Taking down the thought police is just the warm up.
Obama Girl – at the front of the line. Right?
Glavin on on Afghanistan.
Add yours in the comments.
Taking down the thought police is just the warm up.
Obama Girl – at the front of the line. Right?
Glavin on on Afghanistan.
Add yours in the comments.
TG – I think the moderate voices of Muslims are going to come more from actions than from rhetoric. Not everyone ‘acts’ through words; most people..just act.
So, in their daily life, moderate Muslims will, more and more, work with other people. In the ME, the key driving factor will be economic. The tactic of breaking down Islamic fascism in the ME, is economic networking. And open talk about the need for more rights for the people, more talk against harsh punishments etc. We do the talking. Not them. And we and they establish the economic networks.
The ME can’t last as a one-industry town, so to speak. They have to move out of that one resource, oil, which is ‘owned’ by one tribal elite with revenues redistributed to the powerless others…and into a diverse market economy.
The UAE, eg Dubai, are already recognize this; they are modoernizing their economy; they realize they have to educate their people to participate in that economy. The people will move into pluralism, democracy and global interaction by their economic actions. There’s no need to talk about it.
Yes, there are Islamic scholars who are immersed in the ‘talk’, who are claiming that The Texts can be interpreted to sustain modernity and democracy. That’s very helpful as a counter to the fascists. But, the greatest counter to fascism is an open economy networked to democratic states.
The danger of Islamic fascism is not so much in the ME, which is moving out of tribalism and into a civic mode..slowly, slowly..but inexorably. The danger at the moment is the isolate thug-groups in the multicultural West.
Just as we have thug-groups here engaged in touting anti-poverty, socialism, communism etc, but who are, psychologically, just thugs – there are the same in Muslim societies.
But the danger in these groups is that the Islamic ideology is isolated from reality, from having to moderate its agenda faced with the hard facts of economic reality and local laws, and local plurality and local democracy.
Multiculturalism isolates immigrant groups into mini-states! Their ideology becomes supreme in these mini-states – unaffected by contact with the local economy, local laws, local people.
It then moves into a Pure Ideology. Pure words. Pure text. Totally unaffected by contact with opposition, debate, other people. That’s what multiculturalism and political correctness does.
These ideologies, as Pure, become emotional havens for, not merely the thugs, but the people who aren’t assimilated into the local city and economy. They become the Ideals – and the West has to stop these Isolate Havens, because they breed cults.
The other important voice, however, is that of women. It is disgusting that the western feminists are showing their ‘true colours’ by their lack of support for Islamic women. However, more and more Islamic women are rejecting the tribal mode of life (patriarchy, sharia law, etc). Again, these will emerge more in the form of action than in words. Actions..are first.
Fascist Friday, February 8th:
7pm Main Lecture NAKBA AND THE RIGHT OF RETURN
Ryerson University Library building @ 350 Victoria St Room #: LIB 72
Featuring
– Ward Churchill, of the “Little Eichmann’s”
Former Professor in Ethnic Studies at University of Colorado at Boulder, author of A Little Matter of Genocide, Fantasies of the Master Race, From a Native Son, and many more.
– Mohammad Ali Khalidi, featuring “Kill the apes and pigs”
A Palestinian Professor of Philosophy at York University. He has wrote and lectured on Palestinian refugees in Lebanon and the right of return.
– Nagi Farah, featuring, “Drive them into the sea”
Palestinian Refugee and survivor of 1948 Nakba
includes PHOTOSHOPPED VISUAL DISPLAY
—————-
ET,
“By the way, are you another name for Irwin Daisy? The two of you seem twinned with each other.”
Are you becoming paranoid? Starting to imagine that I’m secretly writing other peoples posts? Is it upsetting that nobody shares your irrational point of view that Islamofascism has nothing to do with the Quran, Hadith, Sira and Mohammad? Is it irritating that you can’t find one shred of evidence to prove your theory and disprove that the texts and teaching of the texts was and is Islam? Finding it difficult to find others to corroborate your theory, especially Muslims?
This is seriously strange behaviour.
You need to read the blog Gates of Vienna and search their info on a European Group of leftists that call themselves Antifascist Action and many variations of that moniker… they are Violent, Criminal and pernicious with chapters across the Continent and into Russia even.
The advocate violence and are responsible for attacks on public figures including politicians.
They are active fifth columnists and quizlings in European events and may be responsible for spreading propaganda through disinformation efforts.
LGF’s Charles Johnson quite likely was duped by their efforts in this regard.
Not surprisingly the Left Loving Media are ignoring them and their activities. So are socialist Governments.
Search Results on AFA
Know Your Enemy!
Boob Rae, unelected, unaccountable to Parliament, Mo Strong’s nephew, speaks to the Muslim Taliban crime bill:
“Liberal foreign affairs critic Bob Rae said the crime bill was “not a contentious matter.”
Where is Citoyen Dion?
Liberals: soft on Taliban; soft on crime.
Conservatives “to introduce confidence motion on crime bill”
http://tinyurl.com/2ml2m6 (ctv)
…-
No, ET, Irwin Daisy and I are not twins, clones, or otherwise connected.
It is disingenuous to suggest that a very brief blog posting can provide all material evidence that you request. Just as it would be disingenuous of me to insist that you adduce reams of scholarly research to prove his assertions wrong. Let’s start with something quick and dirty. Can you name a moderate Muslim leader who has demonstrable influence in the Islamic community and who is not marginalised in the West? Opinion poll evidence and content analysis of the MSM would suffice for now.
I have never agreed that the texts alone adequately explain Islamofascism. Islam has varied in its extremism through time, between sects and from area to area despite the Trilogy remaining essentially constant.
Your point regarding tribalism is well taken. Are you are looking forward to the publication of Philip Carl Salzman, Culture and Conflict in the Middle East (reviewed here by Daniel Pipes) on 19 February? Or have you had an advance look?
Thanks, TG.
MND, I look forward to looking at the Tariq Ramadan book when time allows.
irwin daisy. Stop it right there. Don’t move into personal attacks. Stick to the issues.
I disagree with your focus on Texts as causal of belief and behaviour. So do others. OK? Focusing on texts or objects or oral tales as causal of belief/behaviour is also called ‘symbolic causality’. In anthropology and sociology, it was a dominant paradigm in the 1930-70s. It was heavily critiqued as inadequate to explain how those texts/articulated beliefs emerged within a collective – and were accepted by the collective – in the first place.
Your focus on the Hero as agential in creating an ideology (Hero, Great Man, Founder, etc) is another aspect of your analysis. You focus on Islam as created by one individual, and ignore the historical context of the belief system, ignore why it was accepted in the first place, why it remained within the collective. This focus on the Agential Hero is also, I suggest, another error in your analysis. It reduces a complex historical phase to one agential cause: The Hero.
I don’t agree that my view that Islamic fascism is irrational; it’s based on a thorough empirical and rational understanding of demographics, economic modes and political modes. You don’t work in those areas of analysis. I do. There is a great deal of analysis of societies using these three aspects, and I don’t need to validate my analysis by listing them.
You disagree that population size, growth and migration are relevant to socioeconomic and political behaviour. Fine – you consider that the only causal factor is their written ideology.
You disagree that biomic reality, ecological attributes and economic mode are relevant factors in defining socioeconomic and political behaviour. Fine – that’s your decision.
You disagree that there are different types of political structure, and that these differences are directly connected to population size, which is linked to economic mode. Fine – that’s your decision.
The fact remains, you know nothing of these areas of research – and for you to tell me that they are irrational or without a shred of proof, is arrogant.
As I’ve said before, we’ll have to ‘agree to disagree’. You can stick to your Texts as causal of all behaviour. I reject that; I look to the economic and political systems and population pressures.
If the liberals expect an election to be based on one issue only they are very wrong.
PMSH statement last time re the Senate will be proven right.
There will be at least 3 issues, The Crime Bill,
Afghan, leadership, and the budget.
Holy Cow, Dion just got mad in question period.
charles macdonald – as I said, the moderate movement in the Muslim world is emerging via actions, not words. Ideological words, in my view, always come AFTER the actions.
Just as, in the Reformation phase, the market economy, civic mode of governance and individual thought emerged before the philosophical analysis of this mode of behaviour.
No, I can’t name either a radical or a moderate Islamist. The reason is that my mind doesn’t work with names. I always used to tell my students at the beginning of term, that they were not to be upset if I couldn’t remember their names or faces. I just don’t have that ability.
Your insistence that I come up with a name from the MSM doesn’t correlate with someone who has influence in the Muslim community. The MSM might provide us constantly with names of, for example, Islamic extremists, but, they might not have great influence in the Islamic community.
I’m focusing on the actions, not the rhetoric, and my point is that the actions of a modern industrial economy linked to global economic networks will marginalize Islamic extremism – because Islamic extremism can’t operate an industrial economy. And, the population base of the ME is too large for a non-industrial economy. It’s as basic as that. Three factors: population, economic mode, political mode. Nothing to do with the texts – which are made by man and can be changed by man.
Iggy is reading his questions from a piece of paper, who wrote them.
The issue isn’t how the texts were derived.
Frankly, at this juncture, this is of mere academic — in the pejorative sense — interest.
It matters not one whit. Who cares!
What matters is the vangard of Caliphate Islam (a gentler, but still accurate term) and what motivates them, which is Islam, pure and evil and textual. What motivates them to be motivated by the pure texts is a perception that decline in the Muslim world is due to the displeasure of Allah due to a moving away from Islam — being tained by Western influence.
Charles MacDonald asks the money question!
Can you name a moderate Muslim leader who has demonstrable influence in the Islamic community and who is not marginalised in the West?
This is what I’ve tried to argue on earlier threads. Moderate muslims — who tend to be Western academics, both sincere and taqiyya practitioners — have no traction.
As I’ve pointed out before, ET lacks “street smarts” on this issue and lives too much in her head.
I suspect that if ET were in the Pentagon she would have favoured the firing of Coughlin — who thankfully has been re-hired. That she’d be a sucker for Muslim outreach.
charles macdonald – thanks for the link to Philip Salzman. His book and its analysis seems excellent; that’s exactly the nature of tribalism.
Tribalism is a well-known mode of socioeconomic and political organization; it’s been well-studied by many anthropologists, and its functions of enabling a small to medium size population to operate in competitive land bases is well-known – as well as its focus on stability and therefore, inability to adapt. As I’ve long argued on this blog, it’s the key factor explaining the ME ‘mind’.
me no dhimmi – could you explain what ‘street smarts’ means in this instance? It doesn’t make any sense to me.
I disagree that the origin of an ideology is irrelevant. I think understanding the economic and political causes explains a good deal of the ideology, and helps to explain how it can be changed.
The ‘moving away from Islam’, ie, the notion of a Pure Islam is a fascist theme, and one has to examine – politically and economically – why a fascist theme has emerged in Islam. See Lawrence Wright’s analysis of the emergence of Al Qaeda for this.
My explanation for this emergence is that a tribal political and economic infrastructure is dysfunctional within the exploding population base and industrialization of the post WWars Middle East.
I’ve said above and before, that the changes to Islam will come from the ‘ground up’, ie, not from the words but from actions. Words of analysis and explanation always come after actions.
I don’t know what you mean that ‘I’d be a sucker for Muslim Outreach’. [What the heck is that?]
No, I wouldn’t have fired Coughlin but I certainly wouldn’t have had only him or his perspective within my research team. I’d want all views on the team.
The fact that the MSM provides us only with blips of ‘Bin Laden Has Spoken Yet Again’ (ignoring that the guy never moves, never blinks, and hasn’t been seen walking or alive for years…) doesn’t mean that only extremists have viability in the Islamic world. It means only that the MSM takes delight in such images. The Islamic world will change from the ‘bottom up’, from actions not words – and the actions are firmly based around economic viability.
Mitt Romney throws in the towel!
Romney has just announced he is “suspending” his campaign for president. Now the question is: is he angling for VP, hoping that septegenerian McCain will keel over in office?
And now the question: will McCain pick Romney for VP, hoping that he can help deliver typically Dem states like Mass and Mich? Or does he pick Huckabee to shore up support in the South and the midWest?
A professional engineer with 40 years of nuclear safety experience and former member of the CNSC weighs in on Keen’s claims about the safety of the Chalk River reactor. I believe this guy.
(If link doesn’t work, look for John Waddington’s article in the opinion section of the Ottawa citizen.)
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/opinion/story.html?id=313d92a4-a91f-404d-87f2-ca85b93d5475
“Don’t move into personal attacks.”
Personal attacks? Who started this?
“I disagree with your focus on Texts as causal of belief and behaviour”
There is no such thing as Islam without the trilogy, as well as the actions and sayings of its founder. Do you disagree with this?
“You focus on Islam as created by one individual, and ignore the historical context of the belief system, ignore why it was accepted in the first place, why it remained within the collective.”
Muslims are commanded to emulate Mohammad, ‘the perfect man,’ whether they all do so or not. This is fact. However, on the contrary, I have presented mounds of historical context of the belief system as mandated and justified by the teachings.
Islam was not accepted in the first place (the Meccan years), because it was weak and Mohammad had not yet imagined his full political doctrine. During this period, Mohammad collected perhaps a couple of hundred followers. It became acceptable and ballooned to 10,000 plus adherents after the commands for violence, extortion and the shared ‘spoils of war’ were revealed. It then was transformed into a violently political, pseudo-religious ideology.
The early Caliphs had their own agendas. – Uthman, destroying the existing 26 Qurans and writing his own version, which is the one in use to this day, for example. Probably the first in proto-Arabic, as well. Regardless, the trilogy was used as the vehicle of Islamic jurisprudence, facilitating and sanctifying all societal, political and military edicts, decrees and endevours. Just as in Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc., today.
“You disagree that population size, growth and migration are relevant to socioeconomic and political behaviour.”
I do not disagree that certain lab conditions will produce a unique strain. Islam is, afterall, a uniquely desert-Arab ideology. And they say so themselves. It is alien to other cultures, from the texts and teachings in Arabic transmitted to a mostly non-Arabic speaking ummah; to their imposition of Arabic names and dress on all cultures. Beyond being alien, in my opinion, it’s bizarre and cartoonish when applied to other cultures.
“You disagree that there are different types of political structure, and that these differences are directly connected to population size, which is linked to economic mode.”
As I’ve said before, watch Turkey, Pakistan and Malasia. When there’s unrest in the populace; if they feel Islamic ideology is threatened; or somehow they collectively feel their honour has been diminished, or threatened – they go to the default mode of fundamental, Islamofascism – often in an attempt to regain the so-called supreme ‘glory’ years.
“You don’t work in those areas of analysis. I do. There is a great deal of analysis of societies using these three aspects, and I don’t need to validate my analysis by listing them.”
Followed by,
“The fact remains, you know nothing of these areas of research – and for you to tell me that they are irrational or without a shred of proof, is arrogant.”
Arrogance personified.
BTW, I said that your rejection of the texts as the basis for fundamental Islam is irrational.
‘”will McCain pick Romney for VP, hoping that he can help deliver typically Dem states like Mass and Mich? Or does he pick Huckabee to shore up support in the South and the midWest?” — I think he should pick Colin Powell.
Liberal Keith Martin branded by MSM with the M-word.
MSM casts Martin out of the Liberal caucus.
Citoyen Dion say: Au revoir.
…-
“Martin refuses to delete motion
VICTORIA — Maverick Island Liberal MP Keith Martin”. http://tinyurl.com/2py573 (province)
Tribalism? You must be kidding!
You guys are just discovering this?
I suggest you start looking at Tribalism as a root cause of the inability of most of the worlds people to integrate into a modern society.
Tribalism is Incompatible with modern society!
The Doctrine of multi-culti denies this fundamental truth and the proponents refuse to allow debate on the matter. It is THE root cause of failure in the third world and guarantees the ultimate failure of all the multi-culti utopian plans.
From Hot Air
Which is worse, the old guy who picks his nose in public or the cable network shill whose reaction to the pick is “Good for him!”
http://www.redlasso.com/ClipPlayer.aspx?id=9bd87065-4bd5-4ef9-ba08-9c60457a8bbc
“Sexsomnia “ Look It Up
ET – well contructed – if theoretical – view on moderate Islam and the future.
But, I suspect you would benefit from more discussion and discourse with moderates within Islam.
Recently, I have. And I can state that what you see in the future, was what I (naively) thought, some weeks ago.
I don’t think the same way anymore.
hardboiled – I’m not sure what you are implying, but of course I’ve discussed my theories with moderate Muslims. And with people involved in social analysis. No, I won’t provide any names.
irwin daisy – a debate is not a personal attack. But you get very angry when someone disagrees with you, and you start to make accusations of incompetence (not one shred of evidence, irrational, etc). That’s what I’m talking about.
I repeat – I disagree completely with your focus on the texts of Islam as causal of Islamic fascism.
As for your statement that: “There is no such thing as Islam without the trilogy, as well as the actions and sayings of its founder. Do you disagree with this?” –
I completely disagree with YOUR USE of the texts and the ‘actions and sayings of its founder’. Your use is determinist and linear. I disagree that a society is a mechanical clone of a text. Would you say that there is no such thing as Christianity without the texts and Jesus? Would you reduce Christianity to this?
You state that Muslims are commanded to ’emulate Mohammed’. So? Explain why. Don’t you realize that this is a tactic to promote stability and reject questions? Why was such a mode of behaviour promoted?
My point remains, you ignore the historical and economic context of the emergence of Islam. And the historical and economic context of the emergence of islamic fascism.
You state: “Islam was not accepted in the first place (the Meccan years), because it was weak and Mohammad had not yet imagined his full political doctrine”
Weak’ is an evaluative term. Weak in what manner? Why, when he ‘imagined’ his ‘full political doctrine’ – was it accepted? Again, you ignore the economic and political context.
There is absolutely no such thing as ‘lab conditions’ with regard to population dynamics. Or with regard to any social structures.
Furthermore, you are putting the ‘cart before the horse’ so to speak, when you say that Islam is a ‘uniquely desert-Arab’ ideology. Please explain what the nature of a desert-Arab is, that would lead to Islam.
Why is it ‘alien’ to other cultures? For example? Please explain.
You evaluate it as ‘bizarre and cartoonish’ when applied to other cultures. Could you explain what is, never mind bizarre, but ‘cartoonish’ when Islam is applied to other cultures?
You still don’t understand the relation between demographics, economic and political mode. You refuse to accept that such an infrastructure exists, and remain, I consider, trapped within the Texts. No, it isn’t arrogance to inform you that there is a great deal of research about these three systems and their interlocked natures. It’s fact.
Your list of Turkey, Pakistan and Malaysia has nothing to do with these three systems. There is no ‘default mode’ of fundamentalist Islam. These countries are in trouble for a variety of demographic, economic and political reasons, and Al Qaeda, a modernist movement of Islamic fascism, is making use of this weakness. It isn’t a default mode of Islam.
Again, as usual, we will continue to disagree.
Mr. Chavez, meet Mr. Contractual Law….
http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNews/idUSN0744656820080207
Islam: head-choppers-off.
…-
“Iranian Ayatollah: Arab Countries Should Have Chopped Off Bush’s Head
Speaking of President Bush’s sword dance with the Saudis, here’s the Iranian reaction, from Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, Chairman of the Iranian Guardian Council.
[…]
Religion of peace!”
(Click picture to play video.)
http://tinyurl.com/2kyzw2 (lgf)
ET,
Thank you for taking the time to carefully answer my question along the lines of what effective way could moderate Muslims be seen and heard.
I do agree with many facets of your overall views. Some of your theory is very good.
The most tangible part of your comments that seems to answer the, *How Moderates can be seen*, question, is this.
** The other important voice, however, is that of women. It is disgusting that the western feminists are showing their *true colours* by their lack of support for Islamic women. However, more and more Islamic women are rejecting the tribal mode of life (patriarchy, sharia law, etc). Again, these will emerge more in the form of action than in words. Actions..are first. **
Posted by: ET at February 7, 2008 1:15 PM
Agreed: [Actions and words together ]
This brings to mind the brave Muslim lady who speaks out to groups about what is wrong with Muslim leaders who twist Islam to their wrongful, power grabbing purposes.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gruIHLIH7qs&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=Tp-KbD43l0k
Wish there were more strong Muslims like her… There probably are. = TG
ET – sharia is incompatible with the notion of western liberal secularism.
Ask moderates to abandon sharia, and you’ll get a host of answers.
This tracks specifically to Arab (and Shiite) hatred of the House of Saud. While several reasons exist for this, the uneven application of sharia is a driving force – as it the presence of American troops blaspheming the holy land.
The bottom of it is that sharia cannot coexist with the notion that everyone is created equal, and is deserving of the same protections.
That is why I contest whether long term integration and evolution of the Islamic culture can proceed.
Or, as the British have acknowledged today by accepting sharia into the societal fabric, it cannot.
ET,
This is beyond ridiculous. You brought me into this ‘debate’ with the remark to charles macdonald, “By the way, are you another name for Irwin Daisy? The two of you seem twinned with each other.” This is somewhat disparaging, since you are implying that I am posting under another name. So stop attempting to twist this around into something else such as “a debate is not an attack” and that “you get very angry,” etc.
And, emphatically and obviously yes, there would be no Christianity without Christ and the NT. As there is no Islam without Mohammad and the Quran. Unless, of course, you tend towards conspiracy theories.
This is exactly why I think you are irrational in your views.
“Don’t you realize that this is a tactic to promote stability and reject questions? Why was such a mode of behaviour promoted?”
Of course I do, it’s called control. Your point is?
“Weak’ is an evaluative term. Weak in what manner? Why, when he ‘imagined’ his ‘full political doctrine’ – was it accepted? Again, you ignore the economic and political context.”
As is typical, you didn’t read my post, did you?
“It became acceptable and ballooned to 10,000 plus adherents after the commands for violence, extortion and the shared ‘spoils of war’ were revealed. It then was transformed into a violently political, pseudo-religious ideology.”
Mohammad was an Arab, who existed in a desert Arab territory, with all the unique characteristics of that time place. This culture was exported along with the political ideology through wars of conquest.
I said “in my opinion” I think it is cartoonish. It is odd for people of other cultures to wear clothes and adopt names obviously not of their own. This becomes more bizarre when they worship in a language they don’t understand. All in order to make the experience more authentic. So?
Furthermore, the Persion and Hindu cultures were higher cultures than the conquering and parasitic Islamic culture.
“No, it isn’t arrogance to inform you that there is a great deal of research about these three systems and their interlocked natures. It’s fact.”
With this twisted approach to debate, you’d make a terrific politician. That, once again, is not what I said. Go read my post.
Until you give me the respect of reading my posts and not misconstruing them, there’s no point to this exchange.
“Mohammad was an Arab, who existed in a desert Arab territory….” – Posted by: irwin daisy at February 7, 2008 5:10 PM
Wasn’t Christ a Jew who existed in a desert Jewish territory…? 8D
Sharia “law” is a religious “law”, it’s written into the tenets of the religion of Islam. It affects only those who believe in Islam, they are the ones who will follow it as they freely adhere to their religion.
What possible reason should their religious tenets be written into the laws of this country? Is it all about having legal control thus more control over forcing the women of Islam to obey? Is all about having a tighter rein on their women in this free Western Democracy?
Sorry ’bout above post, meant for another thread.
Keith Martin is a “maverick” MP for wading into the HRC free speech issue:
http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=91e424b3-d03b-496a-bdee-891cd26f9c05
hardboiled – yes, I fully agree; Sharia is incompatible with a modern democracy. It’s a tribal system that supports a tribal economic, political and social structure. I think it will be abandoned as they abandon tribalism.
irwin daisy – the answer to my suggestion that you and charles macdonald were ‘twinned’ need not have been instant anger on your part, but, a mere, ‘no, we are two separate posters’. That’s all. But you get immediately emotional and angry.
Now, my point about your comment about Islam and its texts/Mohammed vs the bible and Jesus – was that I reject your USE of the textual analysis. I don’t get your ‘conspiracy’ theory.
Why did the pre-Islamic pastoral nomadic population require control? Not control by Mohammed, but control over their existence as a particular economic mode? What was going on at the time in that area? That’s what’s important, and you ignore this.
You haven’t answered my question – why was the early ideology, according to you, ‘weak’, and why did it ‘balloon’…and become accepted? Surely you aren’t saying that it became such because it was warlike! One has to ask – why was warfare wanted and needed?
There’s no need to insult me and say that ‘as is typical’..that I didn’t read your post. I did read it. Your statement that it became warlike is NOT an answer as to WHY it was acceptable. It’s just a description. Description of behaviour is not analysis of behaviour. Again – why was it accepted?
You said: “Mohammad was an Arab, who existed in a desert Arab territory, with all the unique characteristics of that time place. This culture was exported along with the political ideology through wars of conquest.”
What was the unique culture of the time? Are you sure the culture was exported? Even in to different economic modes?
Could you give examples of people adopting clothes and names not their own? Do you think it is ‘cartoonish’ for Africans and other indigeneous peoples to wear suits and ties? To have names like John and Charles? Do you think it is cartoonish for them to worship Jesus and listen to songs and prayers in English? Is it cartoonish for them to adopt the English rule of law and democracy?
What is the point of your statement that “Furthermore, the Persion and Hindu cultures were higher cultures than the conquering and parasitic Islamic culture.” What, by the way, defines a ‘higher’ culture?
I do agree; there is no point in ‘debating’ with you, because you don’t debate. And, you have no knowledge of and reject the importance of the entwined ecological, economic and political structure. So- I guess, it’s back to your Texts.
no, Yesua was a Jew living in the Roman territory of Galilee, north of Samaria. It is a fertile low land of farms extending up to the higher elevations around Nazareth where it was more herding. its wasnt and isnt desert.
Hardboiled,
“Wasn’t Christ a Jew who existed in a desert Jewish territory…? 8D”
Certainly. However, the Galilean/Judean culture, in terms of clothes, language, superstition, etc., wasn’t essential to the faith and therefore wasn’t exported along with it.
LIz J,
I don’t think it’s just about women. It’s either a naive attempt at furthering the false construct of multiculturalism and tolerance. Or it’s a cynical attempt to control. Either way, in my opinion, it’s treason.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:First_century_palestine.gif
this map shows the Philistines have continously occupied the same approximate spot for 2000 years. they should be happy to have a wall.
Douglas:
OK, I’ll give it a try:
“Canada: we’re sort of OK, eh?”
Craig Oliver,on Mike Duffy Live,commenting on a possible election this spring,”It will be fun to put this government out of it’s misery.” Gee,Craig,you mean you don’t like Harper and friends?
REX MURPHY— being very un CBCpravda. I think CBCpravda keeps him around in case they ever have to feign balance.
http://www.cbc.ca/national/blog/video/rex_murphy/all_whipped_up.html
My question on sharia law,Will adapting sharia law result in a better society for all people in that society? I don’t think so and I am pretty sure that most men,along with virtually all free women,and the sexually-challenged would oppose adopting sharia.
cal2 – quite right; the ecological reality of the area which saw the development of Christianity was a fertile area, that was becoming more heavily populated with the introduction of Roman irrigation, roads, and law. Christianity is an ideology that supports different peoples assimilating and ‘loving each other’. That makes sense in this economic environment.
Islam, on the other hand, developed seven centuries later, four centuries after the adoption of Christianity as the ‘glue’ to hold the Roman Empire together. It was, I maintain, a militant reaction of a previously isolated pastoral nomadic economy to the Byzantine encroachment on their land base.
Cal2…
Thanks for the link…. I have been thinking that the Palistinians were acting like Philistines for some time and you have shown that that is what they are. so I guess the only thing a sensible sensitive person should do is stop calling them Palistinians and call them Philistines. There. I feel so much better now.
There you go again ET,
How do you know that I am emotional and angry? It appears, rather, that you are.
You don’t like having your theories challenged. Ironic that that’s exactly what your accusations are against Stephane Dion.
“Now, my point about your comment about Islam and its texts/Mohammed vs the bible and Jesus – was that I reject your USE of the textual analysis. I don’t get your ‘conspiracy’ theory.”
Once again, that’s not what I said. I questioned you on conspiracy theories. However, since you brought it up again, here’s your original statement:
“I completely disagree with YOUR USE of the texts and the ‘actions and sayings of its founder’. Your use is determinist and linear. I disagree that a society is a mechanical clone of a text. Would you say that there is no such thing as Christianity without the texts and Jesus? Would you reduce Christianity to this?”
It appears, that you would agree with Lenin’s statement that “religion is the opiate of the masses.” reducing religious faith to nothing more than a demographic, economic and political construct of control, therefore fitting your theory and your atheistic faith.
I have ignored nothing about Mohammad’s time and place, quite the contrary. Furthermore, the ‘why’ as far as your theory of tribal nomads responding to agrarian aggressors, can only be relevant to the time, not to its spread throughout history.
In fact, that’s what the Islamofascists say, everything is a defensive war.
“why did it ‘balloon’…and become accepted?” War has a purpose and it won’t be achieved unless it’s shared. In the Islamic case, it was narcistic, supremacist belief, avoidance of temporal and spiritual pain, as well as greed and lust – culminating in war booty. Today, it’s supremacist belief and avoidance of pain, for the lower caste anyhow. Although, the Quranic promises still stand in a resurgent Islam. The kaffir is still an animal, whos property is to be rightfully seized.
“There’s no need to insult me and say that ‘as is typical’..that I didn’t read your post. I did read it. Your statement that it became warlike is NOT an answer as to WHY it was acceptable. It’s just a description. Description of behaviour is not analysis of behaviour. Again – why was it accepted?”
From my earlier post, “after the commands for violence, extortion and the shared ‘spoils of war’ were revealed.”
As I said, typical. (You realize, ‘extortion’ refers to the jizya?)
I clearly gave reference to what I meant as Arabic culture. The only economic aspect of the cultural export was the jizya and war booty included in shariah law.
How about 300 million Mohammads? How about conspicuously Arabic names applied to ‘reverted’ Hindu’s, Persians, Anglo Saxons, Chechens, Phillipinos, etc., etc.
Do I think it’s silly for people to wear 7th century burkas, rather than modern clothes? Yes. Do I think it’s silly for people to speak a difficult and antiquated language that the majority don’t understand, like Arabic, in order to be true to their faith? Yes. Do I think it’s silly for most cultures to use Arabic names with guttural, foreign pronunciations? Yes. As I would with wide spread use of guttural Scottish/Gaelic, required for a religion as well.
So, what’s your point? That’s my opinion.
The rest of your post is highly argumentative, I won’t bother responding.
It was, I maintain, a militant reaction of a previously isolated pastoral nomadic economy to the Byzantine encroachment on their land base.
Is this the Patricia Crone thesis that another poster cited here a while back as way-out there radical?
I’ve never encountered this anywhere but from you ET. Anywhere.
And again, so what! Moreover, this now irrelevant argument feeds the jihadist grievance-machine. This is what bugs me most about your theory which leads to the conclusion that it’s push back against Christian aggression. It’s irrelevant NOW, and moreover it damages the counter-jihad (and that doesn’t just mean physical fighting!). By “street smarts” I mean, Wafa Sultan, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Nonie Darwish have it, and you’d don’t. You’re too cerebral — too academic (pejorative meaning).
Obviously you are right when you say that Shari’a law is incompatible with Democracy. I came to the same conclusion after — guess what — my own research and study of Islam, and therefore concluded that the whole “democracy” project, while noble in intent, was wrong-headed. Both Iraq and Afghanistan have shari’a based constitutions. A while back a young man in Afghanistan was sentenced to be executed for offending Islam. The sentence was over-turned due to international pressure [read: desire to keep the jizya flowing].
Both the left and the right were wrong about Political Islam. Read the Thornton piece linked at Posted by: Charles MacDonald at February 7, 2008 11:36 AM
Quick and dirty summary: the left’s argument about poverty was wrong, as was the right’s argument about the “the lack of freedom” for which Muslims have no desire at all. Nor do most Canadians, come to think of it.
On top of that, ET, your statement:
“a militant reaction of a previously isolated pastoral nomadic economy to the Byzantine encroachment on their land base.”
This is false and ahistorical. Nobody wanted that desert land. It was good for nothing. Neither is anybody else mentioned in the Hadith or Sira, other than resident Arab/Jewish tribes.
Your historical revisionism is preposterous.
In fact, that’s what the Islamofascists say, everything is a defensive war.
YES. INDEED. I make the same point just above.
Agreed, MND.
me no dhimmi – the fact that you haven’t encountered an historical analysis of a population that considers their economic mode and their reaction to another, intrusive economic mode, doesn’t mean that it’s invalid.
I suggest, by the way, that you check out Patricia Crone. Her argument is rooted in an analysis of the nature of pre-industrial societies in interaction/conflict with each other, in the ME. She uses original texts in Arabic, Hebrew, Greek..etc..
Her work relies heavily on original texts and descriptions of the historic events of the period. There’s a great deal of research on the economic activities of the period – from the pre-Christian through Roman through post-Roman times, in the ME. You can check this out.
See also Michael Cook who works with Crone. They reject relying only on the Islamic texts as historic and ideological sources and insist that you must rely on varied historical sources, archaeological and philological data.
Cook writes: “Virtually all accounts of the early development of Islam take it as axiomatic that it is possible to elicit at least the outlines of the process from the Islamic sources. It is however well-known that these sources are not demonstrably early. There is no hard evidence for the existence of the Koran in any form before the last decade of the seventh century, and the tradition which places this rather opaque revelation in its historical context is not attested before the middle of the eighth. The historicity of the Islamic tradition is thus to some degree problematic:”
This is an HISTORICAL analysis. My point in this, is that it is using non-Islamic sources to document the emergence and rise of Islam, and focuses on its relations with other socioeconomic populations in the area at that time.
An ecological economic analysis requires an understanding of the ecological nature of the area at the time, as well as an economic analysis outlining economic stresses of different economies.
I think these types of analysis are far more robust than an assertion that Islam emerged simply as the imagined ‘revelations’ of one single individual, who then, for some unstated reason, gathered tens of thousands of followers who, for another unstated reason, were all militants. That’s a pretty weak argument for the emergence and rise of Islam!
Why is it a weak argument? Because it is ‘psychological’. It focuses only on the psychological nature of ONE person, and the psychological nature (warlike) of his followers. I’m afraid that I don’t accept psychological reasons for social realities.
No, my theory isn’t ‘push back’ against Christian aggression. It’s certainly a reaction, but against a particular type of economy – settled agriculturalism. The fact that this economic mode moved into Christianity is utterly irrelevant. Christianity functioned to coalesce and assimilate previously more isolate and operationally hostile settlements.
But, the reactive rise of Islam, as a tribal mode of a pastoral nomadic economy (not a settled agriculture but a nomadic)…isn’t a reaction against Christianity. It’s an economic societal reaction.
I don’t see what’s wrong with analysis of WHY a particular ideology emerges and is powerful. The people you list are acknowledging WHAT is happening now, and rejecting the violence. I agree, but I go further, because I’m interested in how and WHY such a mode of belief and behaviour could arise in the first place – and WHY it has arisen again. There’s a deep difference between describing WHAT is happening and analyzing WHY it is happening. It’s easy to describe WHAT; but I think that the analysis of WHY must also be done.
I read the Thornton piece; didn’t agree. I think that enabling democracy in the ME is the only way to ‘break open’ the frozen mindset that they ahve trapped themselves within. Freedom isn’t an option when your economy moves into an industrial mode. The communists have learned that as well. It’s a requirement – or – your economy collapses. Simple as that.
Somalian you say…
“The pilots on board said a female passenger had attacked them and inflicted minor injuries before she was removed from the cockpit and contained.
The 33-year-old woman from Blenheim, who is originally from Somalia, also made threats of two bombs being on board.”
http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/1320238/1574444
“I am an American Arab Muslim from Saudi Arabia, the birth place of Islam and home to its holy shrines. While I agree and have been in the forefront all my life to promote democracy, cooperation, harmony and peaceful coexistence among all peoples, I find it exceedingly disingenuous to compare the American democratic values: Individual liberties, respect for and empowerment of the individual, religious freedom, freedom of the press, thought, expression, civil society, bill of rights, independent judicial system, transparency, accountability, tolerance of differences and protection of women’s and minority rights under the rule of universal laws with Arab and Muslim values now or ever. Such comparison is contradictory to the realities on the ground and distortion of historical facts. I agree that people to people cooperation, communication, understanding and exchange of ideas and information are essential and must be embraced, but the overwhelming majority of Arabs and Muslims are not allowed to express themselves in any form or shape without incurring death, incarceration, flogging, loss of jobs and accusations of being anti-Islam, CIA agents ant the mother of all treasons, Zionist agent, by their tyrannical rulers who govern in the name of God, Shariah and the Hadith.
Sincerely,
Ali Alyami”
This comment on Bruce Thornton article is in the same vein that Hirsi Ali states in her book “Infidel”. Though she embraced western values her fellow muslims in Holland rejected them though continuing to accept their largesse. She had to leave her religion as it is incompatible with western ideals.
Though ET makes good points especially that multiculturialism must go I fear the shear volume of muslims pouring into Canada and the west will ensure their mullahs will stamp out those who stray. ET do you believe we have the luxury of enough time to allow Islam to evolve from a theocracy to a religion?
The left/libs that seem to occupy so many vital pillars will continue with their appeasement and back-pedaling while the perpetually outraged theocracy escalates its demands. Interesting times ahead.
“the fact that you haven’t encountered an historical analysis of a population that considers their economic mode and their reaction to another, intrusive economic mode, doesn’t mean that it’s invalid.”
It’s invalid because it’s false. There is not one iota of historical evidence for your assertion that militant and political Islam is a result of a Byzantine incursion into the nomadic ‘Arabic’ desert lands. Nowhere. Certainly not in the Islamic texts. Which is the topic here – their ideology and resulting history.
In fact, even today, what would anybody want with Arabia other than the oil? What other exports do they have?
Your theory is invalid and false. As most of your analysis is of the ME.
For example:
Mahmoud Zahha, Hamas’ foreign minister told the Economist,
“We [Palestinians] were never an independent state in history,” he notes. “We were part of an Arab state and an Islamic state.”
http://www.economist.com/world/africa/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10609550
Care to prove your Palestinian theory to a ‘Palestinian?’
“The first sign of genius is contradiction.” – Oscar Wilde
There still might be hope.
ET:
Definitely didn’t mean to suggest that because my untutored self didn’t encounter it, it doesn’t exist! I have great admiration for your intelligence and scholarship and defer to it, and, frankly, like others, live in dread of being whacked by your trenchant analytical skills!
But even if your theory as to the emergence of Islam is sound, I just don’t see its relevance to the existential threat we face today — and I don’t mean from “terrorism”. Rather, from being eaten alive from within via the cultural jihad.
Perhaps if you explained how you would apply this theory to defeating the jihad, practical, pragmatic sorts like me and irwin daisy (and others) might be more receptive.
But to argue that today the Islamic texts are not central to the jihad shocks and alarms me. As Coughlin says, we need to take the jihadists and what they say — which is clearly based on the texts — seriously. We ignore this at our peril.
The counter-jihad is floundering becuase we have failed to named the enemy which is Political or Caliphate Islam. As someone amusingly put it on another thread, “war on terrorism” makes about as much sense as calling WW2 “war against tanks”.
* Received my Popper — volume 2! 🙁 Have now ordered volume 1! Lovely trade paperback.
** Ever heard of Eric Hoffer,the longshoreman/philosopher? I just started reading his “True Believers”, his first and quite short work.