In Fillon’s book “Conquering Islamic Terrorism,” there is nothing about limiting the Muslim presence in France, which has created a situation, for the indigenous French and for non-Muslim immigrants, too, that is far more unpleasant, expensive, and physically dangerous than it would be without that large-scale presence. His view of Islam is clearly still a work in progress, but he is asymptotically approaching the views of Marine Le Pen. Perhaps we can offer him a few suggestions as to how to keep Muslim numbers down in France, and outside France, too.
First, Fillon might discuss internecine wars within the Camp of Islam, sectarian and ethnic, and how these help the West by using up Muslim energies and assets (men, money, materiel). Right now, in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen, Sunnis and Shi’a are engaged in hot wars. Ideally, these wars will simmer for a long time. Nor should the West, in a mistaken attempt to spread “democracy” in Muslim countries where despotism is the default regime, try to hold in check those Muslim rulers who, like Al-Sisi in Egypt, use ruthless methods in order to fight the Muslim Brotherhood and other fanatics. Ataturk, after all, was ruthless in dealing with Muslim clerics as he attempted to, and did, secularize post-Ottoman Turkey; one wonders if a new Ataturk, using the same methods as Kemal Pasha, were to arise today, would the West support him, or deplore his means as unjustified, no matter how laudable the ends?
Finally, since 80% of the world’s Muslims are not Arabs, the West could help non-Arab Muslims recognize Islam as a vehicle for Arab supremacism. This is possibly the most important way to weaken the hold of Islam on non-Arabs, to begin to make them resent, and then to doubt, Islam. One simple way would be to subsidize the mass dissemination of translations into the major languages of Muslim Believers — Arabic, Urdu, Persian, Bahasa, Tamazight, Turkish, Malay, Kurdish – of such works as, for example, “Islam: The Arab National Movement,” by the late Anwar Shaikh. Shaikh’s study shows all the ways in which Islam favors and promotes the Arabs at the expense of non-Arab Muslims. Because Allah chose to deliver his message in Arabic to a seventh-century Arab, because Muslims should read, recite, memorize the Qur’an in Arabic, because Muslims must turn toward Mecca in prayer at least five times a day, because Muhammad the Perfect Man and Model of Conduct was Arab, because the Qur’an was written in the Arabs’ language, and it is only in that language that it ought, ideally, to be read, and Arabs are its only trustworthy transmitters, because the earliest Muslims, whose customs and manners, written down in the Hadith, constitute the Sunnah, were all Arabs, because the Arabs were the first to conquer vast territories for Islam — all this naturally produced a feeling of superiority in the Arabs. And wherever they conquered, along with Islamization, Arabization followed. That word describes two different things: first, the physical movement of Arabs into what were non-Arab lands, as in northern Iraq, where Saddam Hussein moved Arabs onto lands taken from the Kurds, in an attempt to change the demographics of the area, to “Arabize” it. But the Arabization that takes place even in Muslim lands without Arabs is different, and describes the change in the non-Arab population that follows Islamization: they forget their original identity, and instead take Arab names, assume Arab identities, and Arab lineages, and try to become, culturally, “Arabs.”
Among the outward and visible signs of this, think of how many Muslim non-Arabs have eagerly given themselves not just Arab names and false Arab pedigrees, but copied Arab dress and customs of the seventh century. (Imagine, under British imperialism, someone in sub-Saharan Africa wearing a suit, carrying an umbrella and wearing a homburg, and calling himself Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper.) They wanted the prestige of being thought “Arab.” In Pakistan, to take an extreme case, millions now claim to be “Sayids” – that is, descendants of the Quraysh, the Prophet’s tribe.
These facts, impossible to deny, and now made difficult to overlook, can be spread far and wide in the West, and though many non-Arab Muslims will try to ignore them, many others will hear, take in, and recognize, despite themselves, the truth of these observations. Some of those non-Arab Muslims, as they inwardly acknowledge the accuracy of the charge that “Islam is a vehicle for Arab imperialism,” may find their faith affected. It’s a lapidary description that ought to be repeated on every possible occasion, and especially in debate with Defenders of the Faith. It will cause them to sputter in rage, but they have no effective rebuttal, because it is so undeniably true.
Those non-Arab Muslims most recently mistreated by Arab Muslims, such as the Kurds (182,000 killed by Saddam Hussein’s Arabs) and the Berbers (subjected to the Arab cultural imperialism in North Africa that for a time made it illegal even to use Tamazight, the Berber language) may be among the first to recognize that Arab supremacism is not tangential, but central to Islam, and Islam’s hold over them might weaken. Ibn Warraq reports that the Berbers now “speak their own language, and have in recent years tried to reclaim their pre-Islamic Berber culture and identity, and resent being called ‘Arab.’” Some may jettison Islam altogether, as has already happened with tens of thousands of Berbers both in North Africa and in France. The French state could help support the efforts of those Berbers who want to “reclaim their pre-Islamic Berber identity” by spreading information about the forced “arabization” that followed upon islamization.
But Fillon makes none of those suggestions in his book about “conquering” Islamic totalitarianism. He doesn’t want to take Islam itself head-on, to try to reduce its appeal and the number of its adherents, by undermining the hold of Islam itself on so many millions of minds. His proposals are directed at more effectively fighting not Islam, but terrorism. Fillon is a Conservative Catholic. He sees Bashar al-Assad, for all his faults, as the protector of Christians in Syria, and certainly far preferable to the Islamic State. He has spoken of the need to collaborate with Russia because of its willingness to fight not just the Islamic State but also, through its support of Assad, other Sunni takfiris. Russia may be an enemy to the West in all sorts of ways, but Fillon is not the only Western leader who sees Russia as an ally against the most fanatical Muslims and, in Syria, willing to fight to protect the Alawites, who in turn protect the Christians.
When it comes to Islamic terrorism and immigration, Fillon rejects the modish prattle about multiculturalism, the assertions that “Islam in no way contradicts the values of the Republic,” and instead promotes “assimilation” to the French identity: “France has a history, a language, a culture. Of course this culture and language have been enriched by the contributions of foreign populations, but they remain the foundation of our identity.” When asked if France is already a multicultural nation, Fillon has been unequivocal. “No. In any case, that is not a choice we made. We did not choose communitarianism (social division) and multiculturalism.”
On Islam, he is certainly on the right track, but needs to be bolder in his suggestions, going beyond better methods of investigation, and swifter means of punishment. He should unembarrassedly discuss how to reduce Muslim numbers. both in France, and in Muslim lands, by identifying and exploiting pre-existing fissures, especially that — I intend to repeat on every conceivable occasion — between Arab and non-Arab Muslims. At this point, there is nothing to be gained by staying away from such topics; solicitousness for Muslim sensibilities has gained us nothing. The propaganda war is on, and one-sided; the West still has not gone on the offensive to weaken and diminish the Camp of Islam. In the war with the forces of Islam, for the West it’s time to enroll the truth.

Kori says
Hmmh… interesting, the Swahili word “kustaarabika” in English “to be civilised” and other permutation… actually means “to be like the Arabs”
mortimer says
Many French writers ‘get it’ about Islam:
“Islam was not a torch, as has been claimed, but an extinguisher. Conceived in a barbarous brain for the use of a barbarous people, it was – and it remains – incapable of adapting itself to civilization. Wherever it has dominated, it has broken the impulse towards progress and checked the evolution of society.”
“L’Islam ne fût pas un flambeau, comme on l’a prétendu ; ce fut un éteignoir. Conçu par un cerveau barbare, à l’usage d’un peuple barbare, il était – et il demeure – incapable de s’adapter à la civilisation. Partout où il a dominé, il a brisé l’élan vers le progrès et enrayé l’évolution de la société.”
– Andre Servier (French Writer)
But care is taken not to say how Islam expanded, how countries ‘passed into [Muslim] hands.’…Regarding this expansion, little is said about jihad. And yet it all happened through war!…the jihad is an institution…that is to say it is a part of the normal functioning of the Muslim world. The conquered populations change status (they become dhimmis), and the sharia tends to be put into effect integrally, overthrowing the former law of the country. The conquered territories do not simply change ‘owners.’
– Jacques Ellul (French Philosopher and Sociologist)
Angemon says
And that would be relatively painless and cheap to do : for example, when teaching French History, some time could be dedicated to both the pre-islamic culture of former French colonies and to the islamic conquest, not leaving out the atrocities committed by the invaders.
mortimer says
Fitzgerald wrote: “since 80% of the world’s Muslims are not Arabs, the West could help non-Arab Muslims recognize Islam as a vehicle for Arab supremacism”.
Exactly.
The Kabyle people, a Berber ethnic group native to Kabylia in the north of Algeria, have seen clearly that Islam is merely Arab SUPREMACISM and large numbers of them are now leaving Islam for that reason. Many have joined Catholicism or Protestant denominations.
Marken says
Excellent continuation of part 1. The problem with stopping Islam is it’s trans-generational nature. The Koran commands fighting until it dominates the world, a dark sided version of the Messiah’s “go therefore and teach all nations”. Containment is necessary but temporary. Attrition within the Muslim countries is a great tactic that leaders need to practice, again this would need to be maintained.
Is there a tipping point envisioned where all of Islam collapses?
Michael Copeland says
“The strongholds of Islam will be knocked down, one after the other,
and then there will come many deceiving guides.”
Mohammed
Al Hendy, Vol. 17, Hadith No. 539.
http://www.answering-islam.org/Mna/frag1.1.html
Michael Copeland says
“Islam will crawl back to the land of Hejaz like a snake crawls back to its hole,”
Mohammed
Sunan al Tirmizi, Vol. 5, p. 18, Hadith No. 2630.
http://www.answering-islam.org/Mna/frag1.1.html
Mohammed did not make many prophecies, but that was one.
Marken says
Michael, a better vision, God willing, the snake will not have a head left or the means to slither and it’s hole filled in….no future hope ever for Islam again.
Hector Archytas says
It is faith and so a little like the internet stock market bull. Victory move it up but a defeat into a war percieved as Holy by muslim would extinguish it.
But first, we would need to our current (Christianism/New Age/Deism/atheism) beliefs into a new synchrenist religion to stand against them in a holy war.
ECAW says
“The Koran commands fighting until it dominates the world”
Marken – this is a widely held belief but in fact is just wrong. There is no evidence in the Koran for universal supremacism, only for a local religious warlord with local ambitions. It was “bigged up” into a foundational book for Muslim supremacism (more likely Arabic imperialism) in the later scriptures.
Let’s take the verse of the sword (9:5) as an example. It is often used as the clearest example of Allah commanding open-ended warfare against all non-Muslims everywhere and forever. But the preceding four verses explain exactly which group of unbelievers are to be ambushed and slain, and it doesn’t include you or me.
http://www.koran-at-a-glance.com/sura9.html
All the jihad verses are similarly either specifically local or non-specific. The nearest the Koran gets to an open-ended instruction is the indirect one of recommending Mohammed’s actions as an example to the believers:
“Verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much.” (33: 21)
My contention finds few supporters here (none at all, to tell the truth) but no one has been able to refute it. Can you?
Marken says
ECAW, I’m glad to hear you apparently have a view that Islam that has no Koranic bases to dominate all ‘unbelievers’ in the world. I don’t believe it ever will of course as God willing it will soon be completely flushed away.
Qur’an (3:83) – “Are they seeking a religion other than Allah’s, when every soul in the heavens and the earth has submitted to Him, willingly or by compulsion?”
Quran (8:38-39) – “Say to those who have disbelieved, if they cease (from disbelief) their past will be forgiven… And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah), then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do.”
Quran (9:29) – “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”
ECAW says
Marken – I certainly hope you are right in your expectation that Islam will be flushed away (down the toilet of history). Either it or Western civilisation has to be but at the moment it looks to me like it could equally be Western civilisation.
I do not think your three verses overthrow my contention.
When I looked at 9:29 and 8:39 I found a similar situation as with 9:5. Also the phrase “in the whole of the world” isn’t in the original Arabic or any of the translations except the Hilali-Khan, one you used:
http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/8/39/default.htm
They are the Saudi government’s own translators, the ones who turned 8:60 from:
Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah…
Into
And make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war (tanks, planes, missiles, artillery, etc.) to threaten the enemy of Allah…
And I don’t see how 3:39 can be construed as a command to fight until Islam dominates the world. Isn’t it just Allah talking big (and incoherently), the way he does?
Ron says
It is a very strange situation. The entire Western world has to be aware by now that Islam is the enemy of civilization as we know it. It is a retrograde, barbaric religion imposed on others by the threat of violence and antithetical to the values of every authentic religion on earth. But we seem totally incapable of dealing with it.
In time the obvious conclusion will be reached by those countries who want to survive: Drive them out. They are the enemy of all mankind, a destructive pseudo religion from which nothing good can come.
Mark A says
After reading the article I think Fillon is on the right track but don’t think he recognizes the full extent of the problem.
If I had a vote in the French election it would go to Le Pen.
Tom from Brussels says
Mme Le Pen’s position on islam is excellent; however, her economic policies are identical to that of the communist Jean-Luc Mélenchon, which gives pause for thought.Fillon is a good choice and he always keeps his promises.
ECAW says
Does Fillon keep his promises? I wasn’t aware, but then I had never even heard his name until he became the centre right candidate. What do you say to the charge I have heard that he never did much about the problem when he was Sarkozy’s prime minister and is merely stealing Le Pen’s clothes in order to win the presidential vote, after which it will be business as normal?
ECAW says
“His view of Islam is clearly still a work in progress, but he is asymptotically approaching the views of Marine Le Pen”
I wish someone would explain why the mathematical term “asymptotic” adds something to the above sentence. Voegelinian used it all the time but would never explain it or justify its use.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/asymptotic
Jeremy Condor says
It’s a charming thought to imagine Fillon has a way to go on understanding Islam. But if he wrote a book about it, it’s because this is his way of seeming to talk tough, while avoiding the fundamental issues. And he knows exactly what they are. He’s a politician looking for the presidency. There’s nothing niaive about it. Marine owns the all-out anti-Islam position, so he has taken on the electable tough talk, while couching it in accommodationsism, and the usual nonsensical notion that the inevitable superiority of French culture will one day conquer. Drivel. It’s apologism dressed up as tough talk.
Hugh FitzgeraldI says
I think you are right, and that I unnecessarily used the word because I yielded to my fondness for it,(though see below for a weak defense),, and that’s a not sufficient justification. Thank you.
I still have,, I admit, the feeling that “asymptotically approaching” contains a hint of something that is not in “approaching” alone, that is, the idea that as close as you get, you will still never attain to, coincide with, whatever it is you are asymptotically approaching. I wanted to convey the idea of Fillon’ getting closer and close to Le Pen’s views, not precipitously but slowly, but that I did not expect that his views, though they would get close, would ever coincide exactly with hers.
ECAW says
Thanks.
Stanley Alpern says
My wife and I are Americans who live in France. On a holiday in Corsica a few years ago,a woman hotel cook in charge of breakfast, apparently from North Africa, packed off her young son to the local French school every morning. We asked her which country she came from and she said Morocco but to our surprise gratuitously added .”i’m not an Arab,” which to us implied resentment against Arab supremacy.. Both mother and son seemed more open to Western civilization and more willing to assimilate to French values than North Africans we’ve seen on the French mainland. Hugh Fitzgerald is right to emphasize a potential split between Arabs and other Muslims. This week’s ban on burqas by the Moroccan gvernment is a good omen.
Lauri Heikkilä says
“Right now, in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen, Sunnis and Shi’a are engaged in hot wars. Ideally, these wars will simmer for a long time.”
Are you serious? Your knowledge is extensive, I can see that from your articles, but I think you’ve become too hateful and started to see Muslims as less than humans, become desensitised to their suffering. In that regard, you’ve started to resemble the Islamists, who see us as less than humans.
“I think… I think when you hate something hard enough, you usually end up looking just like it.” – Courtney Crumrin in Courtney Crumrin and the Fire Thief’s Tale