Gearing Up For Open War

Christopher Hitchens: Londonistan Calling.

A very detailed column that should be read in its entirety. A small excerpt:

In the 1960s, many Asians moved to Britain in quest of employment and education. They worked hard, were law-abiding, and spent much of their time combating prejudice. Their mosques were more like social centers. But their children, now grown, are frequently contemptuous of what they see as their parents' passivity. Often stirred by Internet accounts of jihadists in faraway countries like Chechnya or Kashmir, they perhaps also feel the urge to prove that they have not "sold out" by living in the comfortable, consumerist West. A recent poll by the Policy Exchange think tank captures the problem in one finding: 59 percent of British Muslims would prefer to live under British law rather than Shari'a; 28 percent would choose Shari'a. But among those 55 and older, only 17 percent prefer Shari'a, whereas in the 16-to-24 age group the figure rises to 37 percent. Almost exactly the same proportions apply when the question is whether or not a Muslim who converts to another faith should be put to death …

This is what many Westerners don't get. They think that as time passes the upcoming generation will be less extreme and more like us. Instead we are witnessing the horrifying opposite reality. The young generation of Muslims is increasingly rejecting Western ideals and finding comfort (and a sense of retarded superiority) in the hideous arms of Islam, sharia and jihad.

Also read this Q&A with Hitchens.

Comments

[slickdpdx]

That Q&A is HOT.

[Saul]

I agree that these numbers are disturbing and far too many are in denial about them.

But the numbers leave open a lot of questions. It is the standard problem with statistics in that people either leave out vital data about how trends are changing over time or else that information is not yet available.

One thing I notice is that the high numbers are still minorities, (and physically dangerous types of fundamentalists are likely an even smaller fraction of them) despite the intense efforts of (typically foreign born) Imams to reach these kids. This being the case, are the kids of the majority of non-sharia supporting second generation immigrants (SGI) going to fall into the same pattern (which could push the numbers towards the fundamentalists)? And will the kids of the more religious minority of SGIs stay in the religious grouping or will a sizable fraction move back to the secular camp?

One of the least often asked questions about statistics is whether the numbers are changing and in which direction. Second and third derivatives are crucial to understanding trends. Factors that affect the rates of change of rates of change are vastly important.

Speaking of such factors, I would like to know whether continuing news reports of terrorist attacks and plots have any affect on Islamic retention rates and general belief structures. Certainly Islam's conversion rate seem to be very weak and its demographic advantage (birth rates) are high but falling faster than even the West's did. And given the difficulty in getting self-identification of apostate rates even in Western nations, a crucial piece of information is lacking.

Also, while all ages of people are capable of being morons, the 16-to-24 age group is probably much more likely to have poorly developed emotional awareness (especially at the lower end of that age range) as well as much less life experience and greater difficulty finding work and other factors that affect their decision making ability. I am sure that I had some pretty stupid ideas when I was that age and when you are out of work and/or money you tend to put your faith in anything that offers radical change (Che-teeshirt-wearing teenyboppers - I'm looking in your direction when I say that). How many of these pro-sharia youths are likely to still be so ten or fifteen years from now? Some certainly will be and will continue to make the news but others might grow out of it and the rate at which they do is another important unknown.

And if we are going to use all this information (providing we can acquire it) to set immigration policy, we should also figure out what kind of effect the immigrant communities in the West have on their home countries. We have heard the stories of Imams coming to the West to get a better reception (what with our freedom of expression and all) and then stirring up zealots who then return to their homelands to stir up the zealots there. But are these more or less important than those who come here and pick up non-Islamic ways and ideas and then spread them back to family and friends? The Islamic world will not disappear if we close the borders so we need the best intel if we are to fight a war of ideas.

[Josh Scholar]

OT: You know you're reading a Muslim's writing when they off the point like this:

This man's reaction to the Hamas Mickey Mouse (the report on which was pulled from CNN because they didn't like that Hamas Mickey said "We are going to annihilate the Jews") - anyway his reaction was:

"Now, personally, I've always found adults who dress up as large plushy animals to be creepy."

and

"The PR hazard inherent to dealing with a zone traumatized by decades of struggle — whther it's Chechnya, Burma, Gaza, Sri Lanka, Darfur or anywhere torn apart — is that a certain amount of ugliness bubbbles up over time in some very bizarre ways."

And of course the point of the long post is that the poor Muslims are being abused by the media for reporting this:

"This has always been the case when media (even outlets sympathetic to the plight of the occupied) from nations on the side of the dominating culture report on the subjegated..."

[Isaac Schrödinger]

Saul: Good points.

"We have heard the stories of Imams coming to the West to get a better reception (what with our freedom of expression and all) and then stirring up zealots who then return to their homelands to stir up the zealots there. But are these more or less important than those who come here and pick up non-Islamic ways and ideas and then spread them back to family and friends?"

In a globalized market, the West exchanges a lot of products with the Islamic world but when it comes to ideas the traffic has been largely one-way: Muslims export their pathologies to the West.

In Saudi Arabia and Pakistan the Western ideals are spat upon. Very precious few praise the methods of the West in the public sphere. Those who do see and appreciate the liberty in the West don't share their thoughts because (in a society with extended and large families) they can be harmed in many ways.

So, while the secular Muslims are large in numbers, they mostly keep their mouths shut. Therefore, policies are increasingly being set by the hideous Islamists.

"The Islamic world will not disappear if we close the borders so we need the best intel if we are to fight a war of ideas."

I agree. Though, severely restricting Muslim immigration should be a part of the overall strategy.

[Isaac Schrödinger]

Josh Scholar: Muslims have lost their minds on the Israel-Palestine issue. The Jews are evil and the Palestinians can sometimes be a little "bizarre".

[Saul]

"The PR hazard inherent to dealing with a zone traumatized by decades of struggle"

Maybe he means centuries. Islam has been traumatizing its lands for centuries not decades but I get his point.

"whther it's Chechnya, Burma, Gaza, Sri Lanka, Darfur or anywhere torn apart"

He means "Islamic world" or more accurately, the Islamic world's front line - these are all areas where Islamic folk have to live next to infidels though he left out Thailand, the Philippines, Paris, Indonesian islands where Christians or others live, Denmark, Nigeria...

Kind of odd that every culture Islam is in contact with, from the black Africans, the Israeli Jews, the Chinese Buddhists, the Indian Hindus, the South Asian Christians and animists, the Russian and east European orthodox Christians, the secular multiculturalists... all decide to "dominate" and "subjugate" Muslims to a degree that "a certain amount of ugliness bubbbles up over time in some very bizarre ways". Is it Islamophobic of me to point that out?

He admitted that it was ugly. That is a plus. Are you sure he is not a Dhimmi. Though it's a "why-get-all-upset-over-it" kind of ugly.

I guess it is hazardous dealing with PR for such an area. That is why Farfur and folks like the direct approach. AK-47s.

[Saul]

"I agree. Though, severely restricting Muslim immigration should be a part of the overall strategy."

Perhaps. I saw an article somewhere in which the author specifically pointed the finger at family based immigration which has been the dominant ideology in immigration regulation in Canada and Europe for some time now. The author felt that by making it easy to bring over everyone's aunts and grandfathers and cousins it makes integration and the questioning of traditional values far more difficult.

Perhaps focusing on giving shelter to legitimate refugees (not the ones who are being "oppressed" by their home nation for being whacked out Farfur-Imams an image that will be with me for days) and skilled immigrants it would make for a better system. Those coming in would either be grateful for the sanctuary or of an enterprising nature and more likely to raise their kids with these values.

I think that having a certain level of people from these cultures is important since it gives us access to potential translation, and cultural insight from people who have a foot in both worlds. It carries risks but everything does. And while the flow of ideas may seem to be one way, this may also be because of the hostility that is inspired by the increasing contact with these ideas. The desire to suppress Western ways is likely because the see them as a threat to their own ways (which is actually a compliment of what they condemn) and that is generally the second stage of evaluation of new ideas. At first ideas are so novel that they are ridiculed and only after they become more familiar are they genuinely attacked. Meanwhile, the young and the open-minded are watching the attack on these ideas and asking if the reaction against them is sensible or not.

Another article (I need to start keeping track of where I read these things) which I recently read asked why there is so much variation in the traditions of various Islamic nations. The article dealt with Saudi Arabia - why are women there so encased in fabric and why is the culture in general so extreme compared with Egypt or places further west or further east of Pakistan? That author's feeling was that Saudi Arabia has urbanized very rapidly, bringing tribal people into areas where the traditional values and gender roles were not functional. Rather than abandon the old ways the conservatives reacted by pressing for more and more extreme restrictions - ones that are even beyond what was common in traditional the tribal societies. (Their monarchs, of course, being happy to oblige to keep their racket.)

The rapid urbanization of the Islamic world seems to have contradictory effects in various nations with Dubai sprouting up rapidly and, to my knowledge, seemingly becoming less conservative in comparison to Saudi Arabia. There seem to be waves of change affecting the region on all fronts from demographic transitions to economic. (I am not going to argue that the Islamic world is doing well economically but there are vast changes form technology to employment patterns.) One day I hear that Egyptians are becoming more and more conservative and that head scarves are everywhere and the next day I hear that everyone is saying that that was a fad and now no one wants to be seen as religious. Then back again. One day the big concern is that jihadis are using the Internet to recruit and organize and the next they are bombing Internet cafes to keep people from getting contaminated by ideas.

That people in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia and other cultures in the Islamic world are spitting on Western (or rather modern/global) ideas and ideals is the reality that must be confronted. Those ideals - freedom, protection of individual liberties from the collective, prosperity and the property rights that enable it - are not simply our values that we can embrace or abandon. These ideals are us. We either succeed in spreading them and making them universal or we let a culture that is willing to spread its values conquer the world.

There can be only one.

[Saul]

"Muslims have lost their minds on the Israel-Palestine issue. The Jews are evil and the Palestinians can sometimes be a little "bizarre"."

Amazing what trying to hold on to logical contradictions to avoid burning in Hell can do to the mind.

The Prophet and Allah are perfect and merciful. They gleefully raided and committed Genocide and other crimes against Jews and other infidels.

To make just these two statements true requires non Muslims to be intrinsically worthy of all sorts of horror in this world and the next. And since no one working in Allah's cause could be evil they must be just a little bizarre. Or seem bizarre! SEEM!! SEEM!!! Please don't zap me Allah!!!

[Josh Scholar]

I found that guy doing a technorati search to see what Muslim blogs are saying about Hamas Mickey.

His was the only Muslim blog I found that mentioned it at all.. There is no outrage to be found at all. After all saying that this is creepy, just like Barney isn't outrage!

Teaching kids to hate is normal to Muslims as long as they're the ones doing it.

[Isaac Schrödinger]

Josh Scholar: Teaching hatred is normal because it's sanctioned by the Quran.

"O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people." [05:51]

This is part of regular Islamic education. See this post to get a glimpse of what the Saudi kids are learning. The hardcore religion-only madrassas are even worse.

This hurts the Muslims the most. There are fathers in the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan who refuse to have their children immunized. They simply can not believe that the infidels who come to do this are doing it out of a sense of compassion. These Muslims think that the kuffar are trying to spread some super-disease or make their offspring sterile.

[Josh Scholar]

OT on a different topic:

Does #4 in this list sound a bit like "please don't use paper because it's evidence and can get us in trouble" to you too?

And Muslims should avoid using the word "honor" too much.

Though I'm reminded that Fatah's public relations office once sent out a memo requesting that their spokesmen refer to suicide bombers as "honor incidents" or some such. My impression at the time was that they weren't trying to make suicide bombers in Israel more popular and acceptable - those are already popular and accepted world wide - I figured that they were trying to take the embarassment out of the reports of Palestinian honor killings (you know, of girls and mothers) by making people confuse the usually reviled honor killings with the mostly accepted Jew killings.