When World’s Collide: Extending the Social Democratic Empire Against World Islam

Let’s be frank. The democracies of the world have increased their hold on millions of acres of the world’s landmass with the demise of the Soviet Union. Falling solidly into the “world democracy” camp are Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, and Romania. Entering the camp with some trepidation and a bit of turmoil are Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus. Once one reaches those entities bordering the Islamic nations, great turmoil exists in the former Yugoslavia, Kazakhistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Kyrgyzstan. These nations can certainly NOT be counted among the democracies. In the Far East, one can safely include India, South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan among the democracies. The Philippines is also embroiled in the Islamic malaise, but it is generally considered a struggling democracy. Excluding China and North Korea, whose forms of government defy description, but are commonly called “communist,” the other nations of the Far East and the island East behave as various forms of fiefdom. A possible exception is Thailand. Africa is, of course, Islamic in the north and sadly, but apparently, tribal in the south. The Middle East is Islamic with the exception of isolated Israel, a social democracy.

In general, then, one has a world divided into social democracies and those going that direction, communist states, eastern fiefdoms, world Islam, and troubled regions bordering world Islam.

Who wishes to emulate whom? As of this writing, I can think of no people group wishing to copy any patterns coming out of southern Africa or out of the fiefdom states of the east. Likewise, while China is a world power and commands respect because of its large military and huge population, there aren’t books being written about the advantages of “dynastic communism” or whatever that stuff is that they practice.

Islam, on the other hand, is making no small military effort to firmly extend into formerly communist nations to its north and into the African nations to its south. The social democracies, on the other hand, with their seductive mass media and their uncontrollable internet paving their way, get their message into practically every location on earth.

If destiny means anything it means that some trends are inevitable. Social democracy is already the standard for most of the world’s landmass and most of the world’s successes in technology, standard of living, and treatment of the individual and his/her family. Social democracy is destined to displace tribalism, fiefdom, genghis communism, and, yes, world Islam. (Western Islam is very comfortable with grocery stores, voting booths, televisions, universities, the internet, and coffee shops. They’ll not be trading that anytime soon for Osama bin Laden’s tents and the ladies-in-black robes of the subjugated females of world Islam. They are thoroughly and inevitably social democratized.)

That is why Islam struggles so mightily. That is why Islam sends its terrorists to blow up the symbols of wealth and power. It knows it is attacking its real enemy: a governmental and cultural ideal to which it is doomed to lose. “But,” you say, “Islam is a religion. What does religion care of government?” Let us observe very closely the nations that practice world Islam. Is Islam the religion or is it the government? A clear eye will notice that they are indivisible. A clear eye will understand that it’s no mere accident that Osama bin Laden is a Saudi Arabian and not a citizen of one of the more so-called “fundamental” states. He is a representative of Mecca. As is very well understood by the Saudi ruling family, Mecca allows them. They don’t allow Mecca. I would never be surprised to learn of back-channel funding of Osama from even our “friend,” Saudi Arabia. Worlds are in collision, after all.

What does the future hold? I foresee the real battle lines being made of cable and circuitry...media and internet. The real battle is prosperity, standard of living, health care, educational opportunity, and Freedom of Choice and of lifestyle. For after all what is a king, dictator, or a despot (they are the same, you know)? Paraphrasing Paine for a while, a "king" is the bad idea that some, by virtue of their blood line or power, should have the right to enforce their more enlightened view on others who are not their equals. Complicating factors with these blue bloods include their desire to pass their power to the offspring. As in North Korea, these offspring are men who by the very nature of random genetics probably lack the capabilities of their selfish, but successful, parent.

What does the future hold? Barring a catastrophic acquisition of new and powerful weaponry by tin-horn despots, it holds democracy. The trend is social democracy, and that is far better than world Islam or Confucian Communism.

What an astute piece Whitson has written. Thank you for posting it!

I am sorry to say this, but I find Islam to be friendly, cordial, hospitable -- to MUSLIMS ONLY. To the infidels (US), it is vindictive and barbaric. The terrorist attack we have just witnessed was SPAWNED in Islam. There is no shirking or refuting this. It is not only tolerated, it is encouraged, funded, and cheered (most of it secretly for fear of exposure of Muslims for the scurrilous beasts they are). To them, there is no concept of live and let live.

And, far from being anathema to the Koran, the terror we just witnessed could easily be rationalized by such words from the Koran, such as "Kill them wherever you find them; over such men we give you absolute authority"; "strike terror into the hearts of the enemies of Allah..."; "...take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends...whoever seeks their friendship shall become one of their number." I quote. So, don't excuse Islam. It is the milieu in which these bewildered barbarians, who worry because the world has passed their religion by, these anachronistic a$$holes, it is the milieu in which they have hatched terrorism. And, dammit, it works for them, because they are also patient. They will lose war after war, yet call themselves victors for a whole nother century because they downed the infidels' trade center.

It is a good thing I am not president. Since we have no country to fight back against, we are currently frustrated. Not me. I see that our enemy is Islam -- barbaric, intractable Islam, with its atavistic dreams and visions and its fatuous designs on world domination (what a joke!). If I were president (again, luckily, I'm not), my only debate would be between the following two options: 1) announce the need to evacuate Medina (#2 holy site for Islam -- Mohammed's burial place [you see, he's still IN his grave, yet he's greater than Jesus? Go figure]) prior to our nuking it; or 2) DON'T announce it; just nuke it and let the rags fall where they may.

In conjunction with that, since they've given us the excuse, have hated us, do hate us, and always will hate us anyway, have hated Israel, do hate Israel, and always will hate Israel anyway, I would also encourage Israel to take a couple thousand pounds of high explosives up to the #3 holy site -- the Dome of the Rock (aka the in-your-face-Jews mosque) and blow it to smithereens. Again, the tone for this has been set by Islam, as have the terms of the war. Since they hit us in a place calculated to disturb the very core of our belief system, we need to do the same to them -- hit them in a place that would be calculated to strike at a symbol of THEIR core beliefs and values, to produce the kind of distress and angst in their minds as we are suffering, and to give them pause concerning continuing to play this kind of hardball with so formidable a foe as the USA.

We today declared war on terrorists, which is a bastardization of the term, since war is, by definition, a state of hostility between nations. WE SHOULD HAVE DECLARED WAR ON ISLAM, politically incorrect though it would be, because in this case, it is the closest we can come. Farrakhan is right -- it IS a nation of Islam, and they stick together when it comes to Israel and the USA. To any who would say, "Nuke Medina? Wow, that'll make the Muslims mad." I say, "Duh!", the already are mad, and they always will be!". To any who would say, "Wow! That'll make 'em REALLY do terrorism to us!" I say, "Duh!, they already are!" And then I say, "Muslims: better rethink that -- BECAUSE MECCA IS NEXT."

10 perpetual virgins in the afterlife for killing innocent women and children? Please...)

That's not Islam. That's a perversion of Hassan Issaba's perversion of Islam that many of the current terrorist leaders use. Real Islam says that those who's action or inaction results in the death of innocents will be forever damned. A place in Paradise is forever granted to those who fight in a Jihad, but Islam has some very strict rules about who you can kill in a fight; women and children are right out unless they are directly participating in the fight (have taken up arms) and even then the true Islamic is encouraged to subdue them rather than kill.

The real problem here is when you have a largely illiterate population, who are very zealous for their religion, and wind up learning from people that know that and have goals other than teaching the actual religion. Even once they learn to read, even if they turn around and read the Koran, they've already been reprogrammed, it's too late.

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.