3 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Decisions-Decisions-Which Rulebook to Follow.......

Reader comment on item: "Rushdie Rules" Reach Florida

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Oct 13, 2010 at 19:28

As we see the escalation of engagement of divergent philosophies and consorting ideologies and have a good sense of where they are heading, it will be quite unlikely any (save one) will realize a fulfillment of a complete assimilation to the precepts of each, for there are no corroborating elements to be found from one to another them that will suffer a full dissection of a competing ideology. In other words, tolerance of competing ideologies is limited by the deficiencies of humanity's lack of understanding by human logic and /or reasoning.

There is fear in what is not understood. We can tell that Islam has been regaining a lost following in these modern times, for the ancient activities of Islam presented in history of the Muslim conquering vast territories of the Middle and Far East are legend, and the presence of Islam in that part of the world remains intransigent in the tenets of their beliefs for hundreds of years. Only in the constant struggles of a more determined older western form of society was the 'empire of Islam' contained to those parts of the original conquests. But in these modern times, the fear of Muslim conquest remains in the vein of the intransigence found in the fundamentalists' ideology. It is fear that allows the inherent belligerent form of any ideology to find ways to impose upon any society that cannot resist a strength of mind such as that found in Islam; and that gives Islamists an edge.

The question has been asked and now asked again, if the Muslim ideology is not compatible with Western societal mores, and in the face of a resurgent mentality that Islam must eventually replace all competing ideologies, what tact must Western societies take to survive the Islamic resurgence and remain socially vital in a world that would collapse under the weight of the conflict? (Beware-it is a trick question).

The so-called 'Rushdie Rules' are part of a campaign of psychological warfare, initiated against a socially weakened Western culture, which has been undergoing a transformation of values that has become so complicated by liberal theosophical and philosophical renderings of social issues, that none who engage in them can come to a common understanding, thereby having no inner strength to deal with any challenges to the core values. The core values are lost to a liberal rendering of humanist relativism, so there should be no misunderstanding of why Islam can achieve what Muslim fundamentalists claim they want to do.

Now it has been suggested that the world can embrace Islam if the more determined members of the fundamentalist Islamists factions that have threatened the peace and security of every sector of the globe would soften their position and engage in a more tolerant practice of their belief system, but why should they. They have the courage of their convictions (something that seems lost in many western societies), and have nowhere else to engage the energies of those convictions if they are somehow convinced they should moderate their stance. Furthermore, in their determination, they can no longer be marginalized by merely trying to consign them to the radical fringe. Even if one were to say that only one percent of the billion plus practicing Muslims were involved in promoting Islam by force, that is more than many standing armies have in their ranks. In that, they only lack in means.

Now here is a lesson in persuasion; that fundamentalist Islamists have resorted to force and threat of force in order to promote their ideology. In the parallel ranks of purportedly non-violent Muslims, we see a minimalist voice of concern as the drum roll of the determined Muslim rank and file who are advancing towards a shari'a conclusion to things do so with apparently little in the way to stop them. Little do the 'moderate' Muslims seem to realize they are targets as well for their apostasy; or do they wait for the conclusion to be accomplished by the others? That remains to be seen.

Now it has been asserted elsewhere in this post that if shari'a were to be 'moderated,' that if the parts considered an affront to the mores of western societies were eliminated and could therefore be assimilated into western societies, then there can be tolerance. But the fundamentalist Muslim will insist that western cultures do the opposite; to assimilate western society into the standing tenets of shari'a, for it would be less complicated. Further, as observed in the exchange, it is believed by the fundamentalist Muslim that the tenets of Islam are superior by sacred assertion and cannot be compromised as they assume western societal mores are.

So it must thereof be concluded that from a fundamentalist Muslim's perspective, there can be only one outcome, and that is what they all strive for, to the very last one of them. They are following their rulebook: which rulebook do the western societies think they need to follow if they do not wish to learn Arabic?


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submit a comment on this item

<< Previous Comment      Next Comment >>

Reader comments (62) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
We are only one generation away from losing all rights. [61 words]Phil GreendFeb 3, 2013 01:20203079
1Decisions-Decisions-Which Rulebook to Follow....... [831 words]M. ToveyOct 13, 2010 19:28179235
9India should head the ingominous list [173 words]B.N.GururajOct 10, 2010 10:29179140
Sharia law in Alabama? [21 words]DiogenesOct 5, 2010 15:24179002
Your Statement... [27 words]Gloria BahakelApr 3, 2012 13:15179002
Burning the Koran vs. Burning the First Amendment [96 words]Ted R. WeilandOct 1, 2010 08:57178854
3Just adopt sharia, it is easier. [38 words]IhnshallahSep 27, 2010 15:58178755
6I hope that was facetious [48 words]Kepha HorSep 30, 2010 19:28178755
It's all in the name ... [28 words]GetRealOct 2, 2010 09:44178755
1adopt sharia [16 words]Jim CoffeyOct 2, 2010 16:24178755
12The Unspeakable In Pursuit of the Unthinkable [448 words]Arlinda DeAngelisSep 27, 2010 14:57178754
1Other limitations on free speech? [97 words]CalebSep 25, 2010 02:36178671
Free speech limitations [60 words]CatmannOct 15, 2010 18:22178671
how close we always are to disaster.. [150 words]PJMSep 24, 2010 14:48178662
6Goiong Down The Same Route...Again !!! [303 words]GeoffSep 24, 2010 11:44178658
1Truth [183 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
IISep 24, 2010 01:58178647
1How does one 'moderate' divine law? [77 words]hrishiSep 25, 2010 00:24178647
Islam [213 words]IISep 25, 2010 22:38178647
4And the down side is? [29 words]JoanneSep 23, 2010 11:34178626
10Rushdie Rules apply to quran as well [74 words]Muslimk***Sep 23, 2010 05:32178610
3A good reason for "Nobama 2012" [111 words]Kepha HorSep 22, 2010 20:46178591
4Petraeus "moved the country toward dhimmitude" [73 words]mythSep 22, 2010 18:47178588
obama should speak out about 'Evil SHARIA'! [60 words]TOODLESSep 22, 2010 14:30178581
1Is Islam really worth talking about? [94 words]elfinSep 22, 2010 21:36178581
1Why would he do that? [214 words]GetRealSep 23, 2010 10:25178581
9Time to stand up [102 words]Rebecca MouldsSep 22, 2010 09:09178568
2Spot on. [159 words]GetRealSep 23, 2010 09:30178568
1I concur [74 words]Rebecca MouldsSep 23, 2010 21:39178568
1U.S will never learn-pity [96 words]Muslimk***Sep 22, 2010 08:47178566
2Gaza [95 words]GetRealSep 23, 2010 10:00178566
4Dare to defy them! [64 words]GetRealSep 22, 2010 08:22178565
4We must never submit [79 words]Ms. KellySep 24, 2010 20:07178565
5Islam the big bad wolf, America Little Red Riding Hood [328 words]NuritGSep 22, 2010 00:23178550
T.Jones and the Koran [75 words]Samuel StephensSep 21, 2010 21:44178547
5The West is not at war with Islam [43 words]steven LSep 21, 2010 19:42178542
4Spineless leaders = No leaders = Possibly traitors [933 words]MichaelSep 21, 2010 19:18178539
spineless leaders [8 words]J AllenApr 18, 2011 09:33178539
1confession [59 words]mythSep 21, 2010 18:40178537
It's just as well.. [338 words]GetRealSep 25, 2010 09:56178537
Response to Rushdie Rules column [27 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Stan GuthrieSep 21, 2010 17:47178535
Desecration of Koran??? [100 words]Linda BladeSep 22, 2010 13:03178535
Rushdie rules in Australia [59 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
JRSep 21, 2010 17:11178532
Palästinensern chändeten das Grab des Joseph im Oktober 2000 [122 words]Sam MelSep 21, 2010 16:08178530
Rushdie Rules reach Florida. Creating Violence on Purpose. [91 words]DebbieSep 21, 2010 15:27178528
6Dhimmitude in America [184 words]EuskalHerriaSep 21, 2010 14:12178521
who could it be? [42 words]ivySep 22, 2010 23:00178521
Who is responsible [100 words]Stan ThowSep 21, 2010 14:12178520
2One notable omission: The oldest synagogue in the world destroyed at Jericho [51 words]Abu NudnikSep 21, 2010 13:51178519
3We will not be dhimmis - tell our president. [228 words]batya daganSep 21, 2010 13:47178518
1The war is coming here [56 words]Joe Six-PackSep 21, 2010 13:03178516
Rushdie Rules [51 words]Ellen SantellaSep 21, 2010 12:54178514
72Trojan horse mosque in Rome? [265 words]Dale BrownSep 21, 2010 11:59178512
Invest in alternative energy [17 words]RajeevSep 29, 2010 23:45178512
1Vatican and the Moslems [56 words]Lujack SkylarkOct 23, 2010 19:28178512
5"Norway Refuses Millions of Dollars From Saudi Arabia for Mosque Building" [27 words]Young MCNov 12, 2010 01:53178512
4Good [3 words]Sardar Ravi Ranjan Singh 'PanthBharti'Dec 15, 2010 12:34178512
1The west will Never understand,,This is the only way Muslim pray, No surprise! [294 words]moon lightFeb 18, 2011 02:12178512
Free speech: the last hope of free men. [207 words]Ralph C. Whaley MDSep 21, 2010 11:31178511
Solid except for the first sentence [370 words]Kendra ASep 21, 2010 10:25178508
4burning mein kampf is an act of free speech. islam limits free speech [162 words]Phil GreendSep 21, 2010 04:44178500
time [34 words]ivySep 23, 2010 14:58178500
free speech [91 words]mariahSep 25, 2010 18:42178500

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Decisions-Decisions-Which Rulebook to Follow....... by M. Tovey

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List


eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2019 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)