Sultan Knish
Wars are fought with steel and of words. To fight a thing, we have to
understand what we are fighting and why. A blindness in words can kill
as effectively as blindness on the battlefield.
Words shape our world. In war, they define the nature of the conflict. That definition can be
misleading. Often it's expedient.
The real reasons for the last world war had very little to do with
democracy. The current war does involve terrorism, but like fascism,
it's incidental to the bigger picture. The United States would not have
gone to war to ensure open elections in Germany. It hasn't been dragged
into the dysfunctional politics and conflicts of the Muslim world
because of terrorism.
Tyranny and terrorism just sum up what we find least appealing about our
enemies. But it's not why they are our enemies. They are our enemies
because of territorial expansionism. The Ummah, like the Third Reich, is
seeking "breathing room" to leave behind its social and economic
problems with a program of regional and eventually world conquest.
Islam, like Nazism, makes a lot of utopian problems and pays the check
for them through conquest. Like Communism, we're up against a rigid
ideology, brainwashed fanatics, utopian fantasies and ruthless tactics.
And we can only win by being honest about that.
We are not yet dealing with armies. This is still an ideological
conflict. Terrorism is just the tip of a much more dangerous iceberg.
It's the explosion of violence by the most impatient and least judicious
of our enemies.
What we are dealing with is Islamization. Islamization is the imposition
of ideological norms in increasing severity. Like Nazification, it
transforms a society by remaking it in its own image from the largest to
the smallest of details.
Islamization begins with the hijacking of "secular" spaces transforming
them from neutral into explicitly Islamic forms and functions. The
process can be grandiose or petty. A group of Minnesota Muslim taxi
drivers who refuse to transport passengers carrying alcohol are
"Islamizing" part of the transportation system around that airport. They
are imposing Islamic norms on the airport and the passengers. Similarly
a Target cashier who refuses to scan pork is Islamizing her line.
Islamic organizations encourage this form of seemingly petty
Islamization even while they angle for bigger things. Their followers
are foot soldiers in the same political war that destroyed secular
spaces in their home countries.
Small scale Islamization becomes large scale Islamization. The women who
begin wearing Hijabs are imposing a new social norm that eventually
leads to Burkas. By then, women no longer have the right to leave the
house, either legally or in social norms. The outlawing of liquor or
pork begins in the same way. It doesn't just happen in large ways, it
also happens in small ways.
In Germany, the exchange of the greeting "Gruss Gott" for "Heil Hitler"
was the bellwether of a larger social change underway. Nazification was
not just a matter of Hitlerian speeches, it was in what you read, what
you saw and how you said hello to your neighbors. A Nazi was not just
someone who marched around in a uniform. It was also someone who said
"Heil Hitler" or who in any way participated in the Nazification of
public spaces.
Similarly an Islamist is anyone who participates in the Islamization of
public spaces. The media has mischaracterized Islamist as a follower of
some rogue branch of Islam followed by a tiny minority. But there is no
rogue branch. Even Wahhabism is hardly rogue. If anything, it's simply
more literal.
Islam is Islamist in that it "Islamizes" what it comes into contact
with. Islamists are not a separate movement. They are Muslims following a
legacy of intolerance by practicing Islamization.
Religion
can exist on a personal level and a public level. Religion on a
personal level can be accommodated in a public space so long as it does
not change the nature of that public space. For example, a group of
people can pray in a school cafeteria. Secularists may object, but their
objection is groundless unless the praying people then announce that no
one is allowed to do anything in the cafeteria except pray... and only
in their approved way.
That is Islamization in a nutshell. It begins with accommodation and ends with theocracy.
When a Muslim imposes his religious identity on someone else, he is
engaging in Islamization. That is the difference between Mark, the
Mormon taxi driver who refuses to drink alcohol and Mohammed, the Muslim
taxi driver who refuses to drive a passenger carrying alcohol.
Mark is practicing his religion in a public space. Mohammed is imposing
his religion in a public space. Mark's religion can be accommodated
because his choices extend to his own body. Mohammed's religion cannot
be accommodated because it hijacks any public space that he exercises
influence over by attempting to Islamize it. Islamization causes
conflict, terrorism and war.
Every devout Muslim is an "Islamist". Islam is not a personal religion.
It is a religion of the public space. A "moderate" Muslim would have to
reject Islam as a religion of the public space, as theocracy, and that
secularism would be a rejection of Islam.
Nothing in Islam exists apart from anything else. While liberals view
culture and religion as a buffet that they can pick and choose from, it
is a single integrated system. If you accept one part, you must accept
the whole. Once you accept any aspect of Islam, you must accept its
legal system and once you accept that, you must accept its governance
and once you accept that, you lose your rights.
If it were not for Islamization, Islam might be personally
objectionable, but not publicly objectionable. Some of its tenets might
be disapproved of, its behavior in its home countries might be
disagreeable, but it would not lead to a zero sum war in which Islamic
expansionism leads to endless conflict.
Islam has been imported under the guise of multiculturalism, but it does
not recognize the idea that there can be room for multiple religions
and ways of doing things in the same space. While Muslims exploit
multiculturalism, the outcome of injecting Islam into a system is an
Islamic space in which alternatives are either eliminated or
marginalized. Islam is not a multi anything. It is a single uni.
Islam does not integrate. It disintegrates. It's hazardous to any
culture or political system that comes into contact with it. It
colonizes public spaces and pushes out anything that is not it. Or as
the arsonists of the Library of Alexandria said, "If it is in the Koran,
it is redundant and ought to be burned. If it disagrees with the Koran,
then it especially ought to be burned."
What goes for the Library of Alexandria, also goes for all knowledge,
ideas, culture and thought. Islamization measures them all against the
Koran and finds them either redundant or incompatible. Like a virus,
Islam destroys anything that isn't it so it never has to compete against
anything, because, as its societies demonstrate, it is not capable of
competing.
Islam
reproduces incestuously. inbreeding its ideology until it has copied it
over itself so many times that there is no room for anything else.
Wahhabism or anything that is associated with "extremism" is simply
Islam copied over itself even more times. It's not extremism, it's
simply undiluted. It is what happens when you take out as much as
possible of everything that isn't Islam.
That is the objective of Islamization. It copies itself over until
Hijabs become Burkas, until everyone is illiterate and killing each
other over minor points of doctrine so their chief gang leader can
become Emir. When it runs out of non-Islamic things to copy over and
destroy, it copies over its own form, introducing errors, schisms,
conflicts and religious wars.
The Islamist, like the virus, attempts to destroy what is non-Islamic to
Islamize it. His tactics may be small, but his goals are big. And his
success leads to a wasteland in which there is only the endless
nothingness of Islam, a religion built on the endless conquests of
Islamization, and which in the absence of external conflict must turn on
itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment