Replies

The war can be won, if you understand the history of Islamic conquest and rebellion, the conflict between civilizations, and the reformation of religion.

To start with, the formation of the Ottoman Empire showed the same pattern of rapid expansionism found in other empires, in which the people in one country would take over another country, then train those people to take over yet another country. It is an effective technique, until the progression is stopped cold. From then on the empire is in a state of slow decay, its expansion at an end.

This is one facet of Muslim aggression. The others were the frequent Mahdi revolts through history. There were numerous Muslim rebellions during the reign of the British Empire, with much the same character. Led by some charismatic individual, they tended to burn out quickly when confronted, at most only lasting the rest of the life of the Mahdi.

But neither of this describes the situation, except in technique, we face today, which is a clash of civilizations. Between modernity and barbarity.

At the time of its founding, Islam was far more “civilized” than the barbarity that existed in the region. It was the “better mousetrap”, which anyone could see, and that made it easy to sell and spread because it was a better way. This gave Muslims great confidence with their sales pitch.

Today, Muslims still try to pretend that Islam is more “civilized” than modern civilization. But it is so plainly inferior to the man on the street that it is a hard sell. This leaves the true believers in a terrible situation.

Primitivism and barbarism cannot coexist with civilization, as the comparison is deadly. The average man on the street will vote with his feet, and primitivism will die out. The one way barbarism can win is if civilization is wiped out entirely. Otherwise it is a desperate effort of the barbarian leaders to keep their people from deserting.

Each year now, only a few, usually mentally unstable people, decide to embrace Islam. In exchange, literally hundreds of thousands or even millions of normal people are leaving Islam because they can no longer abide its primitivism and barbarism. Islam is hemorrhaging followers.

Which leads to the question, can Islam be reformed in such a way that it can become part of modern civilization, without being in perpetual conflict?

The answer to that is “yes”, it can. This is because the vicious clarity of its doctrines can both be ignored and rationalized away, reinterpreted by those to emphasize the less hostile and primitive text in favor of values more appropriate to the modern world.

Certainly it is hypocritical. But religion has always been hypocritical, based on the needs of its followers.

For example, Muslim reformists could re-define Jihad as being a purely spiritual pursuit, that should never be reflected in violence or oppression. Slavery could be re-defined as self-control and service, in essence elevating those who serve over those who pretend to mastery.

Of course it is contrived and stretched to its limits, but when faced with either that or dying out as a religion, their wiser religious leaders will opt for self-control.

And as things are going now, Islam is slowly dying. The choice for many is either to become “secular” Muslims, or if they are completely fed up with Islam, to become Christians. Often not out of any great love for Christianity, but so they will be able to say that they are Christians, NOT Muslims. Their revulsion and rejection of Islam are that strong.

If Iraq can change and thrive as a secular state, it will do much to persuade Muslims around the world that they, too, can and should push for reform. Already the stirring of democracy is putting pressure on leaders through the Middle East. The wiser ones realize that democracy will bring them stability, not radicalism, their people having much the same impulses as their leaders, if even a tad more conservative.

But democracy is not an inherent part of Islam. For it to emerge will force many sensible reforms on doctrines, as just common sense. And common sense is the start of reason, and reasonableness.