Populist politicians in the United States, Europe and Australia who seek political advantage with Islamophobic dog-whistle politics are actually doing more to boost the appeal of extremism than counter it. Such rhetoric helps to intensify perceptions of crisis across Muslim communities and fuel the psychosocial conditions within which extremist propaganda tends to resonate. It also crudely validates the “competitive systems of meaning” advanced by groups like Islamic State and AQAP. Furthermore, when that rhetoric manipulates fears among disenfranchised sections of the broader community and ties their sense of crisis to certain races and religions (out-groups) and solutions to a utopian nationalist identity (in-group), it empowers far-right extremists and helps to broaden their appeal. Better-intentioned politicians and counterterrorism authorities may also be inadvertently and more subtly undermining efforts to counter extremism.
Many Muslims living in the West have expressed their exasperation with the constant pressure to describe themselves as “moderates.” This view is frequently echoed during my travels in the Middle East and South Asia. As one Syrian activist said to me: “Why do you insist on us saying that we are ‘moderates?’ I am a Muslim, this is Islam. That’s it. Or do you want us to lose credibility in our audience’s eyes? When you insist I say ‘moderate,’ that’s for you. To my audience, that means not Islam.” Using “moderate” Muslims as the champions of government schemes or demanding that Muslims identify themselves as “moderates” risks inadvertently delegitimizing those voices in their communities, especially among those most vulnerable to propaganda’s siren call.Source
He doesn't explain exactly what the solution is. Presumably being nice to Muslims and telling them how much we love and appreciate them and how great and peaceful we think Islam is as they routinely murder us would do the trick. But the author misses the point. The vector of the Muslim threat to us is immigration. Virtually all jihadis operating in the western world are people of recent immigrant origin; the ones who aren't have somehow been influenced by people of immigrant origin. Without immigration, the threat of Islamic radicalism would be negligible for us.
Critical discussion of Islam therefore is a necessary step in preparing public opinion for the shut-down of Muslim immigration, even if most of the people who engage in it are too weak to actually say that, although Trump may have emboldened some of them.