Cultural Castration

I got into an exchange with a Muslim professor of a Canadian university recently in an internet discussion group. He is a strong and vocal opponent of ‘Islamism’. It was that exchange that led to this post and the questions I will discuss in it.

Can there be a moderate Islam? I don’t believe so, but the questions at this point in history is not just about Islam but Western civilization as well. The question is all about balls, about having them and losing them, figuratively speaking, of course.

The two questions we have to answer are:

  • Can Islam be reformed and still be called Islam?
    and
  • Can Western countries embrace Muslims without endangering the very foundations of their cultural existence?

Can either change without losing its identity?

We can start by asking what exactly does the word ‘Islamism’ mean. Isn’t it simply radical Islam or Muslim terrorism without using the ugly words ‘radical’ and ‘terrorism’?
It may also simply mean: taking Islam seriously. Or literally, which, for most Muslims, is the same thing. (Mark Steyn is discussing his aversion toward the term in this article.)

The voices in Europe asking for the reformation of Islam are getting louder in direct proportion with Islam’s attempts to assert itself.
There is no altruism behind these voices, just a sense of self preservation. People don’t care much about Islam, they just want it to stop encroaching on their lives. They just want Islam to leave them alone, to respect their laws, their societies and their individual rights. They want Islam to be like their own religions. Secular with comfy traditions, churches with nice music and pretty pictures, something that we can embrace or ignore at our leisure, something that is there when we need it, but leaves us alone if we find it bothersome. The voices that call for the reformation of Islam want it NOT to be Islam. The way Christianity isn’t really what it used to be either. But how realistic is this expectation? Can Islam reform itself? Can there be moderate Islam?”

Reformed Islam

Before we can answer that question whether Islam can be reformed, we have to understand what the essence of Islam is.
I think we should be able to agree on the three most fundamental elements:

  • Militant monotheism (There is no God but God)
  • Totalitarianism (There is no law but God’s law – Sharia)
  • Imperialism (There should be no country but God’s country – the Caliphate)

Can a reformed Islam, one that accepts religious pluralism be still called Islam?
There is no God but God is the most fundamental tenet of the faith. Any other faith is an affront to Muslims. Showing respect for other religions is antithetical to their most basic belief.

Can non-political Islam, Islam without sharia still be called Islam?
Anywhere Muslims go, any place where their numbers allow them to form communities, they demand the wholesale acceptance of their laws and custom. The so called ‘moderate’ Muslims of the west are on an unending quest for ever more accommodation, all in accordance with the demands of Sharia. Many outright reject the legitimacy of the laws of their host countries. Can Islam really accept the legitimacy of laws other than sharia and still be called Islam?

Can a reformed Islam retain its aspirations for world conquest and domination?
Hussein Aboubakr points out the following in his Prager U video Where Are the Moderate Muslims?  (@ 0:55):

“Growing up, I was told, among many other things, the following: That every day that passes on the Islamic nation without a caliphate is a sin.
That the failures and miseries of the Muslim world started the moment we Muslims gave up conquests and wars against the infidels.”

Imperialism has always been an essential part of Islam. The three dominant ethnic groups in the middle east (Turks, Arabs and Persians) are already in an increasing competition to determine which will become the center of the next caliphate. The essence of Muslim immigration to the West is all about conquest, and this time it won’t be just Al-Andalus, but Al-Götaland, Al-Bavaria and Al-Normandie as well. Every no-go-zone in Europe is Ribat, a foothold, a conquered corner of Dar al Islam. Can Muslims truly integrate and still call themselves Muslims?

As far as the world is concerned, these three are the true pillars of Islam, but when we are talking about reform, we could also ask:

Which Islam?

Sunni or Shia? Sufi or Salafist? Ahmadi or Wahhabi?
Islam has many schools and branches. Some are more radical than others. The moderate ones have a curios tendency of being illegal in the not-so-moderate countries. The Ahmadiyya are considered apostates in Pakistan. The Sufis were ‘sidelined’ in Wahabist Saudi Arabia.

The problem with the Muslim promise of peace and harmony once they got rid of the infidels and the apostates is that they will always find new apostates and hypocrites. Muslim history is rife with sectarian conflicts in which the moderates, the reformists were always the ones who ended up dead.

There is no way to ‘moderate’ Islam, just as there is no way to ‘moderate’ any religion.
It is like asking communism or fascism to be moderate. Successful religious reformations tend to go in the conservative, fundamentalist direction.

Those who ask for the reformation of Islam do not want to reform it, just tame it. They want to turn Muslims into, nice little folks with their quaint little customs, headdresses and superstitions but who can play nice within the rules set by the grownups. This is what castration is, this is what castration does. Turns men into harmless children. Just like we did with the natives of North America.

Asking for the reform of Islam is just virtue signaling.
Asking for the reform of Islam is not taking it seriously.
I can perfectly understand why the radicals find this condescending and patronizing arrogance insulting. I can understand why ANY Muslim would find it insulting.

The answer to the ultimate question is no, Islam cannot be reformed. Not without castrating it, not without taking away its essence.

  • Islam may fade into irrelevance, but for that, they should be left alone.
  • Islam may collapse into insignificance just like Catholicism did in Quebec.
  • Islam may be beaten into submission, just like it was in colonial times and in Soviet Russia, but that would require political will.

The ONLY RESPECTFUL WAY of dealing with Muslims is beating them into submission. Yes, that means beating them into Islam. Submission is not just the name, but the very essence of Islam, that is the only thing Muslims understand. If they wish to fight, we should fight them. If they wish to die for their faith, we should help them. For those, on the other hand, who are ready for true moderation, meaning a break from Islam, we should be ready to open our arms.

The ONLY HUMANE WAY of dealing with Muslims is the encouragement of apostasy. We should embrace the apostates. We should celebrate them. We should protect them. We should make it clear to all of them that our only enemy is evil ideology and evil actions. Not the people who had the misfortune of being oppressed by them.

Spread the word:

Embrace an apostate!

 

This post is the third in a series:

Opting in, opting out
Why we could hate you …  and why we still don’t
This post

In my next, I will try to address the self-castration of the West

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *