Men as Dhimmi

Recent and natural interest in militant Islam has led to a renewed interest in a sensitive and often ignored social and theological fact: Islam, in its true and pure form, does not recognize Christians and Jews as having the same legal or moral status as Muslims.

An Egyptian Jew, Bat Ye'or or "Daughter of the Nile" has written several well-researched books on the status of Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Samaritans as "People of the Book" granted protections under Islam which pagans do not have. This status "dhimmi" is distinctly inferior to the status of a Muslim.

Within those lands of Islam or dar al-Islam, the Dhimmi from the beginning lived under deliberately humiliating conditions, which varied from place to place and from ruler to ruler, but included the following types of inequalities.

Dhimmi were compelled to pay a special tax from which Muslims were exempt, and which was paid by the enslavement of the Dhimmi family members if not paid. Dhimmi could not strike back at a Muslim, even in self-defense. Dhimmi could not testify against a Muslim in a court of law, and only the word of another Muslim could be considered. Property acquired by Dhimmi was only possessory and was not true ownership.

The deliberate purpose of these rules was to humiliate the Dhimmi, to make the Dhimmi understand that the best Dhimmi was worse than the worst Muslim, to require that the dirty work of society was done by the Dhimmi, to disparage any accomplishments of Dhimmi.

Part of this process of progressive dehumanization was to re-write history. Moderns tragically know little of the old and sophisticated culture of the pre-Islamic Zoroastrian empire of the Sassinians because conquering Muslims destroyed all the libraries with libraries of ancient texts. Eastern Orthodox Christianity did not suffer the same fate because Constantinople was built at a strategic and defensible location, which was not conquered until 1453.

The result of all this - which is not intended as an attack upon Islam or Muslims today - was to stop progress in dar al-Islam, which meant that lands once the richest and most sophisticated civilizations in human history - Egypt, Mesopotamia, Asia Minor, the Iranian plains, and the Indian subcontinent - became backwaters.

This was the result of twin, complementary causes. First, the dogmatic acceptance of the inherent moral and intellectual inferiority of all Dhimmi meant the suppression of vast amounts of human wisdom and learning: Torah, Talmud, the Gospels, the Avesta, the Gathas, and all its interpreters, as well as the rejection of all contemporary contributions by Dhimmi (much like Nazis would reject "Jewish science.")

Second, Jewish and Christian great minds fled to Provence, Milan, Aragon and other parts of Christian Europe, which led directly to the later explosion of modern science, modern medicine, modern political theory and countless other disciplines of intellect and art.

This decay of dar al-Islam explains why there is so much anger at Jews and Christians within some parts of dar al-Islam today. According to Islamic dogma, Instead of being wealthy, learned, charitable, powerful and happy, the Dhimmi of America, Israel, Europe and the English-speaking democracies should be miserable.

There is a parallel between the way Islam historically treated Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians and Samaritans and how Womenism treats men today. Those differences in outlook and ability between the two sexes can never be allowed by Womenists to be seen as male superiority in any area. This is blatant absurdity, even if one swallows whole the false premise that homo sapiens, unlike every other species of life, does not have profound differences between the two sexes.

So just as Muslims, who came as military conquerors, complain about exploitation by the West, Womenists decry the silly "glass ceiling." This barrier is a consequence of choices by women not to focus their lives on business and a consequence of male domination in those areas of very high levels of analytical power (none of the top 100 chess players in America is female, and only one of the top 100 chess players in the world is female, despite the fact that many despised minorities have succeeded in chess because of its inherent neutrality).

While the "glass cellar" of garbage collectors, school janitors, and road construction workers seems natural and fair to Womenists. This is almost identical to the viewpoint of formative Islam, which considered that dhimmi who succeeded were never as good as Muslims and that these dhimmi should be relegated to all the lowly and nasty roles in society. The other modern parallel is the ghastly spectacle of Jewish doctors and professors being forced by mocking Stormtroopers to sweep streets and clean latrines.

Absent from this formative Muslim viewpoint and the contemporary Womenist viewpoint is the notion of trade-offs. Business tycoons live with stress, often lose their families, and may die from heart attacks, while housewives may be bored and feel useless, they also do not have to worry about being fired and they have the companionship of their children.

This sneering condescending perspective must be wrapped in absolute moral certainty that sex or race or religion in every context and in clear degrees is superior to the "other" - the dhmmi, the male, the Jew.

There are hundreds of other examples of trade-offs operating in a healthy culture, but the pathology of the historical Islamic attitude toward dhimmi and the Womenist attitude toward men are both based upon the same logical inconsistency: all variables in an equation cannot be simultaneously maximized - and there are many variables in life.

What is the prognosis? Not good, sadly. As Bat Ye'or points out, the dhimmi of dar al-Islam slowly fell apart demographically and culturally. The religious heritage of Zoroastrians (modern Parsee) was almost extinguished; Jews and Christians who remained in the Muslim conquered lands that stretches from Indonesia to Morocco, began a long descent and frequently fought among themselves for the scraps thrown to them. Dhimmi were often given positions of power, just like Womenists are more than happy to have Bill Clinton as president, but this did not prevent a long drop into ignorance, poverty and isolation.

What is bad for men is also bad for women. Just as Muslim superiority led directly to the long decline of Islam into a backward, angry and vicious culture, so Womenist superiority will lead - has led, many would say - into a modern culture in which many women cannot understand why they cannot have everything in life.

Gaea or some other lifeless goddess of Womenism has promise them a perfect world, if only the "other" was sufficiently humbled and weakened and robbed. Killing Jews and Poles helped insure Nazi defeat. Massacres of Jews and Christians during the mythical and fake majesty of the Caliphate at Cordova, caused poor and fragmented Iberian Christian kingdoms to drive out the Muslims in the Reconquista. Hammering men again and again will not bring joy and peace to women either.

It is not just the Dhimmi whose lives and hopes are wrecked by irrational arrogance. It is not just Jew and Poles whose tears end up shed in the savagery of global war. It is not just men whose happiness and peace is crushed by the vile misology of Womenism. Everyone loses, every time.

Reminds me of a description Lord Macartney of the Chinese: "They will treat you as a god, or they will treat you as an animal. But they will never treat you as a man."

Same seems to be true with all too many Muslims: They will treat you as the hammer, or they'll treat you as the anvil. But they will never treat you as an equal.

This attitude has also provided the driving force behind the 'Palestinian' movement. It is a fragrant insult to Muslims that Jews and Christians should be prominent residents of the Holy Land much less be in control of it. I just don't see any evidence, current or historical, which would lead me to believe that Muslims can live in peace with people who hold to other belief systems.

As with any culture with imposed, second-class status for an identifyable out group, eventually the culture stagnates and fails. Not to allow the genius of all to compete in the marketplace of ideas is to willingly choose to do without some portion of your culture's intellectual capital.

The Islamic world, once the very seat of learning on this planet, is now an insignificant backwater in the realm of the intellect. It is sad but the example may protect others from the same foolish mistake.

Reminds me of a description Lord Macartney of the Chinese: "They will treat you as a god, or they will treat you as an animal. But they will never treat you as a man."

The English used to say: The German is either at your feet or at your throat.

I concur with your analysis entirely. Note that, during the decline of the Islamic Empire and its fracture into warring kingdoms and Mongol tributaries, it had been experiencing a steady drift toward statism by nationalizing caliphs and the centralizing Ottoman emperors. Similarly, in Nazi Germany, it was a totalitarian state that targeted Jews as scapegoats. So in the emerging statism of our society, males are the ones becoming subjected to second-class status.

What this grants the ruling oligarchy is a never-vanquished but always persecuted group of underlings on whom all the troubles can be blamed while their actual root is ignored. This is a frightening scenario, and a useful concept to grasp.

agreed. the same can be said to some extent for the decline of technical skill in the South prior to the Reconstruction, when a very great deal of skilled manual labor (masonry, etc...) was performed by slaves. The white southern culture learned a disdain for hard "menial" work which lingers to this day.
The same can be said of the samurai families of japan after the meiji restoration. Save those with stockpiled wealth and imperial connections, they fared badly when they lost their social status and privileges - because they didn't know how to do a damned thing.

The white southern culture learned a disdain for hard "menial" work which lingers to this day.
You're full of it and ignorant of the situation of many southerners! Despite what "publik edyukashun" might have taught you many, if not most, white southerners worked their own lands, not having the financial luxury of being able to own slaves.
Nice Southron bashing you got going there.
So much for giving respect to my elders. When you earn it you'll get it.

many, if not most, white southerners worked their own lands, not having the financial luxury of being able to own slaves.

Yes; those are the people for whom the disparaging term "White Trash" was invented by the planation elite culture.

Yes; those are the people for whom the disparaging term "White Trash" was invented by the planation elite culture.
And here I thought it was a modern day expression of disparagement. Having not come from the plantation elite culture I wouldn't know. Thanks for explaining how you knew of its origins. Who would've thought that you were part of the plantation elite culture.
Since you're so knowing, where does "cracker" come from?
Don't you find "White Trash" to be just a more PC way to castigate whites in general? What were the blacks who lived that way called? Black trash?
If some terms, such as nigger, chink, or wetback are no longer acceptable in public why is White Trash still allowed without any repercussions?

Um. Buckwheat? I live in QUITMAN, BROOKS COUNTY, GEORGIA. Accusing me of ignorance of the conditions of modern Southern Man is a bit ludicrous.
Oh. Buckwheat? I am a product of the Jesuits, not public education.
And, Buckwheat? Yeoman agriculture was not terribly skilled before the civil war. Masonry and carpentry were, as was laying rail lines. Slaves were used for these and other purposes. Those who could not afford to own slaves frequently rented them.
Um. Duh.
Calm down and look at things the way they actually are.
Otherwise, you tend to come off like an Islamofascist: Ignorant, arrogant, and mad as a hornet.

And, Buckwheat?
Are you implying something? Why don't you just come right out and say it in no uncertain terms instead of using your simple euphemism?
I live in QUITMAN, BROOKS COUNTY, GEORGIA.
And this means what exactly...?
Accusing me of ignorance of the conditions of modern Southern Man is a bit ludicrous.
Why? It is ludicrous. You're making a blanket, unsupportable claim about all modern Southern Men using a perception you've attained from over 100 years ago. "Let's Do the Time Warp Again"
I am a product of the Jesuits, not public education.
Isn't that special! /Church Lady
So that makes you smarter than everyone else?
Readying for the next Inquisition? Ignatius, nor his Order of Jesuits, was "all that".
Calm down and look at things the way they actually are.
Seems like you want me to bow and scrape before my betters (syn. superior, elder).
From the rest of your response it seems that you might be part of that plantation elite mentality mentioned earlier in the thread yourself.
Otherwise, you tend to come off like an Islamofascist: Ignorant, arrogant, and mad as a hornet.
Such a nice, conceited smear job you got going there. Why do you wish to associate me, a believer in Christ, with Islamist? And I'm the arrogant one? You're the one calling me Buckwheat!
I'm no whipping boy, Mr. Misperception, I fight back.

No, actually, you start fights and scream like a gut-punched girl when you get trounced.
Either you failed to note that each point I made in the immediately preceeding post was a direct rebuttal to particular assumptions and assertions you made in the post preceeding that, or you are pretending that you failed to so note. Which was it, then: Ignorance or deceit?
If you persist, I shall lead you through the process and make all explicitly clear. I would hope you would instead prefer to calm yourself and do a little thinking, perhaps a triflingly small amount of research, that you would come to understand how off-base you are. I do hope so, as it will save me the time and effort required to humiliate you in public.
Oh, and "Buckwheat" is no code word for anything sinister of which I am aware, it is merely a pungently irritating way of addressing an assertive and irksome fool. I wouldn't have used the term had you decided to disagree politely, Buckwheat.

If some terms, such as nigger, chink, or wetback are no longer acceptable in public why is White Trash still allowed without any repercussions?

Here, at least, you have a valid point. Terms such as "redneck" and "white trash" should indeed be held in as much disfavor as "nigger" et alia.

crushing you properly will require some reading, quotation, a bibliography of sorts. I could just pile reams of apocrypha upon you, but I suspect your response would be to claim that I made it all up.
So be patient.
In the meantime, do look up Quitman, GA on a map. Also, consider the fact that I have lived in the Southeast since 1988. Seven years in Louisiana, seven in Georgia. You might also wish to reread both your posts and mine, paying particular attention to details and limiting statements (such as the very first one "the same can be said to some extent...").
If, after all this, you still desire to be flogged publicly, rest assured that it is coming.

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.