“No religion can be considered in abstraction from its followers, or even from its various types of followers.” — Alfred North Whitehead, from Adventures in Ideas (1933)
Publilius Syrus wrote long ago that “there are some remedies worse than the disease.” We could say as much about most of the Western world’s erroneous ideas about the religion of Islam. Chief among them is the notion that Islam is good and the terrorism committed by Muslims is tangential from Islam – a transmogrification of Islam proper. The remedy for this terrorism, the theory goes, is to “deradicalize” those Muslims who have taken the plunge into the dark waters of Islamic terrorism, or better yet, prevent those Muslims considering taking this plunge by sheltering them from the dangers of “radicalization.” The consequences of these imprudent and sciolistic estimations is now catching up to the Western world, a world that at one time believed our freedoms and our unhindered way of life immune from the egregious cultures and violent sectarianism to which Islam is innately connected in other, far away reaches of the planet.
Edmund Burke warned: “Well is it known that ambition can creep as well as soar.” And those who have not really taken the religion of Islam seriously, who have assumed that its adherents and its tenets are probably quite similar to those of the other major religions, have done so at the expense of our future and the well-being of the Western world. The insouciant and the foolhardy pluralist (and this would include journalists and academia and clergy) among us believe that the hegemony that Islam strove violently and ruthlessly to achieve in the not-so-ancient past cannot possibly be the end and the means that the “moderate Muslim” envisions and employs today for the future of Islam. The most glaring failure of our modern experts (aside from making innumerable observations about terrorists and terrorism without offering even one real antidote) is that their premise has always been, and remains, that Islam is good and, as the logical extension of this premise, terrorism and the terrorist are anomalies tangential from Islam proper. The creeping obtrusion of jihadist ideologies (and their political/religious supporters) into the Western political narrative will continue in congruence with the propagandistic existence of such contradictory assumptions.
In a 2015 article in Commentary, Joshua Muravchik, after presenting the results of numerous polls regarding Muslim attitudes towards terrorists and terrorism, concludes: “While the predominant view among the world’s Muslims, insofar as we can learn from these polls, rejects terrorism, a significant minority does not. If, on the whole, say, 20 percent of Muslims, a conservative estimate of the average of these numbers, support terror ‘often’ or ‘sometimes,’ that amounts to 300 million people; and if, say, another 15 percent support it ‘rarely,’ then the total base of support for at least occasional terror acts comes to 500 million. There is little comfort to be found in such figures.” Such figures prove without a doubt that terrorism within the Muslim world and terrorism committed by Muslims in the Western world can no longer be viewed as incidental or anomalous, but the norm. Such figures also do little to exculpate Islam from the common but oft-slandered and suppressed opinion that this religion is a root source of anti-Jewish hatred and terrorism, and the primary inspiration for jihadist ideologies.
Edmund Burke also wrote: “Nothing is so fatal to religion as indifference.” It could also be said (although it would be a deviation from Burke’s intended meaning) that nothing is so fatal to Western democracy as indifference to Islam and the terrorism that inevitably manifests itself in a minority of Muslims that numbers in the hundreds of millions. I’ve written long ago that you cannot judge a religion’s efficacy, whether good or bad, by its exceptional personalities, but only by the behavior of those masses who are conglutinated by its tenets. In this sense and from this perspective, Islam is not merely insalubrious for mankind, but even worse, and because of this same insalubrious nature, it is a grand deception that has hoodwinked the Western world in such a way that we
bend over backward in abject humility just to accommodate this intolerant religion “in abstraction from its followers, or even from its various types of followers.”
mortimer says
Important quote from A.N.Whitehead: “No religion can be considered in abstraction from its followers.”
And yet, Muslims often say the REVERSE: don’t judge ‘the religion’ by Muslims.
Sorry, I’ve done the reading, done the study. Islam is reflected in the actions of its most DEVOUT FOLLOWERS… those who are ready to die for the 72 virgins. Islam is not reflected by Muslims who stay at home and ‘SIT’ (words of the Koran… K.4.95 “Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home))”.
So who is a REAL Muslim, the jihadist or the non-jihadist ‘moderate’ Muslim. The Koran says the jihadist is SUPERIOR to the non-jihadist Muslim.
I believe the Koran defines Islam, not personal opinion.
Dajjal says
8.1-6, 9.111 & 49.15 define Believers: those who do Allah’s wet work~fighting & killing.
Why not face the fatal fact and recognize Islam as the problem?
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/designate-islam-international-terrorist-organization
Dacritic says
ISIS.
rubiconcrest says
Topic of Debate: ‘…the notion that Islam is good and the terrorism committed by Muslims is tangential from Islam – a transmogrification of Islam proper.’ Indeed, when will the nation demand an answer to this question? It would be a good question for a congressional investigation. If Islam is not ‘good’ then everything we do with respect to it must change.
RAB says
Michael Devolin, Thank you for finally saying what I have been thinking every time I hear that we cannot condemn all Muslims for the chaos and terrorism caused by a few. I approve of the work of Robert Spencer, Pamela Gellar, Geert Wilders and others who understand the true nature of Islam and the very real threat it poses to western civilization in general; and yet it seems we are always being told to love Muslims but hate the ideology of Islam. For the life of me I cannot see how you can exonerate anyone who professes to be Muslim from the arrogant, intolerant, and aggressive attitudes and actions of so many Muslims. Is it that many Muslims are actually ignorant of their own ideology or that the “moderate” Muslims are simply devout (i.e. “radical”) Muslims content to infiltrate western society at all levels until the Umma is strong enough to declare an Islamic caliphate?
Michael Copeland says
Just a point: the “arrogant, intolerant, and aggressive attitudes and actions of so many Muslims” is what they are INSTRUCTED. It is not their free personal choice:
The Koran instructs “between us and you enmity and hatred forever” (60:4).
Muslims are “the best of peoples raised up for mankind”: the kuffar are “filth”, “the vilest of beasts”.
“You should hate the kuffar”, say the imams.
“It is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should [thereafter] have any choice about their affair.”
Koran 33:36, part of Islamic law.
The Muslim community “possesses no power except to acknowledge and obey”, rules Dr Salah al Sawy, Secretary General of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (Translating Jihad, 30 March 2011).
mortimer says
Agree with MC: Islam’s ‘essential doctrines’ (i.e. required for salvation and admission to Islamic paradise) are “not their free personal choice”.
The “essential doctrines” of Islam include ‘Al Walaa wal Baraa’ (Islamic apartheid), a doctrine of hatred of and towards the dirty kafirs ‘for the sake of Allah’.
A Muslim who fails to observe Islamic apartheid cannot enter Islamic paradise and is considered a ‘hypocrite’. That means a ‘moderate’, unobservant Muslim is one who is not a Muslim in good standing.
RAB says
Thank you. Yes, I understand that a devout Muslim does not have a choice but must follow the mandate of the Koran and the Sunna. I was thinking of those Muslims who do not think of themselves as intolerant, arrogant, and aggressive in the service of Islam and still consider themselves good Muslims. Is it not the case that by simply believing what they do they are consciously or inadvertently propagating the Islamic ideology and are therefore just as responsible for the bad results as the “devout” Muslim who openly carries out jihad?
mousey says
i don’t know rab, do you blame a 10 year old suicide bomber? Hold him responsible? Conditioning is really hard to get out of….for everyone, at all ages. It’s tricky to extricate anyone, but it seems it would be easier with the non-violent power crazed ones, and i’d rather focus on that than on blaming.
mousey says
that is: the non violent-power-crazed
Sarah says
I know what you mean.
But a 10 year old Western kid, raised in a largely secular household, simply isn’t mature enough in the eyes of out societies to be held to account for undertaking an action of this nature – and thus is not responsible enough to suffer the consequences.
Now look at the 10 year old Islamic kid – raised in an Islamic household, where he has been fed a steady stream of Islam from birth..This kid has heard nothing else but ‘peace be upon him’ and ‘jews are pigs and need to die’ and ‘the West is to blame for EVERYTHING that is bad in our world’ etc etc etc. This is a kid who doesn’t get a chidhood like our Western kids do. Who is not given an education like ours. His education is being taught to recite the Quran in Arabic over and over and over til memorized. And hit with a stick when he’s wrong. He isn’t taught science, he isn’t taught arts or creative writing- anything creative, anything that would encourage him to think creatively and to innovate is deliberately withheld and that creative spark within him is stamped out
This is a kid who is used to seeing his mother getting beaten and spat at by his Dad and other male relatives. He is used to seeing other kids torture an animal in the streets for fun especially a poor dog – he is used to seeing people suffering from PTSD or injuries from violence. He is used to riots, to conflict in the street.
And all he is told by his parents, by his family, his educators at school and the Imam and fellow coreligionists at the Mosque – is that Islam is the way. And its all about Islam. It stains every centimetre of that kid’s upbringing and thought processes.
So when that 10 year old who is raised to obedience is told to strap on a vest and blow himself up for the Ultimate Reward – he thinks he’s good to go. He’s been told his entire life that Allah will reward him and his entire family will get into Paradise if he does this. He gets to kill the bad guys now – and its all for Allah.
The mindset of this kid, is not remotely comparable to the mindset of the average Western kid.
Wellington says
“No religion can be considered in abstraction from its followers………”
I don’t really agree with this assessment by Whitehead. It is my conviction that an ideology, whether a religious or secular one, can be judged solely on what it asserts. Of course, looking at the conduct of the followers of a particular ideology can surely be helpful, but an ideology should ultimately be judged based upon what its says and not by the fact that many adherents of that ideology don’t fully implement its tenets or wrongly do so.
For instance, just reading Marxism in theory, forget its horrible track record in action, should lead one to conclude that it is pernicious nonsense, voodoo for intellectuals and a prescription for the termination of liberty, for economic disaster and even for genocide. Ditto for the Islamic faith. Just reading the Koran alone, forget the actions of Muslims in the past and today, should lead a sensible person to conclude that Islam is a disturbing, totalitarian, highly intolerant and violence-prone religion, never mind it being devoid of a true Golden Rule for all. Conversely, a reading of Christian scripture alone may not lead one to accept the theology it propounds, but it should still result in one concluding that Christianity is not a mortal threat to liberty as both Marxism and Islam in theory are.
mortimer says
Agreeing in part with Wellington: A poor implementation or adaptation of an ideology will not accurately reflect it. However, this is a dangerous argument used to let Islam off the hook of critical evaluation. Today many Muslims are begging us, “Don’t judge ‘the religion’ by ISIS!” This is a distraction to prevent us from looking closely at DRACONIAN Islamic doctrines… doctrines that only ISIS observes 24/7. In the same way monks and nuns in a monastery or Hutterites or medieval towns organized around the monastery have implemented their understanding of Christianity 24/7. They are demonstrations of Christianity in a complete way. I would add that the most accurate version of a Christian society was likely that of medieval towns.
In his famous article, ‘What ISIS really wants’, author Graeme Wood wrote, “The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic.”
I aver that we CAN fairly judge an ideology by its most CONSCIENTIOUSLY ACCURATE application. The Benedictine model implemented in medieval Europe came as close to a Christian society as can be imagined. ISIS is a self-conscious recreation of the caliphate of Islam’s first three generations.
Islam is a ‘DEEN’ (Arabic: governance) and therefore, Islam can only be understood as a GROUP ACTIVITY, rather than a solitary one.
Islam is incomplete without an Islamic society ruled by a caliphate imposing Sharia law. Read any manual of Sharia law and that is the implicit and explicit message of Sharia.
mousey says
that’s a good point wellington, and one that is helping me get things clearer in my mind:
Islam is taken up by all different types of people, some are naturally meek, some are naturally violent…etc., and so they manifest the contact with the ideology differently and get grouped into categories of extremist or moderate… People need to stop focusing on how the ideology is manifesting in particular muslims and instead focus on the ideology itself separate from individuals.
Nilendu says
Islam Does as Islam really is, it is as simple as that.
Jeanette says
And “Muslims are as Muslims do.”
Patrice Ayme says
Who wants to follow a god who is scared of pigs? Which free person would follow a dog scared of pigs? Let alone a god!
Seriously, all and any ideology should be judged on its own merits, especially when it calls to kill some categories of people (apostates, homosexuals, all sorts of pagans, atheists, “non-believers”). And one should be even more severe when authorities come and order us to respect such a lethally minded, hateful ideology. And authorities, in media, universities and elsewhere, add that, otherwise, we are “racist”, and our own fear itself is a crime!
Jeanette says
We need more articles aimed at the authorities who are empowering the Muslims to destroy the West.
This wouldn’t be happening if it weren’t for those authorities.
Terry Gain says
If you were a Muslim and you were asked whether you support terror, would you answer it honestly? The fact of the matter is that Islam supports terrorism. This is beyond dispute. So every devout Muslim supports terror. Those who say they don’t support terrorism either don’t know their religion or they are lying.
Jeanette says
Every member of the Killing Cult supports terror, regardless of their level of devotion.
Carolyne says
I agree with you Jeannette. I believe that every Muslim, no matter how friendly and helpful he might seem, is secretly proud of terrorist acts committed by Muslims. Throughout their history, Muslims have achieved nothing but war and death and now that they are more active against the West, they have gained some perverted sense of pride in the body count, even if they do not personally commit violence.
FYI says
Look at the vile angry faces of these followers of allah.
But do they LOVE God and do they LOVE their fellow human beings?
No.Of course not.They blindly worship the koranic allah instead.
Probably because in the islamic belief system the concept of a God of Love doesn’t exist.
There are no Two Chief commandments to be found in islam or in the koran or found in the hadiths( or to be seen anywhere in the life of muhammed).So that means the original truth about God has been hidden/dismissed by the author of the koran.
So we have allah with his hate and his intolerance and his followers exhibiting the same characteristics.
The fact that these essential aspects of God (revealed in the Biblical revelation given to both the Jews and the Christians)are missing in allah’s koran(the islamic misrepresentation of the original truth about God)tells you all you really need to know about allah:allah is NOT God.
Carolyne says
I am always amused when I see a picture of supposedly grown-up men with their mouths open screaming their love of Allah. Given the lack of hygiene in Muslim countries, one wonders if they don’t fear flies getting in their mouths. On the other hand, given their perverted tastes in other areas, maybe they like flies.
RALPH DEGROOT says
Islam is not a religion, it’s an ideology. An ideology that is evidenced to be incompadible with human life. And like the ideology of Nazism, should banned. It’s the only option for the West to survive!
Scurvydog says
OK, the way I see it is like this. The world many of us grew up with in the 20th century is gone. On the surface, we have some of the same institutions and architecture, but social structures, forces, and populations are rapidly changing and setting up the difficult conflicts we are experiencing today – with much more to come.
There are three main forces at work in this: (1) globalists (both of the neo-liberal “economic” variety, who benefit from importing cheap labour, driving down wages, and moving jobs to “low cost” jurisdictions to improve their bottom lines; and elite “progressives,” who benefit from conducting employment, research, social service, legal, public relations, and advocacy work for migrants, along with helping divide the existing population politically); (2) islamists, who seek to spread their barbaric worldview, laws, practices, and populations worldwide (ironically, the dissemination of their wahhabi views is funded largely from oil money paid for by Western consumers to our so-called “allies”); and (3) traditionalists/nationalists, largely emerging from the more traditional cultural populations and ethnic stock of nations, many of whom are reproducing well below replacement level, aging rapidly, and feeling both “left behind” and threatened by all of this rapid social change and industrial decline (notably active in the U.S. election, Brexit, and several European elections).
The first two groups more often have coinciding interests against the third, and frequently (though not always) cooperate in effect, if not in intent in a hegemonic relationship. It’s not necessarily a “conspiracy” (which is hard to prove), but a coincidence of interests that often benefit both groups in various ways. The danger is that their disproportionate influence over our institutions is seemingly growing faster than the relatively limited protests and influence of the third group, which I’m sure the others hope will simply die off and hand them the field by default.
Add to this the fact that islam is an worldview that morally elevates obedience and submission and you can get a sense of the legitimating ideology that may eventually be employed (along with some twisted variant of multiculturalism) to justify the emerging state of affairs, with small elite groups benefiting handsomely while everyone else’s toil, deprivation, and submission gets justified by faith.
This is potentially the social architecture of the future. The seminal question: fear or fight it? Well, I know where I stand and I won’t go quietly…
Jeanette says
We should be plastering everywhere the terms “Islam is as Islam Does” and “kaffirophobia.”
The liberals and Muslims have handcuffed us with “Islamophobia” – let’s return the attack.
Jeanette says
If a bunch of modern-day Druids decided to start practicing mutilations and human sacrifices, it absolutely would not be tolerated.
And, if would be called what it is, not described in the least damaging terms that could be found.
It is the fault of the globalist elites who have inflicted the Muslims on the West that Muslims are not treated exactly as any other mutilating, murdering cult would be treated.
Until we cut out the source cancer, we won’t be able to rid ourselves of the rest of the cancer – Muslims.
Carolyne says
The ex- Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, was inducted into the Druid religion. I don’t think he kills people, though, but he has said that “Sharia in the UK is inevitable.”
Politicianphobia says
“ISLAM CAME TO ESTABLISH ONLY ONE RELATIONSHIP WHICH BINDS MEN TOGETHER IN THE SIGHT OF GOD, AND IF THIS RELATIONSHIP IS FIRMLY ESTABLISHED, THEN ALL OTHER RELATIONSHIPS BASED ON BLOOD OR OTHER CONSIDERATIONS BECOME ELIMINATED. There is only one place on earth which can be called the home of Islam, and it is the place where the Islamic state is established and Shari’ah is the authority and God’s limits are observed, and where all the Muslims administer the affairs of the state with mutual consultation. The rest of the world is the home of hostility (Dar-ul-Harb). A Muslim can only have two possible relations with Dar-ul-Harb: peace with contractual agreement, or WAR. A country with which there is a treaty will not be considered the home of Islam. Those who believed, and migrated, and strove with wealth and their persons in the cause of God, and those who gave them refuge and helped them, are the protectors of each other.” (8:72)
Politicianphobia says
“ISLAM CANNOT ACCEPT ANY MIXING WITH JAHILIYYAH , either in it’s concept or in the modes of living which are derived from this concept. Either Islam will remain, or jahiliyyah. ISLAM CANNOT ACCEPT OR AGREE TO A SITUATION WHICH IS HALF-ISLAM AND HALF-JIHILIYYAH. In this respect is very clear. It says that the truth is one and cannot be devided; if it is not the truth, then it must be falsehood. The mixing and co-existence of the truth and falsehood is impossible. Command belongs to God. or otherwise to jahiliyyah. God’s Shari’ah will prevail or else people’s desires. THE FOREMOST DUTY OF ISLAM in this world is to depose jahiliyyah from the leadership of man, and to take the leadership into its own hands and ENFORCE the particular way of life which is its permanent feature. The purpose of this rightly guided leadership is the good and success of mankind.
Politicianphobia says
“Islam does not sanction the rule of selfish desires. It has come to abolish all such concepts, laws, and customs and traditions, and to replace them with a new concept of human life, to create a new world on the foundation of submission to the Creator.”