission will carry with it restrictions upon the freedom of speech and debate in parliament, or public platforms and discussion in the Press, for it will be said – indeed, I hear it said sometimes now – that we cannot allow the Nazi system of dictatorship to be criticised by ordinary, common English politicians. Then with a press under control, in part direct but more potently indirect, with every organ of public opinion doped and chloroformed, we shall be conducted along further stages of our journey.”
December 15, 2022
I recommend this book for one reason only: I'm in it! I particularly appreciated Bruce Bawer referring to "Pino's dramatic, grand eloquent speeches". I never knew the world (OK neocons) saw me that way. Still, Bawer has given me literary immortality, for which I thank him.
February 8, 2010
There is now an entire genre of books warning about an incremental movement toward sharia law and the failure of the West to acknowledge the threat. These books are routinely labeled alarmist by the press and by academics. “Well,” counters Bruce Bawer, “if some of us are ‘fearful,’ it’s because many influential persons have plainly decided the West’s future lies in gradual accommodation with sharia law.”
Bawer offers example after example of Western capitulation, in the United States but particularly in Europe, including distorted mainstream news coverage of stories involving Muslims, new laws applying double standards to Islam (vs. all other religions), the persecution of those who criticize Islam, and self-censorship in the face of the threat of potential Muslim violence. He argues that many politicians, academics, and media members are serving, whether consciously or unconsciously, as abettors to the non-violent wing of jihad, which seeks, gradually and ultimately, to replace secular law with sharia law.
The very people who react with shrills of horror to Pat Robertson or Jerry Fawell and see a Handmaid’s-Tale-like future for the West if evangelical Christians were ever to amass too much power actively minimize the threat to Western liberal values posed by Islam and carefully paint sympathetic and misleading portraits of “moderate” Muslims that, if their views were instead portrayed in a straightforward manner, would make the average fundamentalist Christian look like a social liberal. Filmmakers, politicians, editors, gallery owners, artists, and writers again and again cower before threats of violence from Muslims and consequently self-censor themselves. Those who would happily display or publish a picture of a cross submerged in urine or of the Virgin Mary covered in cow dung do not dare, out of “respect for people’s religious beliefs,” to display cartoons of Mohammed or images of scarred and beaten women covered with verses of the Koran authorizing domestic violence. The U.S. media fails for weeks to even report outbreaks of violence among Muslims in Europe, and, when it does finally report them, downplays the religious aspect.
All this Bawer sees as a sign of Western dhimmitude. The West, he believes, has signaled its willingness to accommodate Islam in a way it would never concede to accommodate a far less radical fundamentalist Christianity, and Bawer, as a gay man, understandably fears the eventual consequences. Indeed, Bawer dedicates an entire chapter to criticizing gay activist groups for downplaying Islamic “homophobia” out of “solidarity” with minorities and a devotion to the creed of multiculturalism. “In short,” Bawer summarizes, “multicultural ethics demand that gay people respond to Europe’s Islamization by committing self-genocide.” (He offers some pretty shocking examples of gay activists minimizing even the execution of homosexuals in some Muslim countries.)
“Surrender” is not as optimistic about America’s unique ability to assimilate its Muslim population (in contrast to Europe) as Bawer’s earlier “While Europe Slept” was. This is perhaps because time has passed, and he has realized that smiliar self-censorship and accommodation is happening in the U.S. However, the U.S. is still not in nearly as bad a situation as Europe, where, in some places, people can actually be arrested, interrogated, fined, or even imprisoned for criticizing Islam. Jihadists “have been less successful at rolling back freedom, including freedom of speech, in the United States than in Europe—partly because the First Amendment makes the freedom a good deal stronger in America than anywhere else on earth, and partly because Americans have traditionally possessed a deeply ingrained appreciation for their freedom that many Europeans, alas, do not.”
“Surrender” repeats some of the same examples from “While Europe Slept,” and it is not written in nearly as engaging a manner as that earlier work, and, because of this, it was somewhat disappointing.
Bawer offers example after example of Western capitulation, in the United States but particularly in Europe, including distorted mainstream news coverage of stories involving Muslims, new laws applying double standards to Islam (vs. all other religions), the persecution of those who criticize Islam, and self-censorship in the face of the threat of potential Muslim violence. He argues that many politicians, academics, and media members are serving, whether consciously or unconsciously, as abettors to the non-violent wing of jihad, which seeks, gradually and ultimately, to replace secular law with sharia law.
The very people who react with shrills of horror to Pat Robertson or Jerry Fawell and see a Handmaid’s-Tale-like future for the West if evangelical Christians were ever to amass too much power actively minimize the threat to Western liberal values posed by Islam and carefully paint sympathetic and misleading portraits of “moderate” Muslims that, if their views were instead portrayed in a straightforward manner, would make the average fundamentalist Christian look like a social liberal. Filmmakers, politicians, editors, gallery owners, artists, and writers again and again cower before threats of violence from Muslims and consequently self-censor themselves. Those who would happily display or publish a picture of a cross submerged in urine or of the Virgin Mary covered in cow dung do not dare, out of “respect for people’s religious beliefs,” to display cartoons of Mohammed or images of scarred and beaten women covered with verses of the Koran authorizing domestic violence. The U.S. media fails for weeks to even report outbreaks of violence among Muslims in Europe, and, when it does finally report them, downplays the religious aspect.
All this Bawer sees as a sign of Western dhimmitude. The West, he believes, has signaled its willingness to accommodate Islam in a way it would never concede to accommodate a far less radical fundamentalist Christianity, and Bawer, as a gay man, understandably fears the eventual consequences. Indeed, Bawer dedicates an entire chapter to criticizing gay activist groups for downplaying Islamic “homophobia” out of “solidarity” with minorities and a devotion to the creed of multiculturalism. “In short,” Bawer summarizes, “multicultural ethics demand that gay people respond to Europe’s Islamization by committing self-genocide.” (He offers some pretty shocking examples of gay activists minimizing even the execution of homosexuals in some Muslim countries.)
“Surrender” is not as optimistic about America’s unique ability to assimilate its Muslim population (in contrast to Europe) as Bawer’s earlier “While Europe Slept” was. This is perhaps because time has passed, and he has realized that smiliar self-censorship and accommodation is happening in the U.S. However, the U.S. is still not in nearly as bad a situation as Europe, where, in some places, people can actually be arrested, interrogated, fined, or even imprisoned for criticizing Islam. Jihadists “have been less successful at rolling back freedom, including freedom of speech, in the United States than in Europe—partly because the First Amendment makes the freedom a good deal stronger in America than anywhere else on earth, and partly because Americans have traditionally possessed a deeply ingrained appreciation for their freedom that many Europeans, alas, do not.”
“Surrender” repeats some of the same examples from “While Europe Slept,” and it is not written in nearly as engaging a manner as that earlier work, and, because of this, it was somewhat disappointing.
December 2, 2009
This book is dangerous. In it, it preaches for freedom to fight against Islamic appeasement. I am frighten at how easily the U.K, Dutch, Norway, governments are trying to erode the rights of its citizens to criticize or even mention the relationship between fundamentalism and terrisom.
I plan to buy some of the books that the Islamic had requested to be banned, burned, or mashed to pulp to ensure that the heros and heroines of freedom of artistic expressions from Samuel Rushdie's The Satanic Verses to Infidel by Hirsi Ali words should live on.
Those jihad terrorists are relentless. And so are Muslims who take the words of the Koran very seriously. We need to be on guard for double standards and demands imposed by the sharia laws which include using force, rape, and honor killing of Muslim women and perhaps future female "converts" for disobeying their husbands and also for putting to death people who committed the "crimes" of homosexuality.
I recall in the news that various religion groups gathered at a luncheon in New York, and everyone, priests, rabbis, and other religion faith leaders and all agreed to condemn homosexuality. Well here's a goddamn good idea. Why not start with the big one, "Thou Shall Not Kill" and work your way down to something small minded and petty as being against "gay." My contempt know no bounds when it come to organized religion groups getting together for lunch and overcoming their differences by agreeing to condemn homosexuality.
Mr. Bawer is a very very courageous man to warn us of these things. People in organizations to shut out other people and fuck with the excluded ones rights make me sick. And noooo, the Muslims are not the ones who are excluded no matter how much they cry victimhood.
I plan to buy some of the books that the Islamic had requested to be banned, burned, or mashed to pulp to ensure that the heros and heroines of freedom of artistic expressions from Samuel Rushdie's The Satanic Verses to Infidel by Hirsi Ali words should live on.
Those jihad terrorists are relentless. And so are Muslims who take the words of the Koran very seriously. We need to be on guard for double standards and demands imposed by the sharia laws which include using force, rape, and honor killing of Muslim women and perhaps future female "converts" for disobeying their husbands and also for putting to death people who committed the "crimes" of homosexuality.
I recall in the news that various religion groups gathered at a luncheon in New York, and everyone, priests, rabbis, and other religion faith leaders and all agreed to condemn homosexuality. Well here's a goddamn good idea. Why not start with the big one, "Thou Shall Not Kill" and work your way down to something small minded and petty as being against "gay." My contempt know no bounds when it come to organized religion groups getting together for lunch and overcoming their differences by agreeing to condemn homosexuality.
Mr. Bawer is a very very courageous man to warn us of these things. People in organizations to shut out other people and fuck with the excluded ones rights make me sick. And noooo, the Muslims are not the ones who are excluded no matter how much they cry victimhood.
November 5, 2011
This book started fine with sharp criticism about the dynamics of Islam in the West: badly integrated immigrants with their bullying attitude (you-draw-cartoon-i-will-bomb-you) and the politicians and the media who cowardly conform to those bullying and terrorizing gestures. The second half of the book -- especially after he talks about portrayal in hollywood movies -- turns blah, blah, blah until I am really fed up.
It is de ja vu for me. On the other end of the world before 9/11, I read books like this. Bickering, whining, about how the west with its neo capitalism and neo imperialism wants to dominate the muslim world and tradition, how the media and politicians opportunistically conform to the West. You know, the same blah blah blah.....
By the way, I picked this book because it was on the "reading list" of the man behind the bombing and massacre in Norway: Anders Behring Breivik. A few days after the bombing, the author frantically and apologetically wrote a piece in the Wall Street Journal, cleaning his hands and distancing himself from the incident.
This type of books operate on fear. And honestly, I am fed up with this tone. From BOTH sides!
Integration and co-existing is not an easy task. Everybody knows that. Consuming books like this won't help it either.
It is de ja vu for me. On the other end of the world before 9/11, I read books like this. Bickering, whining, about how the west with its neo capitalism and neo imperialism wants to dominate the muslim world and tradition, how the media and politicians opportunistically conform to the West. You know, the same blah blah blah.....
By the way, I picked this book because it was on the "reading list" of the man behind the bombing and massacre in Norway: Anders Behring Breivik. A few days after the bombing, the author frantically and apologetically wrote a piece in the Wall Street Journal, cleaning his hands and distancing himself from the incident.
This type of books operate on fear. And honestly, I am fed up with this tone. From BOTH sides!
Integration and co-existing is not an easy task. Everybody knows that. Consuming books like this won't help it either.
March 2, 2010
A very densely packed book, but it is definitely worth the time to read it thoroughly. There is a lot of important information in here and I would urge anyone who is interested in the civil rights of women and/or gays, as well as those concerned with freedom of the press, freedom of speech and other essential first amendment rights to pick this book up. Bawer (known also for his writings on gay rights and Christian fundamentalism) will tell you the stories and the details that the mainstream media might have decided you were not "responsible" enough to hear, so you can decide for yourself what you think.
December 9, 2015
Terrifying.The West is a bunch of fucking crybabies.
October 16, 2017
Terrifying stuff in this book. Even more terrifying considering this book was written in 2009 and we, as a country, have become only more determined to give away our free speech rights with both hands (e.g. trigger warnings, speech codes, antifa, etc.) As the author points out, ours is becoming an Orwellian world where "bravery is cowardice, bullying is victimhood, and standing up for freedom in the face of religious totalitarians is a demonstration of racism."
However much I appreciated the author's expertise, though, I occasionally found the book fragmented and hard to read. At one point, the author points out that another scholar "systematically deep-sixes the ugly parts...and foregrounds...scraps...that can be yanked out of context and selectively quoted to make the intended impression." But it's hard to ignore that this author is potentially doing the same thing. Maybe he's giving an accurate impression of all the sources he quotes snippets from, but without reading the articles/books/journals in question, it's impossible to tell. And that seemed problematic to me. Perhaps it's merely that I don't read too many of these types of books, so I'm not familiar with the format, but I struggled with that aspect of it.
However much I appreciated the author's expertise, though, I occasionally found the book fragmented and hard to read. At one point, the author points out that another scholar "systematically deep-sixes the ugly parts...and foregrounds...scraps...that can be yanked out of context and selectively quoted to make the intended impression." But it's hard to ignore that this author is potentially doing the same thing. Maybe he's giving an accurate impression of all the sources he quotes snippets from, but without reading the articles/books/journals in question, it's impossible to tell. And that seemed problematic to me. Perhaps it's merely that I don't read too many of these types of books, so I'm not familiar with the format, but I struggled with that aspect of it.
July 17, 2019
Muy bueno
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 24, 2015
Bruce Bawer's follow-up to While Europe Slept takes on many of the same ideas concerning the clash of Islamic and Western values, yet in a much larger sense. I'm a big fan of this man's work, and the way he speaks out plainly and unabashedly about the real teachings of Islam is inspiring. Many times the book made me so frustrated at the PC-inspired establishments of various countries and their incredibly cowardly position that free speech should be reformed so as not to insult Muslims that I actually had to put the book down for a few minutes. A must-read for anyone not afraid of the truth about the most important international issue today.
August 12, 2009
Bruce Bawer's Place at the Table was instrumental in changing my mindset about sexual orientation as it relates to political identity and advocacy. A 2004 essay he authored in the Hudson Review - Hating America - is a must read. His latest book, Surrender, picks up where his previous book - While Europe Slept - left off. This is a well-documented expose of the self-censorship practiced by western media and cultural institutions on the subject of Islamofascism for fear of offending Muslims. Bawer is an astute observer and a great essayist who doesn't mince words.
August 15, 2014
This book focuses primarily on how Islam is being appeased in Europe through "Creeping Sharia" and "Stealth Jihad". An excellent warning for the U.S. I would recommend this book to anyone with an interest in the current state of affairs between the U.S. and the Islamic world.
Want to read
December 4, 20097/26/09 NY Times Book review
September 3, 2025
Fearless, comprehensive, and more than a little disquieting.
April 7, 2011
Amazing Book on Western Media and Islam .
February 24, 2011
Bawer is an excellent writer and even though 90% of the material was familiar it was still a memorable experience.
April 15, 2013
crazy insane. but so true.
June 23, 2013
Good, though a bit tedious and repetitive. Not on par with Bawer's exceptional first book.
August 29, 2017
"The post-Enlightenment West isn't about respecting ideas or religions or ideologies -- it's about debating them. What it respects is individual freedom -- including the freedom to criticize any idea, or religion, as much as one bloody well pleases." p. 139
"... to distinguish between having the right to express an idea and not having the right to express it in words of one's own choosing is to jettison the First Amendment." p. 171
Bawer takes on the notion that the citizens of Western democracies ought to curb freedom of expression out of respect for Muslim sensitivities. He cites examples from several "bastions of democracy" in Europe - Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Great Britain and France - where the political and cultural elites are pushing the idea that "if social harmony is to be achieved between Muslims and non-Muslims in the West, it's necessary for non-Muslims to undergo a radical shift in views and values." They claim that Muslims have a "right" not to be insulted. Sorry Muslims, but protection from being offended IS NOT A RIGHT.
Violence, destruction, murder, rioting and rape are NOT acceptable responses to acts of expression in the West. And Westerners who say that free speech is dangerously provocative to Muslims are tacitly admitting that Muslims are no better than rabid dogs in that they cannot control their hate and rage. Really? Is that not the bigotry of low expectations?
No. I refuse to do it.
I have read the Koran. I have educated myself about the Hadith and about the Sura. The Muslim Holy texts are extrinsically extreme. The Koran was written in the 6th century. Yet Muslims are taught that the Koran and Shari'a law are God-given and thus binding on everyone, everywhere FOR ALL TIME.
"It's their culture" or "Muslims are an oppressed victim group" are NOT GOOD REASONS for any acceptance of wife-beating, honor killings, genital mutilation, and death to apostates, gays, and victims of rape.
As a Catholic, I find it ironic that the "establishment" used to be convinced that Catholics could not be trusted to obey the laws of the land because our true obedience was to the Pope. Yet the same establishment completely disregards the ACTUAL obedience to fatwas issued by Muslim clerics. In fact, they believe that free speech comes with "social responsibility" and that Salman Rushdie, Theo Van Gough, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and the employees of Charlie Hebdo all, in some way, "deserved" to be targeted for death.
No. Social responsibility in the West means defending our fundamental freedoms - the first of which is FREE SPEECH. And I am looking at YOU special snowflakes at college campuses everywhere.
Thanks Bruce Bawer for your courage and clarity.
"... to distinguish between having the right to express an idea and not having the right to express it in words of one's own choosing is to jettison the First Amendment." p. 171
Bawer takes on the notion that the citizens of Western democracies ought to curb freedom of expression out of respect for Muslim sensitivities. He cites examples from several "bastions of democracy" in Europe - Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Great Britain and France - where the political and cultural elites are pushing the idea that "if social harmony is to be achieved between Muslims and non-Muslims in the West, it's necessary for non-Muslims to undergo a radical shift in views and values." They claim that Muslims have a "right" not to be insulted. Sorry Muslims, but protection from being offended IS NOT A RIGHT.
Violence, destruction, murder, rioting and rape are NOT acceptable responses to acts of expression in the West. And Westerners who say that free speech is dangerously provocative to Muslims are tacitly admitting that Muslims are no better than rabid dogs in that they cannot control their hate and rage. Really? Is that not the bigotry of low expectations?
No. I refuse to do it.
I have read the Koran. I have educated myself about the Hadith and about the Sura. The Muslim Holy texts are extrinsically extreme. The Koran was written in the 6th century. Yet Muslims are taught that the Koran and Shari'a law are God-given and thus binding on everyone, everywhere FOR ALL TIME.
"It's their culture" or "Muslims are an oppressed victim group" are NOT GOOD REASONS for any acceptance of wife-beating, honor killings, genital mutilation, and death to apostates, gays, and victims of rape.
As a Catholic, I find it ironic that the "establishment" used to be convinced that Catholics could not be trusted to obey the laws of the land because our true obedience was to the Pope. Yet the same establishment completely disregards the ACTUAL obedience to fatwas issued by Muslim clerics. In fact, they believe that free speech comes with "social responsibility" and that Salman Rushdie, Theo Van Gough, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and the employees of Charlie Hebdo all, in some way, "deserved" to be targeted for death.
No. Social responsibility in the West means defending our fundamental freedoms - the first of which is FREE SPEECH. And I am looking at YOU special snowflakes at college campuses everywhere.
Thanks Bruce Bawer for your courage and clarity.
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews