Posted on 11/16/2009 11:06:16 AM PST by Sherman Logan
(This was a post on NRO Corner)
Mark - Interesting point. It reminded of an email I got last week that I thought was particularly interesting and provocative. FWIW:
Dear Jonah
I am 34 years old, born in the U.S., raised as a (nominal) Muslim in Iran, and returned back to the U.S. in 1990 (thank Goodness). I converted to Catholicism in 2002, and became a reservist in the Navy (through the Direct Commission Officer program) in 2004. Growing up in Iran, religious instructions in schools started in 1st grade. Sixth grade is when our religious instructions began in earnest by the Basij goons (the true believers) and their fellow-travelers. My family and I left Iran after I finished 9th grade, but by that time I had had a steady ideological diet on Supremacy of Islam, the place for dhimmis, the primacy of Jihad and martyrdom for years. With this background, may I offer a few observations:
1) Islam is indeed the problem. Although I can, I will spare you recitation of chapter and verse in the Qur'an were Muslims are called to Jihad and establishing the global caliphate.
2) I agree with you that we should not "out loud" call Islam the problem. There are many muslims which are peaceful, because they actually are NOT either very devout or do not pay particularly close attention to pertinent violent passages. To the extent practical, we should refrain from poking them in the eye over the barbarity of the true form of their religion.
3) Having displayed my "sensitivity and inclusivity" bona fides in point #2, I don't think we should shrink from calling attention to the fact that our enemy is Violent Islam. This is for our own population's benefit. People in the West (and Americans particularly) in large majorities have fully internalize the fact that Violent Islam poses an existential threat to the long term survivability of Western Civilization, and therefore the future of their progeny. It is entirely irrelevant if Violent Islam is the true Islam, a fake one, or a fringe element. What is important is that it's followers be killed or disabled, one way or the other. There is no converting these people, trust me.
4) The long term solution to Violent Islam, I sincerely believe, is some form of mellow nationalism. In Iran, the teachings of the Basij people had relatively little impact on any of us. One of the chief reasons is because Iranians have a very strong sense of nationhood. They consider themselves Iranian first, Muslim second. Doctrine of Jihad has relatively shallow influence on someone with mooring in something other than Islam. Notice that you see very few Iranian suicide bombers. You don't see many Turks pulling the chord on their suicide belts either. The Iranian regime financing and support of terrorism is another matter entirely.
5) Having said that, inculcating and nurturing a sense of nationhood in Arab lands, Pakistan and Afghanistan is an exceedingly difficult task. There is a very nebulous sense of nationhood in these places as I am sure you know. What binds people is tribalism and Islam, which is as noxious of a combination as you can get. Whatever the mechanism, the West has to encourage the formation of as secular a notion of nationalism as it possibly can in these places. I instinctively cringe at the concept of secular nationalism (which is poisonous to the West), because you often end up with effete bunch of pantywaists like the French, or brutal aggressors like the Germans or Russians. But if somehow we could inculcate the French-pantywaistism in Muslim lands, maybe they would be too busy complaining about the cloudiness of the wine or runiness of the hummus to consider murderous Jihad. I am of course being flippant, but honestly, short of turning the whole place into glowing radioactive glass, I don't see any other cure which preserve the life of our own citizenry in the short- to medium-term.
He is spot on, except for one thing: there is no mention of taq’iyah. What better way to postion yourself for an attack than to gain the trust of your victim, by pretending to be on his side?
Sadly, that is why you can never trust any Muslim.
So are you implying the author is a lying Muslim practicing taq’iyah, or are you speaking in generalities?
Interesting letter. I think this is exactly what Bush was trying to do in Iraq and also Afghanistan: create a secular nation where people didn’t feel they had to reject their past, but where at the same time they saw it for what it was, enjoyed the nice parts, and weren’t interested in cultivating it to the exclusion of the good aspects of modernity. Scornfully call it “nation building” if you will, but I do think it’s a good idea...if you can get it to work.
The problem is that you really have to destroy the hold of Islam on a country before it will work. All Islam is fundamentally violent and repressive, but most Muslims aren’t about to act this out; however, if you have a situation where the more radical ones set the tone, as we have now, even “moderate” Muslims can’t be relied on, simply because the violent radicals are actually the truly orthodox and the ones who do, indeed, stick most closely to the essence of Islam.
Personally, I think a little more work on converting Muslims might be an important contribution to this; and, of course, there is the unpleasant but undeniable reality that there are simply a lot of the radicals who must be killed or eliminated for their societies to be able to progress in any way.
I suggest it is highly debatable whether it is possible to enjoy the "good aspects" of modernity without falling prey to the highly negative aspects.
At least I don't know of a society that has succeeded in doing so.
Well, I was actually thinking of technology, which is certainly not bad in itself but is often misused, or even something like modern medicine. And as for avoiding the bad side - that takes a little effort, and this is why a society needs to be founded on a solid set of religious and ethical principles and why people have to make an effort to adhere to them.
The principles of Islam are fundamentally rotten and there is no way an Islamic society can avoid devolving into a 7th century world, regardless of how much technology it might have; in fact, most Islamic societies reject technology. When the Jews left their greenhouses and small factories to the Palestinians during one of the many times they were forced to cede territory to them, the Palestinians trashed them all, used what parts they could to make weapons, and didn’t grow a single thing.
I would agree this has been largely the case till now, but I'm hopeful it isn't impossible for Islam to avoid this devolution.
As the author says, it may require something comparable to the Roman destruction of Jerusalem to force Islam to evolve into something less destructive.
In fact, I hadn't thought of it before, but pre-70 AD Judaism and modern Islam have a great deal in common.
The Zealots and sicarii would fit right in psychologically with al Quaeda.
Most Jews just wanted to live their lives, but there were enough hardliners they messed things up for everybody else.
Of course, there are huge differences too. Judaism had no commandment to convert the rest of the world, by force if necessary, as Islam does. And the Jews really were being oppressed by the Romans, whereas most Muslim perception of oppression is just an illusion.
The Ottoman Empire tried for 400 years, and the Chinese Empire for over 100, to acquire "modern technology" without destroying the foundations of their traditional society. Didn't work for either.
The only traditional society that was arguably successful at doing so was Japan, and that could be debated either way.
Generalities. I sincerely hope that he is being truthful, but since he is a Muslim I can never be sure.
He misses a lot.
Political Islam is an even bigger threat than violent Muslims. Not naming Islam as the problem is exactly why we are losing this war.
As for those “peaceful” Muslims. 99% of them sit silently as non-Muslims are persecuted across the Islamic world. 99% of them sit silently as Islam advances across the world.
“Moderate” Islam is not coming to the rescue and “moderate” Muslims are not changing a thing. This is all fantasy land.
You may not have read the letter carefully. He converted to Catholicism in 2002, so he’s not a Muslim. Since converting puts him at non-zero risk of execution by his ex-brethren, it is logical to assume the conversion was genuine.
Unless you believe “once a Muslim, always a Muslim.”
If you read the article carefully, the author largely agrees with you.
On the major point of disagreement, would you please explain how announcing that we are at war with Islam and all Muslims would help us win?
So otherwise stated, Muslims with this view will never be loyal to America.
To be perfectly fair, the Nation of Islam is considered heretical by both Sunni and Shia Muslims. Their beliefs contradict a large number of root Muslim doctrines.
I had overlooked that possibility, that as an apostate Muslim he becomes as legitimate a target for the faithful as us Infidels. To repeat, I sincerely hope that he is being truthful.
The author speaks of violent Islam and not the political aspect. That is partially agreeing with me.
Because Islam is the ideology of the enemy and if we cannot name our enemy we cannot defeated it. Geert Wilders is on the money. He also wants to ban Muslim immigration which is just the first step. Sharia Law should officially be banned also. Then any Muslim who calls for it afterwards, arrested and deported if possible. All pro-Sharia Muslims should be looked up as enemies of the state. Just as Nazis were. If this is not enough and Islam still rots us away from within, I would ban the entire “religion”.
Birthed and living in a Constitutional Republic, I was puzzled why Muslims in their lands that don’t buy into the whole Caliphate thing don’t speak out. As an Iranian expat friend told me, ‘You disappear!’
That’s why moderate remain silent, yet most came to Western nations to ‘get away from that crap.’
Islam needs a reformation or simply to go away.
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.