« UK: British QC May Defend Saddam at his Trial |
| France: Algerian Imam who Supports Wife-Beating Loses Case »
October 14, 2005
Islam: Still the Enemy
The Moderate Voice points to a post by Dean Esmay in which Mr. Esmay argues the widespread belief that "Islam is an inherently intolerant, slavery-oriented religion incompatible with democratic pluralism", is refuted by Freedom House's rankings measuring "freedom and democracy". I'm not willing to invest the time that would take to tackle Mr. Esmay's fully, but I do have several criticisms that should make the argument vastly less compelling.
First, there is a rather common philosophical confusion. Mr. Esmay makes little, if any, distinction between Freedom and Democracy. To be blunt; you can have Democracy and not have Freedom. Venezuela's Hugo Chavez came to power by democratic means, but acted like a despot from day one. Democracy exists as a vehicle for freedom, but that vehicle often fails.
Second, there is the question of dhimmitude. One of the easiest ways of maintaining a democratic majority in an ethnically divided country is through the politics of ethnic hatred. This sad fact is made vastly worse by the Islamic doctrine and practice of dhimmitude, in which non-Muslims are subject to onerous discrimination. (Example; Malaysia's extensive discrimination against its most successful minorities, especially the Chinese.)
Third, Mr. Esmay fails to include military conflict in his analysis. In many of the countries he lists, Muslims are trying to curtail the liberties of non-Muslims by armed conflict or the threat of armed conflict. (The Phillipines, Nigeria.) He doesn't take into account the Islamic Doctrine and practice of Jihad.
So, in short, Mr. Esmay's conclusions are hardly justified. (You don't need to prove your position to discredit a bad argument.) Perhaps, one of these days, we will find somebody who will indeed prove Islam is a Religion of Peace. Unless, of course, somebody already has.
Posted by Ruy Diaz at October 14, 2005 1:30 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/mt-tb.cgi/493
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Islam: Still the Enemy:
» sex machine from Jane
fucking machines fucking machines wet pussy hairy pussy
[Read More]
Tracked on March 24, 2006 11:53 AM
» Dane from Dane
Edgar [Read More]
Tracked on August 8, 2006 6:24 PM
Comments
I am always highly amused by people who say they haven't the time to explain why someone is wrong, and figure they can just assert it with handwaving, airy generalizations and get away with it.
First, you betray a common lack of understanding of the modern definition of democracy as understood by political scientists. Freedom cannot be had without democracy, and freedom can only be curtailed, not eliminated, with it. The standards used by Freedom House (and Polity) are well-established, their methodologies thoroughly vetted by years of study and vindication, showing that political and civil freedoms, while not the same thing, naturally follow each other. But the difference is why the Freedom House gives rankings for political freedom as one number, and civil freedoms for the other. The two don't march in lock step but they are inextricably linked, as can be seen from a review of all their data over the last 30 years on every nation and territory on earth.
Simply put, the philosophical confusion is yours.
Second, the concept of "dhimmitude" is more promoted by the likes of western Islamophobes and rabid lunatics like Osama Bin Laden than everyday muslims in free democratic nations. My analysis using objective data shows clearly that whether muslims are in the majority or in the minority, they have proven to be tolerant of religious freedom and democratic pluralism in nation after nation after nation, and whether they are a major minority, a plurality, or the majority, the majority of nations they are found in have been trending toward greater and greater civil and poltical freedom over time, by objectively measurable criteria. Here I offer proof, you offer handwaving generalizations.
Third, and finally, I included military conflict in my analysis. It is a fact that not a single one of the nations I mentioned--all of them democracies--has ever, even once, gotten into a military conflict with any other democratic nation. Never, despite endless opportunities to do so.
Whether you like it or not, the objective facts simply do not support your analysis.
Posted by: Dean Esmay at October 14, 2005 3:13 PM
Dean;
I see how this is going to be: I treat you respectfully and you call me an "Islamophobe". Fine. I don't have the time, but I'll make it--just wait until Monday, and drop a couple of tons of self-righteousness in the process.
Posted by: Ruy_Diaz at October 14, 2005 3:24 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)