Sunday, November 19, 2006

Yes, They Exist. No, They Aren’t The Solution

From time to time I take a peek to see what the other side, particularly the lefties, are saying about the blogging efforts of the wakeful in general, and sometimes I stumble upon things about mine in particular. Most of the sentiments are quite the expected stuff: charges of racism top the list, then warmongering, intolerance, stereotyping and the like. Sometimes the word “bigotry” is used instead of “racism”, and a common refrain is to put the words, “A good Muslim is a dead Muslim” in our side’s mouths. It’s the subject of bigotry, stereotyping and the question of the moderate Muslims that I wish to talk about here.

First, I find charges of bigotry toward me far better than charges of racism. Both charges are meant to smear, but the charge of bigotry has a chance of approaching the truth, and it’s a charge I can address, while the charge of racism can’t be true about me even in theory, nor can I address it any more than I can answer the question, “Have you stopped beating your wife?” Also, when I read the aforementioned phrase they put in my mouth, I’m consoled by the fact they say “Muslim” and not “Arab”. Even a cursory reading of my blog will reveal that my arguments are about Islam and its adherents of any race, not about Arabs. None of my writings apply to Christian Arabs, for example, with the exception of dhimmis like Israeli parliament member Azmi Bisharah who still think pan-Arabism is as influential an ideology as it was 30 years ago; and they apply to Arab Muslims, to slanty-eyed Malay Muslims, to black-skinned Somali Muslims and to blond, blue-eyed Swedish converts to Islam equally. I’m tired of repeating this again and again, but here goes: it’s about religion, not about race.

Now to address the argument that does follow from correct initial assumptions: that I’m a bigot who believes all Muslims are evil and want to offer us the choice between conversion and death (and dhimmitude for some of us). I am charged with disbelieving in the existence of good Muslims: of Muslims who lead their religious lives on the “live and let live” model to which all other religions today adhere; who may think all human beings should keep shariah law, but leave the conversion of the non-Muslims to such observance to their deity rather than to humans; who are ashamed of their brethren of whom we hear about on the news every day, and think they are giving Islam a bad name; and who view clashes like those in Israel or Kashmir as nationalistic land disputes that can be solved through negotiations, and through concessions from both parties. Such Muslims do exist, and I have never hinted otherwise. However, I see four problems that nullify any Leftist argument that proposes the abandonment of the war, on the ideological front against Islam as well as on the physical front against the Muslims, on the grounds of the indisputable existence of such Muslims. These are the problems:

  1. They are a minority.

  2. They can turn to the extremist majority any moment.

  3. Many professing moderates are extremists engaging in dissimulation (taqiya).

  4. Even true and stable moderate Muslims are powerless to deal with their extremist brethren.


Each point needs elaboration.

[...]

In full on Our Children Are The Guarantors »

3 comments:

ziontruth said...

Steve,

Anyone who levies the charge of "racism toward Arabs" against me should search my blog for instances of the words, "Arab" or "Arabs". The only times I've used those words are in the following two circumstances:

1) Christian Arab dhimmitude, ignoring the replacement of pan-Arabism with pan-Islam today.
2) The Arab character of Islam despite its adherents' boast of being a supranational religion ("the cure for the basic racism of the West").

Except for those points, it's "Islam" and "Muslims" everywhere on my blog. But the charge of racism is so fashionable, so attention-getting today...

Regarding the race of the Arabs, their skin color isn't white (in comparison to a North European at least) but brown. You probably meant to say "Caucasoid"--that they are. But, again, I hate that topic deeply.

By the way, Mr Harkonnen: with such a screen name, what do you think of my post about the Fremen?

Cheers,
ZY

ziontruth said...

And oh, I forgot:

I didn't say the charge of bigotry against us was true. What I said was it was better, on the scale of bad things of course, than the charge of racism. The claim that I'm a racist drives me mad, because deflects discussion from the real issue of our age, which is the religion of Islam, instead bringing us to the outmoded, now irrelevant, issue of the previous two centuries. The claim that I'm a bigot, while untrue, has the virtue of keeping the focus on today's topics.

G-d bless.

Pastorius said...

The definition of bigot is:

a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

By that definition, I am not a bigot. I studied religion in college, and while I am a Christian, I am in love with quite a bit of what I find in Hinduism, Judaism, Taoism, and Buddhism. I dislike Confucianism, although I do not think it is dangerous.

But, I hate Islam. I think it is dangerous by its nature. I do not hate Muslims. In fact, for the most part, I feel bad for them. I think they are trapped.

If a person wants to redefine the word bigot to mean "a person who is biased towards a specific creed", then I will gladly accept the term as pertaining to myself.