Years ago I wrote of "armament spirituality," and the need for a depth morality of self-defense and other-defense . . . complete with an attitude towards the risks such a stance has of death.

Now I realize that a more general stance is necesssary, a "Confident Resistance," a principled dissent and self-defense against usurpations and tyrannies.

The main enemy of civilization these days is Islamic fundamentalism. Communism is basically a dead letter, though there are indeed plenty of college professors and college students who could switch to become a danger were the context and historical situation to allow for it. Christianity has been tamed, mostly, though the influence of self-conceived victims amongst Christian fundamentalists, orthodox, and evangelicals in the Republican Party has yielded some groundswells of resentment and bad legislation.

Still, the main trouble right now — other than from our own bureaucratic and political classes — is radical Islam, the jihadists. These people must be opposed.

As I've been writing about for years, now, Islam is not at heart a peaceful religion. The Muslim calendar begins from the first year not of Muhammad's public preaching, but from the first year he became a political and military leader. As Robert Spencer makes clear in his new book The Truth About Muhammad, the deal Muslims offer infidels is simple and tyrannical: convert, pay a poll tax and accept second-class status, or die fighting. This gambit is one of warfare, conquest. Spencer's clarity on this reinforces my own glimmering of the truth, that Islam demands hegemony. The rule of Islamic law is proof of Allah, and a good Muslim will not cease fighting until all proclaim that Allah is God.

Against this — as against all tyrannies and usurpations, really — good people, just men and women, must stand opposed, resisting. It's not merely about dissent from trendy universalism. We must confidently re-assert the universality of peaceful co-existence. And those who will not tolerate differences in peace must be forcefully opposed.

Islam itself means confident submission. And submission to Allah entails, according to the old religion, making others submit, too. It's quite stark, written right there in the Qu'ran.

Of course, other passages in the Qu'ran contradict the military, repressive nature of the religion. Like all religions, Islam is self-contradictory, too.

Free men, free women . . . we must not submit to the totalitarian demands of any religion, and, politically, not to any usurping or coercive gambit. Resistance! It means standing up for freedom. For a secular rule of law. For private property. For worship (or not) according to conscience, for generosity and charity (or not) according to conscience. It is time to reject the stranglehold of ancient communisms and forced observance.

Resistance, yes. Confident resistance. It is the opposite of Islam. There must be an Arabic word for it. We who hold to the ideas that evolved in the west, of the idea of liberty as the chief feature of justice, of the idea of a rule of law that is no respecter of persons, we must be prepared to fight.

Take up arms, even. And settle, in our very selves, the spiritual challenge of death and the risk of death in a cause that must triumph.

We who really support a rule of law must resist those who oppose the sepraation of religion and state, who oppose all limits to state power . . . or those limits that seem most burdensome on their religion.

And on a personal level, what can a person say to somebody who might offer conversion but demand oobeissance? As Robert Spencer notes, the mere offer of conversion conceals a threat, when coming from a Muslim. It won't be God who judges you, at least not right away; if you resist, according to the good example of Muhammad, then coercion to submission is the next step.

So, what to say? Do not threaten me. I find your book, the Qu'ran, wholly unreliable as to past and future, and especially as to what should be. I can't imagine ever converting to your nutball religion. And if you make one move towards me, I will call in the police, get a restraining order, or call out this knife I have in my jacket pocket . . .

Something like that. Perhaps, more philosophical: Is this the teaching of your Prophet? Submission to a Spook, and submission to your tyranny? I will not pillory your Prophet or your deity in public, if you leave me alone. But if you do not leave me alone, realize the consequences: I can aim, I can fire, I can stab, I can punch, I can kick, what-have-you. And I will, if you persist on demanding that I submit to either your will or that of your make-believe historical atavism, Allah.

Resistance is not enough. We must be confident in our resistance. But we must also, always, allow our would-be usurpers and tyrants to back away, to settle for peaceful coexistence. But we should also be wary, realizing that coexistance has been a gambit of the weak who wish to become strong.

Just say No to gods and prophets and tyrants!

There are not many from Muslim backgrounds who have the courage for this. But apparently the amazing Ayaan Hirsi Ali, author of Infidel is one such. Do not cease resisting until all who believe in one god or many accept that others who do not believe as they do have just as much right to live.

Leave a comment

Comments:

No Comments for this post yet...

Leave a comment:

Name:

Email:

Your email address will not be displayed on this site.

Site/Url:

Your URL will be displayed.

Comment text:

Allowed XHTML tags: <p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small>

Options:

Auto-BR (Line breaks become <br />)
Remember me (Set cookies for name, email and url)
Allow message form (Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will NOT be displayed.))

Pingbacks:

No Pingbacks for this post yet...