Re:somewhat twisted arguments

Submitted by Stuart (United Kingdom), Feb 17, 2006 at 05:12

I can't see how the analogy of Islamic expansion, that pretty much ended in the 16/17th century can relate to the 21st century. Salidin is not coming to Main Street Usa or Piccadilly circus. The comparison of Islam's violent beginnings does bear similarity to the birth of Christianity, embroiled in a violent low level contest with other Late Roman successor cults and a brutal repressive regime, being aquired as a state dept of Faith by Constantine and though military means, exstinguishing paganism and Greco-Roman polytheism.

Just as Islam became the tool of violent men in power (A depressingly reccuring characteristic in human sociology), as did Christianity. The destruction of the Northern pagans in the 14/15 c, Native Americans thoughout the conquistador period, Spanish moriscos in the 17th, Irish Catholics in the 17/18th. Remember that Christianity is the birthplace of anti-semetism, from Crusaders to Inquisistion to Luther to Dreyfrus. Does that mean as such that Christains are all instinctively belligerent aggressors intent on mass murder or conversion? Of course not, Humans are not made into monsters by faith alone and to paint a billion people as such is the same as declaring all Indians are BJP fascists and the entire Chinese nation, totalitarian murderers. It is a entirely false assumption and lazy stereotyping

Both Christainity and Islam rely on the creed of Absolute truth, one god, one prophet. Both condemn non-believers to horrible punishment, in this life or the next, both seek to convert the world to one homogenious dogma. They seek hegemon over sprituality. The difference in language between Koran and Gospel does not seem to have encourage divergant methods of achieving this.

As for coexistence, the intensification of religious tension within communities is undeniable. The destruction post 1948 of Jewish communities in moslem states (A tragic acompaniment to the near equal and opposite catastrophe of Palistine) and increasing tensions visavis the Christian community around the Islamic world are caused by a growth in identification with and the power of stringent islam, yet the more striking change lies in the abandonment of secular politics and social relationships. This is not purely a consequence of a fad of islamic puritanism, it is the result of huge changes disrupting in many cases centuries old multi-cultural and coexisting communities and societies. Super power (Including Colonial ones)interferance and a dramatic integration in the world market all put tensions on civic society. Into the vaccum has stroad in many instances, militant Sectarians. These forces, political, social, economical have created societies unsure and changing, strengthening the 'need for the other' and the certaincies of dogma.

As for the remark about the danger of Islamic take over through the use of an islamic minority, this is quite a flight of imagination. I live in Finsbury Park in London and given the sizeable Muslim community here, i would have though i might have noticed their battering rams or catapults, or Cruise missiles and Abrams, yet no, i just see a community getting on with its day to day life. Multi-Culturalism is not easy, it is not a matter of forms. It needs time and understanding, on both sides. The host culture will change as it include the new arrivals, if it is open and not aggressive, it will absorb and permiate back into the culture. This is of course utopian, but i would argue that real democracy is utopian, the path towards these goals is none the less worth travelling, the journey towards humanitarian ideas is the essential and right one.

As for the nihilistic and irrational Europeans, this comment recalls National eugenics of the 19th century and has shades of Kirche, Kinder, Kuche (my german like my spelling is awful). It appears to my ignorant eye to suggest 'If you can beat 'em, out breed 'em'. This betrays great concern for 'the white race' against those swarthy foreigners. All i can say is i disagree entirely and i apologize for not having bred more vigoriously.

As for Yousef Al-Qaradhawi, the threat to Rome is more from traffic than ravaging hordes. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but i think Yousef will be disappointed. His comment alone is not support for assuming an imminent threat to Italy or pan-Islamic thoughts of world domination. It does remind me of the promise in revelations, taken literally by many evangelical christians that all Jews would be finally converted and Jeruselem would transformed into a Christian Capital just in time for Big JC return. This, like Yousef's little rant, is religion asserting itself on the world via prophacy and like Historical materialism and Cylical history, they remain prophacy as the world doesn't act that way and makes fools of those who try to contain it.

A further interesting note is the similarity drawn between Mohammed and his concertrated group of Zealots and Al Qaida. This is rather odd given the vast differences between 7th century arabia and now, the power of mass action and mass organisation etc. Taking this model of an elite of professional acolytes dedicated to a spritual and political revolution reminds me of a Leninist Vanguard, dedicated to action and one aim. How odd after the 'end of history', revolutionaries of a similar narrow ideology have terrorised the world again. Al Qaida is not in any way a force of such power as to subsume stable nation states (or to distabalise established ones) on its own. That requires an domestic elite panic, kneejerk legistlation, corruption of democracy. Al Qaida are narrow pathetic souls, lost in their ideology, turned to evil deeds and vicious libel by the desperate logic of their delusion and the cold ruthless double think of global politics. They are not by themselves or their acts, a power to shake and shape the world. We can only allow them to change the world by our own reaction to their brutal acts. I am not an appeaser, my greatgrandfather died in Spain, fighting a global threat that would three years later would nearly destroy europe via brute force and mass murder, and my family keep his memory evergreen. But to twist our lives and disrupt everything to face off with a very effective organisation, capable of horrible acts of violence but not a threat to the survival of democracy in itself is entirely counter productive.

More alarmingly than these other remarks is the assertion that Muslims would applaud the victory of the Jihadists over the entire globe. Human decancy is not limited by your confessional, for those under shraria law, under the tyranny of Totalitarians, under brutal and corrupt paper democracies, the overwelming majority seek to live lives without blood on the streets and stiffingly prescibed behaviour. This is a human trait and one that remains strong even in the darkest of days. If Moslems are so anxious for such an outcome, where is the evidence that Christianity isn't seeking such a victory. The point remains, people, pious or otherwise, don't seek such totalities.

---

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".