Posted on 09/27/2004 2:06:23 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
Professor John Lewis Gaddis’ recent provocative analysis of the origins of “unilateralism” in American foreign policy highlights the pivotal role of John Quincy Adams. With candor and humility, Gaddis further reveals that his own contemporary assessment, “…is not a new interpretation. If you go back and read the famous Samuel Flagg Bemis, the very distinguished Yale diplomatic historian from half a century ago, Bemis was certainly making this argument about the importance of John Quincy Adams.
But I think this has been lost somewhat in intervening years. So, to an extent, I am trying to rediscover John Quincy Adams, in that sense.” Bemis extolled Adams’ seminal contribution to the formulation of U.S. foreign policy:
“Adams grasped the essentials of American policy and the position of the United States in the world more surely than any other man of his time. He availed himself of matchless opportunities to advance the continental future of his country and the fundamental principles for which it stood in the world. Nothing is clearer than that the fourteen fundamentals (above reviewed) remained the main tenets of American foreign policy during the century following…we may surmise that he and the fathers of American Independence as well, had they lived to share the troublous times beyond the British Century in the science-shrunken smallness of the globe, and to experience the extraordinary vicissitudes, combinations, and wars of global politics would have joined the diplomatic revolution rejecting Isolation, and that he [Adams] would say, as he did say at the time of the Congress of Panama: ‘I do not recollect any change in policy; but there has been a great change in circumstances.’…Even if John Quincy Adams was not to have another great career, as a crusader against the expansion of slavery, this first and mighty achievement, of no less than continental proportions, in laying the foundations of American foreign policy, would have been great enough for one lifetime.” 1
Bemis’ landmark 1949 review also included a vague footnote referring to a work which I located formally in a comprehensive annotated bibliography of John Quincy Adams’ writings, compiled by Lynn H. Parsons 2:
“Unsigned essays dealing with the Russo-Turkish War, and on Greece, written while JQA was in retirement, before his election to Congress in 1830” [Chapters X-XIV (pp. 267-402) in The American Annual Register for 1827-28-29. New York, 1830.]
A brief contribution appeared in the Claremont Review in December, 2002, purporting to summarize the contents of John Quincy Adams’ 136 pages of analysis (although, curiously, never providing the citation, above, for the original essays). Upon reading Adams’ full set of essays, however, it is apparent that this rather uninformed, sanitized Claremont Review piece missed the mark widely.
John Quincy Adams possessed a remarkably clear, uncompromised understanding of the permanent Islamic institutions of jihad war and dhimmitude. Regarding jihad, Adams states in his essay series,
“…he [Muhammad] declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind…The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.”
Confirming Adams’ assessment, the late Muslim scholar, Professor Majid Khadduri, wrote the following in his authoritative 1955 treatise on jihad, War and Peace in the Law of Islam :
“Thus the jihad may be regarded as Islam’s instrument for carrying out its ultimate objective by turning all people into believers, if not in the prophethood of Muhammad (as in the case of the dhimmis), at least in the belief of God. The Prophet Muhammad is reported to have declared ‘some of my people will continue to fight victoriously for the sake of the truth until the last one of them will combat the anti-Christ’. Until that moment is reached the jihad, in one form or another will remain as a permanent obligation upon the entire Muslim community. It follows that the existence of a dar al-harb is ultimately outlawed under the Islamic jural order; that the dar al-Islam permanently under jihad obligation until the dar al-harb is reduced to non-existence; and that any community accepting certain disabilities- must submit to Islamic rule and reside in the dar al-Islam or be bound as clients to the Muslim community. The universality of Islam, in its all embracing creed, is imposed on the believers as a continuous process of warfare, psychological and political if not strictly military.”3
And Adams captured the essential condition imposed upon the non-Muslim dhimmi “tributaries” subjugated by jihad, with this laconic statement,
“The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute.”
Indeed, the famous Shafi’i jurist of Baghdad, al-Mawardi (d. 1058), highlights the most salient aspect of the consensus view of classical Islamic jurisprudence regarding the vanquished non-Muslims “tribute”, i.e., the jizya: the critical connection between jihad and payment of the jizya. He notes that “The enemy makes a payment in return for peace and reconciliation.” Al-Mawardi then distinguishes two cases: (I) Payment is made immediately and is treated like booty, however “it does, however, not prevent a jihad being carried out against them in the future.”. (II). Payment is made yearly and will “constitute an ongoing tribute by which their security is established.” Reconciliation and security last as long as the payment is made. If the payment ceases, then the jihad resumes. A treaty of reconciliation may be renewable, but must not exceed 10 years.4 The nature of such “protection”, i.e., a blood ransom, is reinforced in this definition of jizya written by E.W. Lane, based on a careful analysis of the etymology of the term:
“The tax that is taken from the free non-Muslim subjects of a Muslim government whereby they ratify the compact that assures them protection, as though it were compensation for not being slain” 5
Adams’ staunch anti-imperialism, one of the “fourteen fundamentals” of U.S. foreign policy which Samuel Flagg Bemis states, “…we may connect with the name of John Quincy Adams more than with that of any other man” 6, is consistent with Old Man Eloquent’s support for the struggle of the Greeks 7 to liberate themselves from the yoke of centuries of dhimmitude, imposed by the imperialism of Ottoman jihad 8. At minimum, in light of the global war on jihad terrorism, John Quincy Adams’ candid, timeless ruminations should be required reading for all contemporary U.S. diplomats and politicians.
Key annotated excerpts from John Quincy Adams’ remarkable series of essays, are provided below.
Adams on Jesus Christ and Christianity, Relative to Muhammad and Islam
"And he [Jesus] declared, that the enjoyment of felicity in the world hereafter, would be reward of the practice of benevolence here. His whole law was resolvable into the precept of love; peace on earth – good will toward man, was the early object of his mission; and the authoritative demonstration of the immortality of man, was that, which constituted the more than earthly tribute of glory to God in the highest… The first conquest of the religion of Jesus, was over the unsocial passions of his disciples. It elevated the standard of the human character in the scale of existence…On the Christian system of morals, man is an immortal spirit, confined for a short space of time, in an earthly tabernacle. Kindness to his fellow mortals embraces the whole compass of his duties upon earth, and the whole promise of happiness to his spirit hereafter. THE ESSENCE OF THIS DOCTRINE IS, TO EXALT THE SPIRITUAL OVER THE BRUTAL PART OF HIS NATURE." (Adam's capital letters)….[pp. 267-268]
“In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar [i.e., Muhammad], the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE (Adam's capital letters)….Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant…While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men.” [p. 269]
(Excerpt) Read more at FrontPageMagazine.com
However, if it was up to JQ Adams, Texas would today be part of Mexico, Washington would be part of Canada and much of the West would be a Balkans under the rule of various Indian tribes.
He was not a realist, but a pacifist and an elitist.
Kind of amazing when you consider who his papa was...John Adams (bless him) was considered a hawk. He received a lot of grief in a rag called "The Aurora" for it, too.
bookmarked
54-40 or fight!
bump
Monroe reported to Jefferson that the border of Louisiana as purchased from the French was the Rio Grande del Norte (he said Rio Bravo). Jefferson's report to Congress included Galvez Town as part of the purchase. But Adams, and the other New Englanders, were desperate to keep the US as small as possible so the NE states could dominate the existing union. So we kept purchasing the same property (in money or blood) again and again.
NIKE H THANATO!
The war against Mexico was an injustice fought to expand the Southern States - that is how Northeners saw it. Just because we live with the benefits of the expansion does not mean you can view these past Americans in such an anachronistic way.
BRAVO SOU!
For thise who don't know, Destro has quoted the motto of Greek revolutionaries in our war against the the Mohammaden Turks. The flag was adopted by the local Mani war chiefs during the Greek war of independance (1821-1829). Its design is a blue cross symbolizing our Orthodox Christian Faith in the middle of a standard rectangle shaped flag with a white background. Underneath the cross there are three words writen in black, Niki H Thanatos (Victory Or Death). My ancestors fought Islam under this flag and I am very, very proud of that.
The flag is widely used even today, It flies over many towns in the Mani area.
The following appears at the excellent Iraqi blog, "Iraq the Model":
But what should Muslims do about the “infidels' conspiracies”? Actually nothing. Jihad was limited to the caliphate to deal with. He was the only one who had the power to decide that “infidels” should be fought because they are “infidels”, or just avoid the issue totally when it’s not the right time. To understand this more one should acknowledge that the average Muslim believes that all non Muslims are heretics and should be taught Islam and if refuse they should pay a tax or it’s war. However this rule is not strict at all and most Muslims, although think it is what God said, they don’t think they should carry it out! This can be explained by the effect of the clerics. The She’at have the “Taqyia” and the Sunni had multiple similar legislation that make jihad similarly out of the question until the ‘caliphate’ or the “Mufti” decides. This was needed to keep things under control, as Jihad can turn out to have dangerous consequences on the rulers themselves.
bump
Bump To The Top.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.