“Islamic Bondage” and the death of the West

Four important pieces on Islam and the West.

1) Vanderleun brings us what he calls a counter-intuitive essay by Kip Watson at Truth and Hope. Watson’s thesis is that the majority of the world’s Muslims are captives along the lines of the ancient Jews, and that there are plenty of Pharaohs to be found.

The Muslims of the West have no Moses, but they have a thousand Pharaohs.

Pharaoh is a product of the West, but he is not ruler in the nations of the West. Pharaoh is not Prime Minister Howard or President Bush.

Pharaoh is the one who keeps the slaves in bondage. Pharaoh is the one who whispers to them that their mainstream neighbours are racists who hate them. Pharaoh is the one who seeks to isolate these communities who have never been exposed to freedom of speech, the better to convert them into Left wing vote blocs. Pharaoh is the one who, unasked on their behalf, attacks the Christian traditions of their mainstream neighbours.

It is a thought-provoking piece that deserves reading and discussion.

2) Hugh Hewitt excerpts an interview with Fr. Fession on trends in Europe, Pope Benedict’s take on Islam and the west, and where it may all be heading.

3) Mark Steyn’s incredibly important essay on the demographics involved and how they will affect our future. I have linked to this before, but if you have not read it, you should. It is the impetus for many of these discussions, this week.

4) Back to Vanderleun who wonders about toying with genocide.

The “clash of civilizations” is real. I think there is something to be said for viewing the vast majority of Muslims sympathetically, although I don’t know if I would concede that they are “slaves” so much as simply disenfranchised and bereft of opportunity. In too many cases they are kept out of the 21st century marketplace of both ideas and goods, which leaves their culture somewhat stagnated and economically impovished – precisely the problem which visionary President Bush is trying to remedy in order to bridge the growing chasm between Islam and the West, which some will not understand, no matter how many times you (or in this case, Neo-neocon) explain(s) it to them.

America is looking at the gap squarely and expending political capital and human life and human energy to try to make what is apparently an unstoppable trend into something with which both Islam and the West can live. A very tall order. We don’t even know if it is do-able. But no one else is willing to even try…not complacent Europe, not status quo, conciliatory Democrats, and try we must! Those of us who support the vision are doing so based almost wholly on the belief that all human beings desire liberty. I believe they do.

Islam is on the march – if not radically, than at the very least, by sheer numbers. Whether one wishes to look at that or not, it’s true. Europe will not forever be able to keep it “fenced in” in the Islamic ghettos. The left will not be able to subdue it with speeches about “tolerance” and Kumbaya-fests, which try to gloss over real differences with happy-talk. The ugly truth is, the feminist and “inclusivits” and gay-rights platforms will all be plundered by Islamofascist extremists, and the rest of the Muslim world will remain poor and without hope, unless the bridge America is trying to build is actually completed and Muslims are free to walk across it and engage constructively with the West- not to abandon their faith, but hopefully to enlarge it. It is beyond me how anyone, whether on the left or on the right, can wish for anything but success in this endeavor.

Talk “tolerance” all you want. Without the bridge, it will be nothing but hot air, and it will eventually scald us all.

UPDATE: Dr. Sanity takes a look at the ways of viewing and addressing this clash.

Kobayashi Maru writes about how Iran complicates things, and what is most important. Both Koba and Sanity have excellent links to Siggy, Shrinkwrapped and others. They in turn also have good links. There is a lot to read out there, and it’s perhaps imperative that we start paying as much attention to this issue as, oh, I don’t know…the Valerie Plame story?

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • Joseph

    It seems to me that the first step is to acknowledge how religious the Muslim world is–that it is a place where whether you believe in God, what you believe about Him, and what you do about it still really matters.
    /
    I don’t think these United States have ever been “religious” in that sense. I don’t think Europe has genuinely been so since the Thirty Years War.
    /
    The conflict between the Muslim world and the Secular world is not the same conflict as that between Muslims and Christians or between Muslims and Jews.
    /
    All three conflicts exist, but the conflict of Islam and Secularity is the conflict that matters most because that is the real ‘clash of civilizations’. Most other religions lost that conflict long ago. The world outside the predominance of Islam is Secular by default.
    /
    It is not a conflict about what kind of religion will prevail, but about whether religion itself will really count, will really matter in the collective life of the nation-state, or will it become, as it has always been here, a matter of personal conversion and private conviction.
    /
    I, for one, strongly suspect that most in the Muslim world are not all that disconnected from the 21st century world of goods and ideas. The problem, from their vantage point, is that they may be far too connected to it already, and are in the process of losing the strong collectivity of Islam since the days of the Prophet forward.
    /
    We cannot change this dilemma. We can influence how Islam responds to it. But we can’t do even this unless we understand what the dilemma for Islam [radical or moderate] really is.
    /
    So far, we don’t.

  • Pingback: CaNN :: We started it.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X