Tuesday

Why Now? Islam's Rise Explained

The question has been in the back of my mind for awhile. Why now? Why is militant Islam rising now? What has changed? Is it because western powers, in their colonizing days, had divided and conquered the Middle East, and for decades kept them weak? Is it because after defeating the U.S.S.R. in Afghanistan they have a newfound confidence? Is it because they learned something (from the CIA perhaps) during that conflict about training soldiers that they're now using in service of jihad?

I have been wondering how Muslims have changed or how their conditions have changed. But something else now seems more likely: The West has changed.

The change has been good in so many ways. But it has weakened our ability to protect ourselves against militant Islam.

Islam has been through two previous jihads. During the first one, Islam conquered much of western Europe, coming up through Spain and making it to the middle of France before they were stopped. In another wave of conquest, they came in through eastern Europe and made it to Austria before they were stopped at the walls of Vienna. They receded in power from that point on. Europe had united against them under the banner of Christianity.

But religious fervor has declined in the West. I personally think that's a good thing. But what uniting force has replaced it?

The bad news is the thing that replaced religious fervor has made the West less capable of defending itself. It is as if we have removed a form of immunity we once had.

Religious belief has been replaced by a belief in multiculturalism, which by itself (and generally speaking) is also a good thing. The passionate belief in everyone's right to believe what they want, and the belief that every culture is unique and special and worthy — these have replaced Christian dogmatism in the West.

A widespread belief in multiculturalism is great, but will it help us protect ourselves from invasion? Will it help us unite against a common foe?

Multiculturalism has become almost a religion and is very widespread throughout western countries. It is one of the reasons different cultures have been able to live together in relative peace in democratic countries.

This tremendous spread of tolerance is wonderful. But it has been allowing Islam to rise relatively unimpeded. After all, militant Muslims have a right to believe what they want, right? No culture is better than any other, and it is arrogant and old-fashioned to say otherwise, right? That means no religion is worse than any other. Everyone has the right to believe and preach what they want, even if it is jihad, even in downtown London and New York City. Muslim leaders have openly exhorted their followers to overthrow the government — something that in any other context would be treason and sedition.

In other words, no matter how passionate we may be about multiculturalism or how many of us are united about its rightness, it won't help us defend ourselves.

What could help us defend ourselves? That's the question. What is worth defending? If we can't figure that out, the orthodox Muslims will win. Commitment always beats half-heartedness. Absolute commitment crushes it easily.

What are we westerners absolutely committed to? What is worth fighting for and even dying for?

I believe the answer is freedom.

In fact, one of the reasons people have come to respect and value multiculturalism is that it helps us live in freedom. It helps people of different ethnic and religious backgrounds to live together without harassment and in relative peace.

People in the West value freedom, and they value it enough to defend it — conservatives and liberals and everywhere in between. We believe in freedom of speech, freedom to worship (or not) as we wish. We believe in the power to vote for both women and men, and the freedom to think and read whatever we want.

Orthodox Islam is passionately anti-freedom.

None of the rights above are allowed in an Islamic state, and make no mistake, an Islamic state is what orthodox Muslims are after. They want to make western countries into Islamic states, and you may be surprised to discover, they are already doing it.

This is a war. Freedom against slavery. Am I overstating my case? Not even close. When you live in an Islamic state ruled by Sharia law, you have to pray 5 times a day. Women have to be accompanied by a male relative wherever they go, and they cannot get a job. They have no voice, they have no rights. Men are slaves to the Islamic state, and women are the mens' slaves. (Read first-hand accounts of what it is like in an Islamic state.)

You probably know all this already. But many people, in their passionate commitment to multiculturalism, refuse to entertain the idea. Try talking about the nature of militant Islam in polite company, and most people will gasp as if you had blasphemed, and they will passionately defend Islam, even if they know nothing about it. This is multicultural tolerance working to defend the right of everyone to believe as they wish. If it wasn't so dangerous in the long run, even a blind commitment to multiculturalism would be beautiful in its own way.

But if orthodox Muslims gain more power, recruits, and technology, militant Islam will become harder and harder to ignore, and the situation will become increasingly serious.

We the people of the West, people who live in liberal democracies, will need to unify to preserve our liberties. We will need a powerful unifying belief we can passionately defend. When that time comes, remember: One possible answer is freedom.

29 comments:

  1. Another reason Islam is on its Third (and last) Jihad is that the West has been so successful at spreading its institutions everywhere in the world to include the Middle East....So this current Jihad is a last desperate gamble by a barbaric pagan culture and religion that knows its days are numbered in a civilized and Westernized world that has no room for Islamic barbarism.

    Thus like Hitler's "Battle of the Bulge" gambit in WW II -- The Islamic World has gambled one last throw of the dice to conquer or die.

    Cheers, Ronbo

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous12:27 PM

    Dear Citizen Warrior, be advised that no matter how hard you try to defeat Islam, you will not succeed.
    You see, We The Muslims, are responsible for civilizing Europe itself and the whole world. The American lying Swine, like to claim that the Greeks civilized western Europe,this is an age old white lie.
    Socrates failed to convince the ancient Greek plutocracy,that slaves and foreigners had rights, so your so called democratic Multiculturalism is indeed an outright fraud. under the banner of Islam, Slaves became rulers of entire Countries,the Sultan of Morocco, Bin Yusuf Tajani, was a Black Man!and he was the first head of state in a free Islamic society who saw fit to recognize the declared independence of a small federation of thirteen colonies calling it self the united states of America in 1776.
    When you wanted to be free Islam was the first living ideological entity that recognized your freedom along with the Islamic states of Tripoli, Senegal and Mauritania. Your fraudulent Historians like to say otherwise and teach lies to the youth in your American Universities.This is why your(Evil White Demonocracy),
    yes I said (Demonocracy)not Democracy, because Democracy is a conjured fraud and so is your constitution and the paper that it was written on! a Mob rule mindset governed by the Evil white Majority cannot and never will survive! We the Muslims of Islam figured that out a long time ago.That is why your fait is of the previous Empires that came before you. In the 8th Century the Romans were defeated by Islam Allah granted us the the victory by placing all the Empires at our feet for example Constinople a former Christian Roman Empire is an ancient under ground City to this day, because We the Muslims built our Cities over it. Every day We the Muslims walk, no trample all over The last bastion of the Holy Roman Empire. And just as we trample over it, we will trample over you, You Fucking Evil white Apes of The Shaitan!. Already your So called Generals are throwing in the towel in Afghanistan and Iraq you've Already lost and have resort to bribing the Muslims because you know you can't win, because sooner or later were going to stuff you in our bag of Empires like the rest. And their aint a damn thing you can do about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous3:27 AM

      Islam will not be allowed to flourish in western countries simply because the people see what is happening Muslim's killing Muslim's all over the world, depleting your own kind, eventually when we have seen enough you will be snuffed out and Islam which Muslim's are leaving in huge numbers now will be no more.

      Delete
  3. I disagree, Anonymous. Islam's expansion will be checked, and then Islam will diminish. The free world will win. The harder you fight, the more people you arouse in opposition.

    ReplyDelete
  4. ISLAM AND SLAVERY

    Islam apologists love to tell lies about slavery to try and influence Black African people.
    The Atlantic Trade is infamous but there was an Arab Trade too which operated from the Port of Zanzibar. This trade stole as many Africans if not more than the Atlantic and lasted longer too. The last country to abolish slavery was Saudi... in 1962.

    The slave markets in the Ottoman Caliphate were busy throughout the C19th long after slavery was abolished in the West. I don't know about Tunisa and Morocco being the first countries to recognise US independence but what I do know is that these countries had a pirate Slavers operating with the full support of the Sultans throughout the C17th C18th. it was only when the Royal Navy in the 1820s burnt down the Slave prisons sank the ships and the Forts that it came to an end.

    Muslims claim 'their' slavery was 'better' or 'non racist' than the Wests because some slaves could rise to the top of society kihe in ancient Rome. Whilst this is true, the reason why that A)Islamic Slave Trade is less well known than the Atlantic Trade and B)There is no diaspora of Black Aficans im former ottoman and Islamic countries is because all Male slaves were castrated on capture.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Angela11:35 AM

    Hi. Okay, I am just trying to get a good grasp of what's going on.

    The problem you described in this post sounds more like a problem with "relativism" rather than "multiculturalism".

    In relativism, everything is relative. No absolutely bad thing or good. just a floating bland glazed -eye view of everything.

    Multiculturalism is tolerating a mixture of cultures within a border.

    They don't go hand in hand.

    If you say multiculturalism is the problem, so how far do you go to cleanse that problem? When is it not multicultural? When there is one culture? Which culture? The dominate majority? Hmm.

    ~~~~~~~~~~
    Black folks need a website and blogs and all sorts of things to encourage them to move away from Islam. That I agree with.

    In fact, I think even Islam believes that! There are countless suras (?) that bad mouth a Black person who decides to take on Islam -calling them coarse and lust driven, etc.

    They do need a website...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Multiculturalism is a philosophy that appreciates ethnic diversity within a society and that encourages people to learn from the contributions of those of diverse ethnic backgrounds.

    There is nothing wrong with multiculturalism. In fact, it's wonderful. It makes the world a better place. It enriches everybody. But wholesale, indiscriminate, across-the-board, reckless multiculturalism is incomplete. It is missing one simple distinction, and that makes it blind.

    Multiculturalism is great. Blind multiculturalism can get us into trouble. I think blind multiculturalism is relativism applied to culture.

    The missing distinction is mutuality. It's great to tolerate other religions or ethnic customs if the people following those religions and customs also tolerate ours. It is self-inflicted abuse to tolerate them when they do not tolerate ours. And it is cultural suicide to tolerate a religion that actively tries to undermine or destroy all other religions.

    It is a crime against humanist values to let them be taken away (one small concession at a time) by a less-tolerant culture simply because the less-tolerant culture is more insistent, aggressive, and relentless.

    Read more: Multiculturalism and the Defense of Liberty.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Angela9:43 PM

    Citizen Warrior said:

    "I think blind multiculturalism is relativism applied to culture."

    Okay. I am getting cautiously relieved. i also want to point out that before Muslims came into the picture, multiculturalism was doing fine! (or at least no group had the voice to complain about it legitimately?) The only thing -I think- that went wrong is when Muslims came -they were probably the only group that didn't come with the intent of getting a better standard of living and being content: They either came with that intention, but had strings attached to them (their leaders could boss them around, mess with their heads) or they came with other intentions (a take over).

    How come this "blind multiculturalism" is not talked about? Practically everywhere I hear "multiculturalism" is a problem. Sadly, the only place I hear defending multiculturalism are the Muslims who know they have what to lose once that goes away. Even you said "Multiculturalism" without qualifying it. Is the qualifying for my sake? like throwing a bone to a dog to quiet it? I not say blind multiculturalism in the post?

    (I'm not asking that you change anything. You do you. But I just want to understand if you don't mind.)

    Also nice words aside, if you tell me to my face that you hate the diversity that happened to America. That you want a pure white race only place, I can totally respect that. Its your view and I wouldn't get emotional. I just want honesty and not trickery. I like very gay people (cuz I know they are gay.) even though I have nothing against gay. I like kkk worries rather than worries of Black civil rights establishment pretending to care about me, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Angela, I think I'm starting to understand what you're saying. As I've said in many places, multiculturalism is a good thing. Blind multiculturalism has been a very bad thing because it's not mutual.

    If group A accepts group B and wants to live and let live, but group B wants to dominate, does not accept group A, and does not want them to live, one of two things will happen: Group A has to change the way they deal with group B to put limits on group B's ability to undermine group A, or group A will disappear.

    How can anyone hate "the diversity that happened to America?" America IS diversity, and has been since the beginning, unless you consider all Italians, Irish, Norweigans, Greeks, and Jews, etc. all the same just because they have somewhat the same skin colors. Diversity has created the richness that is America.

    And I agree with you, up until orthodox Muslims came along, no other group said, "You must accept me but I will not accept you. You must yield to our culture but we will not yield to yours. Your culture will be usurped and replaced by ours." When a culture like that comes along, it's time to add an ammendment to the multiculturalist doctrine that says, "as long as the acceptance and respect are mutual."

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous11:12 PM

    @Anonymous: We won't try to defeat islam, we WILL defeat islam, because we are not brutes or savages living in the fourth century. islam has no place in America amongst Americans and, therefore, will not prevail. As to civilizing Europe, from your frothing, I must say I don't believe that could ever have happened. Your people wouldn't know how to be civilized much less teach another how to become civilized...

    ReplyDelete
  10. Another reason is that the Islamic world became literate and the internet became available to all, so the reading the Koran and about the deeds and sayings of Muhammad was easy for everyone. This is similar to the "reform" of Christianity when the common man was able to read the bible, but with different contents and different consequences.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I agree with pretty much everything you said, but perhaps there is some deeper spiritual significance as well. A perfect storm of American economic and leadership weakness combined with rising Muslim militancy. From my blog:


    http://www.captainkudzu.com/2009/02/why-is-this-happening.html

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous6:14 AM

    Well, I think you are only half right on this one. I think that the void left by the exit of Christianity is what caused Multiculturalism to be corrupted into failure.

    When everyone was largely Christian we all had a certain amount of things we just agreed on that just didn't need explaining. We all new that Islam was "not a real religion". We didn't need to explain that further to anyone we knew. People accepted that you couldn't have a religion based on a madman.

    So in essence Islam could never have crept into our governments because Mohammedans, well, who would've voted for one in the first place?
    That Mohammedan Congressman from Minnesota that was sworn into office on a koran never would have been elected back then.

    But now, without Christianity there is no lid or limit on what defines multiculturalism.
    Now, we are compelled to treat Islam as equal to Christianity, largely by a population that doesn't know anything about Christianity. It is this, that allows Sharia to creep and creep upon us all.

    You see, there will be a void where Christianity once was and this void will be filled with whatever is most pressing, and that at the moment that is islam.

    The ideology of "Freedom" won't automatically fill the void.
    They don't teach about freedom in schools anymore, in fact I'd go out on a limb and say there is more teaching about Islam in many schools.

    The liberal agenda was also enabled by the void of Christianity, and liberals have rolled out a red carpet for islam.

    My guess is that, in America, it will come down to a fight between the last freedom loving patriots and a liberal fascist government supporting moslems, and which may lead to civil war or at the least civil unrest if the Islamophiles in government cannot be checked. A lot of Americans will eventually get mad enough to hold up the Constitution in one hand and hold their weapon in the other. That's what will happen in the USA. The Constitution, the fact that it exists, guarantees that it will happen!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous6:57 AM

    Its the reach of the oil money that has helped spread Islam in a big way.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Agreement. We need to unite for freedom, for our civilization.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Walter Sieruk9:34 AM

    There are a number of reason as to why Islam gained so mush power. As for those reason one of them may be too many many had little are no knowledge of the Bible. Nevertheless, it still is a fact that all Muslims [Sunni and Shi'ite] believe that Muhammad, who was the founder of Islam,was an actual prophet. As a Christian I can keyboard that Muhammad might had indeed actually been a prophet, but the important thing to understand is that Muhammad was NOT a prophet sent by God. Instead Muhammad was a false prophet sent by Satan to lead many people astray. Jesus,in fact,did predict and warn about the coming of false prophets. For Jesus taught "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves." Matthew 7:15. The Bible further warns that"many false prophets are gone out into the world." First John 4:1. As to how and why these Bible verses of the Bible apply to Muhammad can be explained in Isiah 8:20. Which teaches "To the law of the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there in no light in them." [K.J.V.] In other words if a prophet,teacher or a religion has teachings and doctrines that are in contradiction to the teachings and doctrine of the Bible then that prophet, teacher or that religion is a false prophet,false teacher or a false religion. With this stated it should be known that Islam denies that Jesus is the Son of God the Father. This is in great contradiction to the Bible which teaches that Jesus is the Son of God. As seen,for example,in John 3:16,17,36. First John 2:22,23. Islam denies the Jesus is God the Son. This is in contrast to the Bible which teaches that Jesus is indeed, God the Son. As shown in Hebrews 1:6-8. With emphasis on verse 8. Likewise Islam denies that Jesus is God. that Jesus is God the Bible teaches as in John 1:1-3. Romans 9:5. Colossians 1:15-17. Second Peter 1:1. Titus 2:13. First John 5:20. Moreover, to further see that Jesus is God all a person has to do is to compare the Old Testament with the New Testament to find out that Jesus is God. As in comparing Isaiah 45:22,23. with Philippians 2:5-11. to find out that Jesus is God. As in by comparing Psalm 89:8,9. with Matthew 8:23-27 to further confirm Jesus to be God. Just by comparing the New Testament books together will likewise show Jesus to be God as ,for example, comparing Romans 14:12. with John 5:22. will show just Who Jesus really is. The list can go ob but this should be enough to prove that Jesus is God.
    The imams and mullah will try to "explain" this all away by claiming that the Bible had been corrupted ,through time, by Christians. This claim ,very much, underestimate that Power of God to preserve and protect His Word and keep it intact , through time, and away from the corruption of men.
    In conclusion, in the light of the Bible,it can be seen for all those who are willing to see that Muhammad was a false prophet and the religion that he started,Islam, is a false religion, Proverbs 14:12. John 14:6.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous11:39 AM

    I'm old enough to remember when multiculti and political correctness started. When it first started it was simply a thing of choice ... I find your culture interesting and maybe I'll decide to learn something from or about it ... you find my culture interesting and maybe you'll decide to learn something from or about it. Then in a heart beat, it became this Monty Python-ish, Life of Brian thing where all aspects of it were mandatory. I suddenly had no choice about whether I found your culture interesting, I HAD to find it interesting. I no longer had the right of discrimination and judgment, I HAD to accept your culture and proclaim it was equal to or better than mine AND I COULD NOT judge it at all. I couldn't even comment on it in a negative way, regardless of how backward, savage, superstitious or insane I found it to be. This is the poison of it now. Obviously, therefore, it was not a good idea to begin with. This is where I disagree with CW. If it has turned out to be so poisonous and dangerous, obviously, we humans are not capable of utilizing it correctly at this point in history and or our evolution. Multiculturalism was not obviously cultural suicide when the concept first started, now it is. And, seriously, folks, mythology informs us of this in stories like the Tower of Babel. (It's an ancient story not just in the Hebrew and Christian Bibles). I'm not saying the old way of rampant racial discrimination was good, but this version of multiculturalism is not good either. We simply cannot continue this as is. This version of multiculti has apparently destroyed areas of our brains that protect us. It seems that we must toss out about forty years of multiculti programming by public schools and universities. We have substituted a group of racists and bigots for a group of sanctimonious, arrogant, control freak liberals who are at least as destructive, if not moreso, than the former. Sorry, folks, it just isn't working.
    Have a nice day,
    Free Speech

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous12:22 PM

    As multiculti and pc exist now, they simply turn our minds into drooling, suicidal, mushy stupidity. For you youngsters, although the foundations of such started maybe in the 1950's-1960's, pc/mc, in its current form really didn't show up until the 1990's and didn't get really rabid until very recently. Therefore, it is a new thing. It has not existed forever. And, it was based on little or nothing more than the neurosis of incessantly whining liberals. There was not law passed. There was no general agreement, no executive order, no memo. Just suddenly, liberals started correcting everyone like they owned the default position of righteousness over everyone in the country. And, unfortunately, out of politeness and leftover white guilt, we didn't fight back.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous12:20 AM

    Multiculturalism doesn't work, relativism doesn't work. There has to be one truth, all beliefs cannot be right, it does not make sense. The fact that western Culture is so tolerant and so against war, makes it very weak against a people who have no hesitation in wiping it out. If the IS gets to America, and promises peace in exchange for abiding by their rules, I would bet money on most people going along with it because they have absolutely no belief that there is one truth.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Richard.Oz10:10 PM

    @Walter Sieruk

    You're no different from all the other religious looneys.

    Blinded by dogma, you think your invisible sky-daddy is the one and only.

    Wake up, there is no god, no allah. Ergo, no mohumod, no jesus. Oh, they may have historically existed, but they were mere mortals, just like the rest of us.

    No one has special powers, no one can see a gawd - because there isn't one.

    Wake up from the dogma, the world will be a better place when all religion is wiped from society.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anne.r.keei11:59 AM

    Richard.Oz- I'm not disrespecting your " belief "but you sure are disrespecting mine as well as others. Regardless of your " knowledge" that there is no " Sky daddy"as you put it,lslam must be eradicated from the face of the earth. When a belief,idea,government,or various other instruments become detrimental to the whole world it's time to bond together to rid the evil and then move on to enjoy the things that we care about and rejoice in .Thing that don't stifle or extinguish the thing that makes us the human family.Islam is an evil ideology.Not a religion. It's a way of life that enslaves all , including its believers.Its nothing but a way to gain total power over all.

    ReplyDelete
  21. The author is not really as smart as he thinks. This is the third and final jihad. One day the govt will be forced to allow retaliation. Muslims were outlawed in the 18th century. We need to return to that if there is time. All cultures are not the same and some are better than others. To the author, in one culture 600 million people use the streets as a toilet. Maybe that is your culture but not mine. The muslims will never stop, never. The only way to defeat them is war. They will never reform and live in peace. Just watch Afghanistan and see what a peace treaty is to them. It's just a tactic to win the war and control with diaria law. The cells in the US can not hide forever. Soon the strikes will increase in frequency and ferocity. Estimates are 10k now in place in the US.Serious jihadest not wannabe morons. They will not just sit till they are to old to act. When the bible was written there was no islam. But read again and you will see the big picture. They are making 80k new martyrs every year. 1 million from 2009 to 2019 l0ok it up.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Walter Sieruk10:18 AM

    As the author of the main article has truly observed “Religious fervor has declined in the West.” That is true concerning the “Christian West.” For much of “Christianity” of Europe is just an empty shell that had ago gone apostate. The tragic and sad reality is the Islam is gaining converts in Europe, even among Europeans, is because many of them in the churches of Europe have minister who are no good because they no longer know, understand or preach the Bible .Therefore many of the native people of Europe know in apostate “Christianly “which is void of any actual value or worth.

    With this explained its best to define Islam and once defined contrast Islam with Bible.

    The way for a person to discover the truth concerning the nature of Jesus is found in the Bible verse Isaiah 8:20. This instructs “To the law of the testimony: If they speak not according this word, it is because there is no light in them.” In other words, if a religious teacher has teaching that are in contradiction to the Word, the Bible, then that teachers is a false teacher who teaches false doctrines. The Muslim clerics, as the imam and mullahs, teach and speak doctrines about God from the Quran .


    As the Quran in 112 teaches “He is God alone: God is the eternal begetteth not…” Likewise, this religious book which is the entire foundation of and for Islam further teaches in 19:35. “It is not befitting to God that He should beget a son.” In great contrast the Bible teaches in John 1:14. “The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, [and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,] full of grace and truth.” Likewise John 3:16 teaches “For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son… Then just a little further in verse 18 it is written about Jesus Who is “the only begotten Son of God. “ Other places in the Bible further teach that Jesus is the Son of God as in Matthew 16:15:16. Luke 1:35. John 3:36. First John 4:14. 15. 5:14,15. Moreover to be even more clear the Bible teaches that Jesus is the Son of God, Who is God the Father. As found in Matthew 3:16,17. First John 2:22,23. 4:14,15. Of course , it ,very much, needs to made even more specific . The Bible teaches that Jesus is also God the Son. As seen in Hebrew 1:8 and First John 5:20.


    The imams and mullahs as well as the other apologists for Islam will try to “explain” this all away. As in they will try brush off all those Bible verse off by making the claim that the Bible had been corrupted, through time, by Christians and that’s why the Bible reads as it does. That claim they make actually underestimate the Power of God to protect and keep His Word safe and intact ,through time, and away from the corruption of men.


    In conclusion ,with the above instruction of the way to find doctrinal truth in Isaiah 8:20 and in the light of the Bible verse provided it may be clearly seen, by all those who are willing to see, that Islam is in terrible doctrinal error and it is therefore a false religion, Proverbs 14:12. John 14:6.



    ReplyDelete
  23. Walter Sieruk11:28 AM

    An odd reality is that a numbers of Westerners are infected by the worthless, sick and unrealistic philosophies which are called “Multiculturalism” and “Cultural Relativity.”
    Which are the concepts that all culture are equal because this MC and C.R concept teaches the foolishness that all values derive their meaning within the specific social content. This folly of thinking leads, or misleads, many people to view every position as only “opinion” and that truth is only relevant to the person or society holding that view. In other words, discovering actual truth in impossible.
    These philosophies of multiculturalism and cultural relativity are absurd, nonsensical and contradictory. For example, to say “finding the truth is impossible “Is a statement of contradiction. For in making that statement that is saying, in essence, “I have found the truth which is finding the truth is not possible.” It should be obvious that this “War of Ideas” needs to and should have a solidly based in and on truth and not by a worthless “war of opinions” A person who embraces multiculturalism and cultural relativity would say about a scholarly truth teller about Islam with its different kinds of jihad , as Pamela Geller, that she is only giving her “opinion” on the subject.
    Such ignorance is appalling. Just look at history. If Americans had that MC and C.R. view ,as many Americans do today , then during World war II it would had been madness and a fools fight to go into battle against the military forces of Nazism if it was only just “opinion” that Hitler was wrong and evil. Likewise in this twenty-first century it would be nonsense, for example, for the US troops to fight and maybe even die in Afghanistan if it’s just “opinion” that the Taliban and Al Qaeda are wrong and evil.
    Two other examples of the falseness of MC and C.R. with its teaching that everything is only “opinion.” First is in the elate 1970’s two guys said “There are so many different religions that no one can ever know the truth about religion.” They were really saying that statement so dogmatically that they were self-contradicting. For they were saying that they know the truth about religion that is not one can know the truth about religion. Second, a shallow man in the 1980’s said when asked the question “Why do you always small talk ? You don’t ever talk about a topic that might have some value, as politics? After all , all thing are related “ That shallow C.R man replied “There are so many different political ideas that finding the true one is unattainable and all thing are not related.” The wisdom-less man was saying that he obtained the truth which is the he can’t obtain the truth and who does can is really truthfully say that all thing are not related in he can’t find the truth. How foolish, an obvious contradiction. What is needed to counter this nonsense C.R./P.C. is the concept of “Absolutism.” Which a definition of this, with the scope of the topic, is “An absolute standard or principle .” In this “war of idea’s it’s the Bible with its absolute standards and principles to stand firm against Islam is its different types of jihad with its many evils. In conclusion, in this War of Ideas a firm foundation for truth may be found in the Bible and not the weak folly multiculturalism and cultural relativity in which everything is “opinion.”


    ReplyDelete
  24. " Is it because western powers, in their colonizing days, had divided and conquered the Middle East, and for decades kept them weak? Is it because after defeating the U.S.S.R. in Afghanistan they have a newfound confidence? Is it because they learned something (from the CIA perhaps) during that conflict about training soldiers that they're now using in service of jihad? "

    Yes, what happened to galvanise muhameddans and give them a new confidence are what is stated above. The defeat of the mighty Soviet Russia by the jihadis gave them a new confidence. It was like the Battle of Badr which was decisive in turning Muhamed's fortunes. Unfortunately it was the CIA who enabled that by funding and training them covertly. Kissinger is on record for saying that, yes we know muslims will be upset that infidels are in their land, and made use of those grievances to incite and fund terrorists to defeat the Soviets. Unfortunately, these jihadis, flushed with success, went on to dream that the muslim caliphate was achievable and went on to create mayhem in places like Philippines, Yugoslavia, Kashmir/India etc. Some of these were with the connivance of the CIA.

    The other important factor was the Islamic revolution in Iran. No doubt they were Shia, but all muslims including sunnis found a new confidence that islam would achieve victory over the infidels and some utopian paradise of islam would be achieved. I was in a muslim sunni country when this happened, it was amazing to watch the change in the muslims as this happened. They become very religious, women adopted the hijab,the distinction between muslim and infidel became palpable. Since then the country and other muslim countries degenerated into increasing islamism.

    Of course other factors are there, but don't forget the factors I cited as a powerful morale boost to the muslim mind.

    Al

    ReplyDelete
  25. Thank you for this article. Such good insight and also loved reading the comments.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Someone wrote in with this comment:

    Your assessment is 100% spot on. I am Canadian but I lived in England and currently also live in Spain. The problem as I see it is that we who see the truth are getting old. The next generation has been educated to accept this. They will walk right into it. Sometimes I think that this takeover must happen before the liberal left will truly wake to the reality of radical islam in our midst. I so applaud and admire your efforts to educate people in a calm, realistic and intelligent way. You are one of the last warriors of this time. Bless you.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Multiculturalism is not an ‘absolute truth’, it is a methodology and partially true up to a point. Intention to see others clearly, unprejudiced by jingoistic pride, is surely a worthy intent; but what if we see a dogma of enmity, and actions based on this?

    People may be afraid to act against it because they fear regressing to what they hoped to leave behind by the openness of multiculturalism. Some outwardly may pit ‘multiculturalism’ against what they see as ‘non-multiculturalism’ (a pair of opposites) emanating from their perceived/appropriated ‘own side’, even while excusing others embraced by that ‘multiculturalism’ who would destroy their civilisation. This ‘multiculturalism’, being non-multiculturalist when it comes to accepting something that appears as ‘non-multicultural’ on its (perceived) ‘own side’, logically defeats its own stand and fails as an absolute dogma.

    I think that, while people may value clear seeing, they may be afraid of an emotion like hate in themselves—it is not that they never experience a feeling or mental state they identify as ‘hate’, but they do not want to rally it in the way they fear may be necessary to fight Islamic orthodoxy. If a mental formation they identify as ‘hate’ arises, they identify with the hate; and they do not want to feel that they ARE hate, but they do not know what to do about it, apart from try to avoid situations that may rouse it. Unfortunately, due to the pressing nature of Islamic ingress, we do not have time as a civilisation to deal with what to do about this (mis)identification with sensations and mental states, but I think people need to believe that it is at least possible to actively oppose something like orthodox Islam without filling themselves with hate about it. Some may think, “How can you oppose something you do not hate; surely opposition is a form of ‘hate’?”, which is just to tie oneself in the same logical knots as thinking multiculturalism is ‘beyond opposites’.

    Some multiculture dogmatists accuse of hatred and bigotry those who try peaceably to talk factually about Islam: exhibiting the very traits they are decrying, they appear not to look at their own motivation, which may at this point be hidden from themselves. This activity may signal a pyschospiritual issue, where people are trying to get to some ‘safe ground’ where they can think they are ‘right’. Of course, ‘being right’ is a righteous and wise thing to wish, but ‘rightism’, where it is more about pride and self-justification/other-condemning for the sake of pride and self-righteousness, rather than owning ones responsibility for ones choices and actions, adds an extra, unwholesome layer to a genuine good wish. Such people may need to face the hatred in themselves. Hatred is surely antithetic to the very peace and fairness they wish for others; but if they do not know what to do about it in themselves, how can they demand others to know and do better? With this sobering thought, even if they do not become actively helpful in opposing orthodox Islam, at least they may thence refrain from further opposition to those who do.

    If people want to ‘go beyond opposites’ they have to ‘go beyond’ the opposites of ‘opposites and beyond opposites’: of course there is no ‘beyond’ of a relative nature (as any relative ‘beyond’ would just be another thing amongst things, state among states). So one is stuck with making choices. The standing down of non-Muslims who fight those trying to expose and oppose Islamic ingress could be one such choice, and an improvement.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Multiculturalism is not an ‘absolute truth’, it is a methodology and partially true up to a point. Intention to see others clearly, unprejudiced by jingoistic pride, is surely a worthy intent; but what if we see a dogma of enmity, and actions based on this?

    People may be afraid to act against it because they fear regressing to what they hoped to leave behind by the openness of multiculturalism. Some outwardly may pit ‘multiculturalism’ against what they see as ‘non-multiculturalism’ (a pair of opposites) emanating from their perceived/appropriated ‘own side’, even while excusing others embraced by that ‘multiculturalism’ who would destroy their civilisation. This ‘multiculturalism’, being non-multiculturalist when it comes to accepting something that appears as ‘non-multicultural’ on its (perceived) ‘own side’, logically defeats its own stand and fails as an absolute dogma.

    I think that, while people may value clear seeing, they may be afraid of an emotion like hate in themselves—it is not that they never experience a feeling or mental state they identify as ‘hate’, but they do not want to rally it in the way they fear may be necessary to fight Islamic orthodoxy. If a mental formation they identify as ‘hate’ arises, they identify with the hate; and they do not want to feel that they ARE hate, but they do not know what to do about it, apart from try to avoid situations that may rouse it. Unfortunately, due to the pressing nature of Islamic ingress, we do not have time as a civilisation to deal with what to do about this (mis)identification with sensations and mental states, but I think people need to believe that it is at least possible to actively oppose something like orthodox Islam without filling themselves with hate about it. Some may think, “How can you oppose something you do not hate; surely opposition is a form of ‘hate’?”, which is just to tie oneself in the same logical knots as thinking multiculturalism is ‘beyond opposites’.

    Some multiculture dogmatists accuse of hatred and bigotry those who try peaceably to talk factually about Islam: exhibiting the very traits they are decrying, they appear not to look at their own motivation, which may at this point be hidden from themselves. This activity may signal a pyschospiritual issue, where people are trying to get to some ‘safe ground’ where they can think they are ‘right’. Of course, ‘being right’ is a righteous and wise thing to wish, but ‘rightism’, where it is more about pride and self-justification/other-condemning for the sake of pride and self-righteousness, rather than owning ones responsibility for ones choices and actions, adds an extra, unwholesome layer to a genuine good wish. Such people may need to face the hatred in themselves. Hatred is surely antithetic to the very peace and fairness they wish for others; but if they do not know what to do about it in themselves, how can they demand others to know and do better? With this sobering thought, even if they do not become actively helpful in opposing orthodox Islam, at least they may thence refrain from further opposition to those who do.

    If people want to ‘go beyond opposites’ they have to ‘go beyond’ the opposites of ‘opposites and beyond opposites’: of course there is no ‘beyond’ of a relative nature (as any relative ‘beyond’ would just be another thing amongst things, state among states). So one is stuck with making choices. The standing down of non-Muslims who fight those trying to expose and oppose Islamic ingress could be one such choice, and an improvement.

    ReplyDelete