The persistent Jut asks:
Isaac, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this: Two people grow up with the same religious/ideological background. One becomes a terrorist, one doesn't. Besides temper and a radical imam, what makes the difference?
He is basically asking: What's the difference between a non-Islamist and an Islamist? A complicated, rambling, and perhaps unsatisfactory answer follows.
From a young age I have had many questions about the Islamic practices around me. I couldn't understand why certain things were done. I thought that when I got older, it would make sense to me. I rejected the possibility that the adults around me were utterly silly. I think that yearning for comprehension is present in all of us.
Many who are born in the Muslim world are force-fed the religion. The madrassas don't pass down any knowledge, they simply beat The TruthTM into the young minds. For hundreds of years, the chaos and xenophobia of such teachings was essentially limited to the Islamic lands. Globalization and petrodollars, however, has made the export of this poison possible.
Islam, in its present form, is incompatible with Western Civilization. Yet, Muslims, both Islamists and non-Islamists are attracted to the West. Even in Saudi Arabia, one of the most, if not the most, despicable regimes on Earth, the Arabs regularly salivate over Baywatch in their homes. Praise be to the satellite dish.
It's schizophrenic. Saudis dress their young daughters as cute little dementors, yet many have zero scruples about viewing infidelicious television shows. Such is the strong pull of the West.
A lot of these people see the West and they want in. The Islamist is also affected by the devilish attraction. Though, the Islamist can't stomach the fact that the West is so wretchedly non-Islamic.
It's worse: After all these years, the audacious West doesn't even "respect" Islam! You see, the Western society respects traffic lights by following the simple set rules. In the same, but opposite sense, the West doesn't collectively follow Islamic laws. Ergo, the West disrespects Islam. Given that "logic", one might say that the West disrespects practically every religion...but to the Islamist who has "learned" The TruthTM, that is no reason.
The non-terrorist embraces the West. The Islamist, however, festers. The non-terrorist sees a shining, dynamic, and glowing pinnacle of humanity in the West. The Islamist sees a glittering and glaring middle finger in the face of Islam.
The non-terrorist values the productivity s/he brings to the market. The Islamist finds the whole enterprise to be hollow. The non-terrorist enjoys his/her life. The Islamist succumbs to the most potent venom of them all: This life means nothing. What matters is the Afterlife. Obliterate those who dare disagree with you. Bonus points if you take yourself with them.
That's the difference: One lives life on Earth, the other finds solace in death.
4 comments:
Good post
Great description of two vastly different mindsets! You get to the essence of the difference: the dogmatic anti-life Islamist and the vibrant nominal-Muslim (or ex-Muslim) who wants to enjoy this life and everything civilization has to offer.
The more I think about it, the more I think Muslims are Victorian Era prudes.
On the outside they are straight and proper but on the inside they practice the devilish side of life.
Thanks scottsa and jason_pappas.
wc: "The more I think about it, the more I think Muslims are Victorian Era prudes."
In a way, yes. The concept of "honor" (a serious case of "what will other people think!?") plays a huge part in Islamic society. It gets quite debilitating, very soon.
Take a non-terroristic example: university education. Muslims, and South Asians in general, look at three fields: medicine, engineering and computers.
Everything else becomes worthless. Other majors are looked down upon. It's one of the big reasons there isn't a lot of occupational diversity in the Muslim world.
Post a Comment