Posted on 11/08/2001 11:27:01 AM PST by ouroboros
You weren't lost. I did it on purpose.
This from someone who blamed September 11th on Henry Kissinger and George Bush Sr.
After you track down the "usual morons," maybe you can help O.J. find the "real killers."
I always enjoyed reading Belloc...even though I'd most certainly be a heretic in his eyes! **g**
Yeah. Right. "You can do anything you want, as long as you want to do what we tell you."
Sobran has gone off the deep end. What an ass.
Millions of modern people of the white civilization - that is, the civilization of Europe and America - have forgotten all about Islam. They have never come in contact with it. They take for granted that it is decaying, and that, anyway, it is just a foreign religion which will not concern them. It is, as a fact, the most formidable and persistent enemy which our civilization has had, and may at any moment become as large a menace in the future as it has been in the past.
…
Today we are accustomed to think of the Mohammedan world as something backward and stagnant, in all material affairs at least. We cannot imagine a great Mohammedan fleet made up of modern ironclads and submarines, or a great modern Mohammedan army fully equipped with modern artillery, flying power and the rest. But not so very long ago, less than a hundred years before the Declaration of Independence, the Mohammedan Government centred at Constantinople had better artillery and better army equipment of every kind than had we Christians in the West. The last effort they made to destroy Christendom was contemporary with the end of the reign of Charles II in England and of his brother James and of the usurper William III. It failed during the last years of the seventeenth century, only just over two hundred years ago. Vienna, as we saw, was almost taken and only saved by the Christian army under the command of the King of Poland on a date that ought to be among the most famous in history - September 11, 1683. But the peril remained, Islam was still immensely powerful within a few marches of Austria and it was not until the great victory of Prince Eugene at Zenta in 1697 and the capture of Belgrade that the tide really turned - and by that time we were at the end of the seventeenth century.
It should be fully grasped that the generation of Dean Swift, the men who saw the court of Louis XIV in old age, the men who saw the Hanoverians brought in as puppet Kings for England by the dominating English wealthy class, the men who saw the apparent extinction of Irish freedom after the failure of James II's campaign at the Boyne and the later surrender of Limerick, all that lifetime which overlapped between the end of the seventeenth and the beginning of the eighteenth century, was dominated by a vivid memory of a Mohammedan threat which had nearly made good and which apparently might in the near future be repeated. The Europeans of that time thought of Mohammedanism as we think of Bolshevism or as white men in Asia think of Japanese power today.
What happened was something quite unexpected; the Mohammedan power began to break down on the material side. The Mohammedans lost the power of competing successfully with the Christians in the making of those instruments whereby dominion is assured; armament, methods of communication and all the rest of it. Not only did they not advance, they went back. Their artillery became much worse than ours. While our use of the sea vastly increased, theirs sank away till they had no first class ships with which to fight naval battles.
The eighteenth century is a story of their gradual losing of the race against the European in material things.
When that vast revolution in human affairs introduced by the invention of modern machinery began in England and spread slowly throughout Europe, the Mohammedan world proved itself quite incapable of taking advantage thereof. During the Napoleonic wars, although supported by England, Islam failed entirely to meet the French armies of Egypt; its last effort resulted in complete defeat (the land battle of the Nile).
All during the nineteenth century the process continued. As a result, Mohammedan North Africa was gradually subjected to European control; the last independent piece to go being Morocco. Egypt fell under the control of England. Long before that Greece had been liberated, and the Balkan States. Half a lifetime ago it was taken for granted everywhere that the last remnants of Mohammedan power in Europe would disappear. England bolstered it up and did save Constantinople from being taken by the Russians in 1877-78, but it seemed only a question of a few years before the Turks would be wiped out for good. Everyone was waiting for the end of Islam, on this side of the Bosphorus at least; while in Syria, Asia Minor and Mesopotamia it was losing all political and military vigour. After the Great War, what was left of Mohammedan power, even in hither Asia, was only saved by the violent quarrels between the Allies.
Even Syria and Palestine were divided between France and England. Mesopotamia fell under the control of England and no menace of Islamic power remained, though it was still entrenched in Asia Minor and kept a sort of precarious hold on the thoroughly decayed city of Constantinople alone. The Mediterranean was gone; every inch of European territory was gone; all full control over African territory was gone; and the great duel between Islam and Christendom seemed at last to have been decided in our own day.
…
But can we be certain it is so decided? I doubt it very much. It has always seemed to me possible, and even probable, that there would be a resurrection of Islam and that our sons or our grandsons would see the renewal of that tremendous struggle between the Christian culture and what has been for more than a thousand years its greatest opponent.
Why this conviction should have arisen in the minds of certain observers and travellers, such as myself, I will now consider. It is indeed a vital question, "May not Islam arise again?"
In a sense the question is already answered because Islam has never departed. It still commands the fixed loyalty and unquestioning adhesion of all the millions between the Atlantic and the Indus and further afield throughout scattered communities of further Asia. But I ask the question in the sense "Will not perhaps the temporal power of Islam return and with it the menace of an armed Mohammedan world which will shake off the domination of Europeans - still nominally Christian - and reappear again as the prime enemy of our civilization?" The future always comes as a surprise but political wisdom consists in attempting at least some partial judgment of what that surprise may be. And for my part I cannot but believe that a main unexpected thing of the future is the return of Islam. Since religion is at the root of all political movements and changes and since we have here a very great religion physically paralysed but morally intensely alive, we are in the presence of an unstable equilibrium which cannot remain permanently unstable. Let us then examine the position.
…
In view of this, anyone with a knowledge of history is bound to ask himself whether we shall not see in the future a revival of Mohammedan political power, and the renewal of the old pressure of Islam upon Christendom.
…
We have seen how the material political power of Islam declined very rapidly during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. We have just followed the story of that decline. When Suleiman the Magnificent was besieging Vienna he had better artillery, better energies and better everything than his opponents; Islam was still in the field the material superior of Christendom - at least it was the superior in fighting power and fighting instruments. That was within a very few years of the opening of the eighteenth century. Then came the inexplicable decline. The religion did not decay, but its political power and with that its material power declined astonishingly, and in the particular business of arms it declined most of all. When Dr. Johnson's father, the bookseller, was setting up business at Lichfield, the Grand Turk was still dreaded as a potential conqueror of Europe; before Dr. Johnson was dead no Turkish fleet or army could trouble the West. Not a lifetime later, the Mohammedan in North Africa had fallen subject to the French; and those who were then young men lived to see nearly all Mohammedan territory, except for a decaying fragment ruled from Constantinople, firmly subdued by the French and British Governments.
These things being so, the recrudescence of Islam, the possibility of that terror under which we lived for centuries reappearing, and of our civilization again fighting for its life against what was its chief enemy for a thousand years, seems fantastic. Who in the Mohammedan world today can manufacture and maintain the complicated instruments of modern war? Where is the political machinery whereby the religion of Islam can play an equal part in the modern world?
I say the suggestion that Islam may re-arise sounds fantastic - but this is only because men are always powerfully affected by the immediate past: - one might say that they are blinded by it.
Cultures spring from religions; ultimately the vital force which maintains any culture is its philosophy, its attitude toward the universe; the decay of a religion involves the decay of the culture corresponding to it - we see that most clearly in the breakdown of Christendom today. The bad work begun at the Reformation is bearing its final fruit in the dissolution of our ancestral doctrines - the very structure of our society is dissolving.
In the place of the old Christian enthusiasms of Europe there came, for a time, the enthusiasm for nationality, the religion of patriotism. But self-worship is not enough, and the forces which are making for the destruction of our culture, notably the Jewish Communist propaganda from Moscow, have a likelier future before them than our old-fashioned patriotism.
In Islam there has been no such dissolution of ancestral doctrine - or, at any rate, nothing corresponding to the universal break-up of religion in Europe. The whole spiritual strength of Islam is still present in the masses of Syria and Anatolia, of the East Asian mountains, of Arabia, Egypt and North Africa.
The final fruit of this tenacity, the second period of Islamic power, may be delayed: - but I doubt whether it can be permanently postponed.
There is nothing in the Mohammedan civilization itself which is hostile to the development of scientific knowledge or of mechanical aptitude. I have seen some good artillery work in the hands of Mohammedan students of that arm; I have seen some of the best driving and maintenance of mechanical road transport conducted by Mohammedans. There is nothing inherent to Mohammedanism to make it incapable of modern science and modern war. Indeed the matter is not worth discussing. It should be self-evident to anyone who has seen the Mohammedan culture at work. That culture happens to have fallen back in material applications; there is no reason whatever why it should not learn its new lesson and become our equal in all those temporal things which now alone give us our superiority over it - whereas in Faith we have fallen inferior to it.
People who question this may be misled by a number of false suggestions dating from the immediate past. For instance, it was a common saying during the nineteenth century that Mohammedanism had lost its political power through its doctrine of fatalism. But that doctrine was in full vigour when the Mohammedan power was at its height. For that matter Mohammedanism is no more fatalist than Calvinism; the two heresies resemble each other exactly in their exaggerated insistence upon the immutability of Divine decrees.
There was another more intelligent suggestion made in the nineteenth century, which was this: - that the decline of Islam had proceeded from its fatal habit of perpetual civil division: the splitting up and changeability of political authority among the Mohammedans. But that weakness of theirs was present from the beginning; it is inherent in the very nature of the Arabian temperament from which they started. Over and over again this individualism of theirs, this "fissiparous" tendency of theirs, has gravely weakened them; yet over and over again they have suddenly united under a leader and accomplished the greatest things.
Now it is probable enough that on these lines - unity under a leader - the return of Islam may arrive. There is no leader as yet, but enthusiasm might bring one and there are signs enough in the political heavens today of what we may have to expect from the revolt of Islam at some future date perhaps not far distant.
Thanks again, by the way.
If all goes well, I'm going back in the spring and will get my close look at you!
Having said that, the danger is as others above have alluded to: when enough Americans convert and change their allegiances to Islam, we will have a situation like Islamic Spain.
I'm not one to hate ... (save watching Frontline last night, I suppose). But, in concentrating on what we've in common, it's only natural some diametrically opposed concepts will emerge with all clarity. Where, in Islam, those concepts or precepts enure to totalitarian-style oppression or the hating and killing "in the name of Allah" in which these alleged militant Muslims engage, I see no reason to pretend some compromise is possible there.
It was interesting last night the way non-Iraqi trainees at the terrorist camps were repeatedly cast as "militant" about their faith ... daily prayers and all that.
I still don't believe for a moment this is about Islam any more than I believe that liberation theology as practiced in Brazil is about Christianity. It's communist "consciousness-raising" as part of the revolution from within. They are triangulating the People of the Book.
What's most interesting to me regarding this insane fixation (of our Western atheists, even) on this so-called "Holy War" is the fact it leaves China completely out of the picture.
If, like I do, you look at China (and Russia's) ability to remain aloof from the WTO or G-7 as they obtain all manner of favors without obligating themselves until ALL are suitabliy strapped down FIRST ... I think there's an argument here for China's sitting back and only encouraging Russia to think she's running the show from her unique vantage point on the faultline of East and West.
History does matter ... particularly to militant atheists inclined toward the heresies of determinism and historicism.
Between Moscow and St. Petersburg, indeed I learned to truly appreciate for the first time how ancient are her ties to the Middle East and how closely connected -- related, more like it, where Germany's concerned -- she became to the West.
I'll China's been stroking Russia so she'll will presume to run the show and let the former Soviets occupy themselves such that they forget it's China who's taking actual control of the key installations -- like the Panama Canal -- around the world.
To tell you the truth, it didn't surprise or particularly disappoint me to see George Bush running around in a UN blue Mao jacket last month. But my heart of hearts was sorta bummed they didn't let Putin wear red as well.
We'll see ... with any luck, despite their "Sisters Sisters" act worldwide and inside our State Departments, agencies and the UN the past 40 years, there's been more hate than love in Sino-Soviet relations, Russia's more wary than I suspect and they've been taking a page from Putin -- Military Deals A Way of Influencing Power Shifts -- and flooding the Chicoms (and Middle East terrorists like Saddam) with cheap Russian military junk the whole time.
It seems Islam has been radicalized from Indonesia to Nigeria and all parts in between. Islam's strengths (changelessness, consistency, simplicity) have almost been twisted and turned upon Islam itself so it grows ever more petrified, solidified and unbending. Islam could become a casualty of itself perverted in the hands of the radicals. That to me is the clearest evidence that it is not Islam itself but rather another movement, anarchistic or communist, trying to destroy many things at once.
I really do think the Sufis have the only theological and philosophical structure that could help Islam survive. Theirs is the heritage of Rumi and the great poets. They have a mystical tradition of amazing similarity to some streams in Christianity and in the Jewish Kabbalah. Sorry to go on so long. This subject really interests me.
It interests me as well ... 'course I'm always struck by any proof our human nature transcends even the most disparate of cultures, faiths and codes to reveal us essentially equal, if not the same.
Your instincts are correct about China in part although it's definitely the Soviets who carried the lion's share of the burden in cultivating, training and sponsoring terrorists worldwide who'd accomplish their Period of Escalating Violence globally.
Again, China does fascinate me for its ability to capitalize on the efforts of others ... their providing both the West and Russia exactly the "empty spaces" necessary for capitalist fools to rush in and cunning Soviets to assert control of the "consciousness-raising" that will only enure, in the end, to the more Pure source of militant atheism.
Here's a interesting old thread such thoughts always bring to mind: Dialectics, Chinese (and Clinton) Style (My Title) (posted by Betty Boop)
And how do you figure? Who is occupying whom? Where are there airbases? Which of our states is used as the staging grounds for their incursions into Mexico and Guatemala? How many carriers have they positioned strategically in our gulf?
[Askel5: If any nation may be said to have hung on the cross with Christ, it is Russia. It's not as if they escaped somehow the terror, starvation, repression and slaughter imposed by their militant communist leadership on others. They suffered it in spades themselves. If they are hardened, in large part it's due to the scars they bear.]
This is beautifully written and captures in much better words than I could write how I feel about Russia and also about Romania where I was born.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.