Orson Scott Card: Fanatic Terrorism from the Past

Rhinoceros Times, Greensboro, NC ^ | 10/30/2003 | Orson Scott Card

[Liberal Classic]

So, why not say simply that you do not like fantasy writing?

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

I also buy many new books but I am more discerning when
buying new books.

[dennisw]

That's why I say play the endgame now. Take the Jihadists at their word. Take out Mecca, Medina, Qom tomorrow. And the Iranian nuclear program too. We do it or Israel does it. Destroy Allah's holy sites and you show him to be an impotent, lamer moon god not worth getting all worked up over.

Quite possibly our economy would do great after the curse of Islamic terror is lifted.

[Tolik]

I am not sure we'll have the balls to do it even we hit with 10 times of 9-11.

Look at Israel. They have no shortage of their own useful idiots despite constant threat of terror. And presumably right-wing government won't offer anything better than  half-measures at best.

[JmyBryan]

But have you read Card?

[Servant of the 9]

He writes fantasy, the lowest form of writing.

What fiction is not Fantasy?
At least Card's is honestly labeled, that puts him one step up on wriers of thrillers, mysteries, or 'serious fiction'.

So9

[10mm]

Take out Mecca, Medina, Qom tomorrow. And the Iranian nuclear program too.

Absolutely 100% correct. The muslims' faith needs to be totally destroyed. Just as the Jap emperor in WW2 was shown to be only a man, and not a deity.

Islam needs to be viewed as a political philosophy, like fascism or communism, and not as a legitimate religion.

I would also like to add the Dome of the Rock to your hitlist.

[Servant of the 9]

I am afraid going to the 'hoof and mouth disease' remedy is the only way we are gonna beat this.

Time for the 'cowboy' President to play 'Cowboys and Muslims'

So9

[Darksheare]

Fantasy as the lowest form of writing?
You show me how inventing a whole language and writing form is low.
Tolkien did just that, repeatedly.
Especially as a member of the writing group The Inklings.

I take it that your reading is not for entertainment.
After all, entertainment and imagination would be low as well.

[Darksheare]

"So leaving them alone will not cause them to leave us alone – it will encourage them to provoke us more."

That's correct.
And I was flamed for saying that before, but hey.
Truth is never popular.
One can only hope that we have the guts to see this through, regardless of what the left delusionates about.
(Yes, coining a word. 'Delusionates', hysterical fantasizing about failure, and how they can use it to regain power.)

[dennisw]

Once Allah shows he has abandoned them by letting Mecca be obliterated, Dome of the Rock will be torn down stone by stone by angry crazed Muslim mobs.

[hopespringseternal]

The only type of books that I have not finished were fantasy and romance novels.

I can't tell you how happy we are all that you took time out of your busy reading schedule to come here and tell us all that you don't like fantasy.

[Wonder Warthog]

"If by mistake I pick up a fantasy book at my used book store ( I will buy 20 or thirty at a time ) I toss it. So it is a personal opinion based on 53 years of reading at least 300 books a year."

Sturgeon's Law, only the ratio of good stuff to c*** is lower.

I take it you didn't like Tolkien, either.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

He writes fantasy, the lowest form of writing.

Give me a break! "Gulliver's Travels", the entire Jules Verne opus? Tom Clancy's "Debt of Honor" was eerily prophetic. Robert Heinlein is brilliant, his works are about so much more than the apparent topic.

[x]

Card brings back a forgotten period of history and raises some good points, but his conclusions are highly confused. He writes: "The best answer to extremist Muslim views is to live in a country ruled by extremist Muslims. Citizens of Iran under the ayatollahs and Afghanistan under the Taliban are far less likely a recruiting ground for anti-Western terrorism." If this is true, most of his other conclusions aren't. And vice versa, though it's possible that neither is entirely true. At any rate, he's very confused in his prescription.

The nub of his argument seems to be here: "The terrorists want a world war between all of Islam and everybody else, because they believe that in such a war Allah will give them the victory and the entire world will become Muslim (or at least be ruled by Muslims)." Is this true? Is it necessarily likely to remain true? Others have seen the conflict as involving more specific issues, and see wars like the current one as simply making things worse.

I can't say Card's entirely wrong. He captures the fanaticism of the terrorists better than those who'd argue against him. But it does look as though he's in over his head. He has to take into account the factors (short of annihilation) that break or inhibit or dissipate fanaticism and make it possible for people of different religions to live together, and it doesn't look like he has.

[Tolik]

Thank you for your interesting points.

The nub of his argument seems to be here: "The terrorists want a world war between all of Islam and everybody else, because they believe that in such a war Allah will give them the victory and the entire world will become Muslim (or at least be ruled by Muslims)." Is this true? Is it necessarily likely to remain true? Others have seen the conflict as involving more specific issues, and see wars like the current one as simply making things worse.

I remember that Osama's inspirations could have been well summarized this way. To a question [paraphrasing]: what should we do to accommodate you? He answered: first, you must convert to Islam.  Than he followed with a long list of requirements to us. After reading the first answer, I am not sure there is a point to continue with more specific issues. Thanks, but no thanks.

I don't think it is true for all muslims, but those who are actively against the West are recipients of mullah's propaganda stating just that.

I don't think he is over his head neither. He is very consistent in his politics writings. See any of his articles I linked. He publishes them almost weekly since 9-11-01. He would want nothing else that for muslims to stop terror ways and to live peacefully with neighbors. How?

His own solution for the Mideast problems (as he writes in his articles and his SF book "Shadow puppets") is for muslims to accept Israel as Allah-sent cousins that Allah wants to serve as a conduit to the Western accomplishments that can be used by muslims without compromising many of their own ways. (This is how they can reconcile Jews and Allah: He wants them there for a reason!). Sound utopian. Yes (and count me as skeptic too). BUT, what in their fanatical believes IS NOT utopian? (Somebody can probably find a Quran quote to support Cards idea). With unquestionable propaganda coming out from mullahs every day, what their brainwashed subjects would do if mullahs would change a tone? Of course, in his book, he shows that they had a change of heart AFTER a terrible war !?! under a threat of a total annihilation. !?!

Forgive my cynicism, but I definitely agree with his point that this war is on us. Better to fight it now on our terms, than wait and see, Because waiting can be interpreted only as our weakness. And we will pay much greater price later.

[x]

Thank you for your response. I agree with you about the necessity of using force to deal with terrorism, and about the fact that not all Muslims are terrorists. Card's overall view as you express it has much sense in it. But I have to wonder if his tactics will help him to achieve that end. It could certainly be argued that if we make ourselves the issue and stand at center stage, we'll become more of a target than if we downplay our own importance and stick to our own defense. I don't know if his vision will work in the end, though. Two peoples can be convinced that the other is put there to help them achieve their own purpose and yet still be at daggers drawn, because they disagree over who is the means and who has or is the end or goal.

[EveningStar]

I thought of Ender's Game as science fiction rather than fantasy. No matter, to me it is one of the best fiction books of any genre I have ever read. It has actually been described by some as a treatise on leadership. This is one of those rare science fiction books that has been embraced by people who don't particularly care for science fiction. Why not borrow a copy from your local library and give it a try? :)

[FreedomPoster]

First thing I thought of, too.

Actually, I thought of it shortly post-9/11, as well.