Saturday, October 06, 2007

The Case for Islamization

Our Russian correspondent Dimitri K. sends his latest essay, a meditation on the process of Islamization and the nature of the modern state.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The Case for Islamization
by Dimitri K.

Skeleton prayingMany have noted recently that the Islamization of Western countries is not only permitted but often promoted and enforced by the authorities. After terrorist attacks in USA and Europe the pace of Islamization actually increased. The reason for that is not yet clear; some blame leftists, other blame greedy capitalists, lack of religious belief, conspiracies, etc.

The author proposes his own theory. Currently it is only a hypothesis; it lacks statistical evidence and details. To collect that evidence is a task for millions of sociologists and political scientists all over the world — after all, they also need to have something to do.

My first point is that the state is not simply a collection of its citizens, just as the animal is not just the collection of cells. The state is an entity which obeys its own laws (don’t confuse these with the judicial laws) and behaves according to its own pattern. Those laws should be studied in future; however, we can speculate on some of them right now.

As with any open system, the state needs some food for its existence. What could that food be?

We know that states emerged thousands of years ago; the great empires existed when technology was rather primitive. My point is completely anti-materialistic: I believe that the food for a state is not industrial production, nor agricultural food, nor means of production, nor any other material substance. The food for a state is the lives of its citizens, which they are willing to give away for the sake of that state. Indeed, the main requirement for citizens was that they always be ready to die for their king or their republic. Not necessarily to win, but necessarily to die.

When the citizens refuse to die, as in modern Europe, the states weaken and die out. When the state receives enough food, like USSR during WW2, that state gets more powerful and can live some of the time without food. Of course, the economy matters, but it is a secondary and derivative factor. The example of the USSR is persuasive — an economically rather weak Russia could create a superpower.

With this hypothesis in mind, what about modern people, who refuse to die for anything? They often think they are the center of the universe. Indeed, they are so educated, so productive, so smart and also law-abiding. But suddenly they start to recognize that the state cares much more about people of absolutely different sort.
- - - - - - - - -
Why is that? Because those modern people are simply not suitable as a food for their state. They lack some vitamin that the state needs. With all their virtues, they are not suitable as a food, and the state ignores them. And this is also an argument against pacifism: even when all current states are abolished, the resulting superstate will still need some food, and it will find the way to get it. Otherwise it will collapse, just as the USSR did.

And now we are ready to answer the main subject of this study: what is the case for Islamization? It is obvious — the state sees people who are ready to die for their principles, whatever those principles are, and those people are Muslims. The state sees the potential food and its mouth is watering.

The modern secular state does not really care about religion. If necessary, it can adapt to any religion. And that’s what it is doing before our eyes.

Our states are preparing for a new source of food, and we are just irrelevant for them.

However, it would be wrong not to add an optimistic tone at the end. For one reason or another, Muslims are not too good in creating states; that is a verified fact. And that is our hope: as soon as our states realize that the new food is not edible, they will return to their traditional feeding policies.

We, in our turn, must show that we still have some vitamin left inside us.


Anonymous said...

Interesting idea that the state has a life of its own and that it needs willing fighters to live. I agree with you, it will eventually realize importing Muslim citizens is like eating tainted beef; OK at first, not so good later.

My own view is that there exists an unholy cabal of lawyers, business leaders and fuzzy-thinking liberals who believe, for different reasons, that immigration is a) a good source of income, b) a good source of low-cost labour and c) a feel-good activity. All of these groups believe they can 'control' the newcomers.

It makes me think of the German industrialists who thought they could control the Nazis. They were wrong and we are wrong.

Anonymous said...

Yes, very interesting hypothesis.

Here is another possible dimension. It is so simple and I think also easily verifiable. It may or may not fit into the thought above but has a similar issue of feeding a hungry monster.

I recently had an opportunity to dialog with a conservative minded journalist (where did I find one of those?). His central comment to me was one that had already been rattling in my head searching for the proper words. Here it is paraphrased:

The left (dems, progressives, etc) always want to break things and will continue to break things so that there is always an endless supply of things to fix. This feeds the machine that leverages popular opinion to propagate the growth of power. The more they smash, the more power they can amass. There may be a small brokenness that will then be exploited and smashed into oblivion to maximize gain of power.

His example was in the last generation of this process is was white on black racism that was used as the social failing - albeit with some genuine seed problem. I think it could be argued that this horse is still being whipped but perhaps the effectiveness for political power building is beginning to subside.

He suggests that "tolerance" is the new problem. Certainly this agenda is in our face every day. The things that the left are destroying (in our minds) in order to claim authority to fix are tolerance of everything under the sun. Even things that we should not tolerate! All in the process to feed the machine of power.


And on the sides of london buses they now advertise how "peaceful"are our masters in waiting.It is time to act !

turn said...

"time to act"?

That is past due and yet not ready.

Congress and judiciary are, with few exceptions, clueless.

Executive, including State and military are in a quandary of how to deal while maintaining constitutional guarantees.

Thr social pact (Constitution) that is our birthright needs to be understood by all that it is two-way.

Those native or foreign born that--for whatever reason--do not sign on to it do so at their peril.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ...

So... a 'religion' that explicitly denies all other religions and adheres to a doctrine to proselytize, enslave or murder 'infidels' can be allowed here?

This is the American dilemma

As I see it, Islam needs to be understood for what it is--a cult driven socio-political pan-national movement not disimilar to international Marxist socialism

"What's the link between a socio-political system like socialism and religious belief?" you might ask. Did you know that there are numerous records of english socialist hymns dating from the 1890's?

"England Arise

England, arise! The long, long night is over,
Faint in the East behold the dawn appear;
Out of your evil dream of toil and sorrow -
Arise, O England, for the day is here;
From your fields and hills,
Hark! The answer swells -
Arise, O England, for the day is here!

People of England! All your valleys call you,
High in the rising sun the lark sings clear,
Will you dream on, let shameful slumber thrall you?
Will you disown your native land so dear?
Shall it die unheard -
That sweet pleading word?
Arise, O England, for the day is here!

Over your face a web of lies is woven,
Laws that are falsehoods pin you to the ground,
Labour is mocked, its just reward is stolen,
On its bent back sits Idleness encrowned.
How long, while you sleep,
Your harvest shall it reap?
Arise, O England, for the day is here!

Forth, then, ye heroes, patriots, and lovers!
Comrades of danger, poverty, and scorn!
Mighty in faith of Freedom, your great Mother,
Giants refreshed in Joy’s new-rising morn.
Come and swell the song,
Silent now so long:
England is risen! - and the day is here.

Edward Carpenter"

That's an example perhaps more easily understood but never anticipated by James Madison 218 years ago.

Too many wish both socialism and islam(ism) upon us.

This will not stand so long as America stands up.

Vol-in-Law said...

The State needs people willing to die for it. Muslims may die for their beliefs, but they won't die for Western secular States like the EU. So this analysis is flawed. The Islamic advance in the West is due to both the superior willpower of the Islamists, and their instrumentalisation by the cultural Marxists, who both control the bureaucracies of the States and wish to see western civilisation ended.

1389 said...

The Russian soldiers who died during the Great Patriotic War, were not, for the most part, dying for Communism or the USSR. Most of them laid down their lives for Mother Russia and their Orthodox Christian faith. Both are alive and flourishing today. Orthodox Christianity can best be described as New Testament Christianity, preserved with great care. People laid down their lives for it, then as now.