Providing the consequences for ideas
Posted by aogSaturday, 11 February 2006 at 12:09 TrackBack Ping URL

Orrin Judd comments

Interesting that the Islamicists and the Islamophobes share the same delusion, that Muslims want a Talibanistan.

The primary error here is the statement “Muslims want”. You can stop at that point and disregard whatever follows because it presumes a homogenity that doesn’t exist. Even glossing over the normal range of opinion in any society, one need only look at the Kurds vs. the Palestinians to see that there are distinct cultures even within Islam.

The problem is, as has become more clear to me, that what the majority of Muslims want may be of no consequence. In most societies the direction of that society is set far more by a dominant minority than by the lukewarm opinions of the majority, who primarily want to just get along. This is the reason I try to use the term Caliphascist instead of Muslim, because the former designates precisely that kind of minority within the Islamic world. The term EUlite is similar with regard to Europe. Over time, of course, a dominant minority will imprint its views on the majority, although we need to be careful to not descend to the “sheeple” view so prevalent these days on the Left. Ideas have consequences and in the long term it is unusual for the majority to not react to those consequences, regardless of how strongy a minority pushes against them (as the Left is finding out).

This leads to two other points. One is that even if the majority of Muslims are the kind of decent people who could do well in a liberal democracy, that is of secondary importance if the dominant minority is the Caliphascist faction. Absent other voices in the Islamic community, such a minority will eventually get its way, even if the majority disagrees. This was proven by the USSR, which fell only when the Communist minority lost its will to power. And as in that case, the fact that the majority of Russians were weak believers at best and cynical copers in the main didn’t prevent the rule of the Communists. Those who laud the basic decency of Muslims would do well to remember that much the same could have been said of the Russians under the USSR.

The other point is that one thing that can defeat such a minority is the consequences of their beliefs. The corrollary is that success will prolong their dominance. This is the real price of appeasement. It is my view that if one truly believes that there is no fundamental conflict between liberal democracy and Islam, the worst thing to do is to appease or ignore the Caliphascists and save the Islamic world from the consequences of their current dominance.

Post a comment