Friday, May 23, 2014


"I'm Good Enough, I'm Smart Enough, and Doggone It, People Like Me!"
-Stuart Smalley

Professor Material
On the very same day that the New York Times did a glowing piece about unrepentant domestic terrorist Bill Ayers complete with a photo of him standing on a flag in an alley, the US was attacked by Muslim terrorists.  Almost 4000 people died in a single day's catastrophic attack, and yet immediately voices rose about how we need to be careful about a backlash against Muslims.
For some, it seems like every time something awful is done by a Muslim, their first concern is how they and others will react to it.  Am I being racist?  We need to make sure people don't blame actual Muslims for what Muslims do, that would be oppressive.
Its an odd time to live in.  These days if Pearl Harbor was attacked, the cries in the press wouldn't be WAR and COWARDLY ATTACK but stories of concern about backlash, stories of heroic Japanese Americans, and a special about how great Japanese culture is compared to the US, with a picture of Custer.  We mustn't let this act by a small number of Asian peoples draw us to conclude negative things about the Japanese people.
It seems to me that we are living in a culture and led by a government more concerned with how they might appear racist than dealing with actual acts of evil.  A culture and government more worried about mythical backlash against Muslims than the evils that Muslims perpetrate.
For these kind of people, the concern over being seen as a good person and not racist by the world and by historians in the future dominates their worldview and concerns.  I am a good guy, people like me!
And for the left, that's their primary driving force.  Its why you can't use hypocrisy against the left; they're perfectly fine with being two-faced if it means they will seem like nicer people in the end.  Sure, I contradicted myself, but it was for a good cause.  That's why feelings and symbolism matter more than results.  I tried, you have to give me credit.  My heart was in the right place, even if it didn't work.
When it comes to Islam, that's what you get: a desire to seem like a good guy, the balanced, unjudgmental sort, who likes the other and will leap to their defense against those awful warmongering conservatives.  Daniel Greenfield explains this with the term "Muslimsplaining":
As bloody bodies and smoke rise into the air after a cry of Allahu Akbar and a bomb detonation, each Muslim terrorist attack is followed by “Muslimsplaining” why the latest act of Islamic violence had nothing to do with Islam.

Sometimes the Muslimsplainers are Muslims. Often they aren’t even Muslims.

When Boko Haram, an Islamic terrorist group aligned with Al Qaeda, kidnapped Nigerian girls, the media’s Muslimsplainers sprang into action to explain why it had nothing to do with Islam.

Time featured “5 Reasons Boko Haram is Un-Islamic”; a listicle friendly article from one of those non-Muslim experts on why Islam is feminist:

“With their sustained campaign of murders and kidnappings, the members of Boko Haram conduct themselves in a manner that could barely be more alien to the Prophet Muhammad teachings,” the article claimed.
This is known as the "No True Scotsman" fallacy in which you explain away all bad things about a group you defend as being inauthentic.  They aren't really Muslim anyway.
And to a certain extent, they're right, and wrong at the same time.  The Koran is pretty contradictory.  That's because it was written by Muhammad at different stages in his career as a would-be world conqueror.  In the initial stages of his inventing Islam, he presented it as a moral system and a warning.  The first chapters of the Koran read a lot like parts of the Bible, especially Jesus' sermons: repent for judgment is at hand.  It condemns immoral behavior and calls for repentence.  Then, as Muhammad gained followers and began his series of military campaigns to conquer all surrounding areas in the name of his new religion, the themes shifted.
Now it was all about defeating and subjugating the wicked.  About how Muslim warriors are the hand of Allah on earth and fighting against the evil unbeliever who will be punished.  Here instead of a call for personal repentance there are calls for conquest and destruction, slaughtering the wicked and cutting the heads off of those who will not submit or convert.
The News you didn't get from Egypt
Then, having beaten almost everyone and in power, the tone shifts again.  The last parts of the Koran are about how to govern, how to live, what to do in minute detail down to what hand to eat with, and information on how to live with the wicked Jew and Christian who are so close to Islam.  The calls for death and conquest are subdued and fade away in this last bit, but complaints about women and how to keep them under control are pretty much the exclusive content of the last few chapters.
Now, Muslims say that there is a principle where older parts of the Koran are understood or replaced by the newer; so if there's a conflict between part A and part C, the part C bits are the ones you follow.
But then it gets complicated.  Because the Hadith is a collection of stories allegedly about Muhammad from his life, collected anecdotes, quotes, information, and tales of his life that are then used to interpret the Koran and create Islamic law with.  And these can wildly differ, conflict with, and even completely contradict each other.  
To make matters worse, for a thousand years or so, different Sharia Courts and Imams have been making official proclamations about Islam that are not just suggestions but absolute total voice-of-Allah law of Islam and the countries that it controls.
And these, too, can be totally at odds.  So its a horrible contradictory mess of conflicting absolutes all claiming to be the total voice of Allah.  And, as Muhammad himself allegedly said, Allah changes his mind sometimes, that's why the conflicts in his writings.
The end result is that Islam can be honestly portrayed as both peaceful and opposing horrible violence against people... and violent conquerors out to behead anyone who disagrees.  Because both are true.
The problem with all this is that its academic.  The people doing these horrific things are not Buddhists, Hindus, or Presbyterians.  Its not Baptists or Shintoists, its not Sikhs or Mormons.  Its Muslims. In other times, those other groups may or may not have been terrible and violent but right now its almost always Muslims if a religious group is doing something.
And pretending otherwise, for whatever reason, is simply idiotic.  These guys claim to be Muslim, and they can make a good case for it - especially as Ismaeli Islam (that's the guys who think girls need to be circumcised to control their uncontrollable seductive evil).
This kneejerk need to claim they aren't Muslim has nothing to do with Islam at all.  It has to do with wanting to seem like a nice guy, like the upper road traveler, the one who doesn't judge and isn't a racist.  Its about me in other words, not them at all; and in the end, that's what it always ends up about for the left.

No comments: