The media have got it all wrong – for a change. What a surprise.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, on the other hand, has got it right. Speaking of ‘moderate Islam’, he said:
“These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it.”
Our media genuinely believes that the ‘real’ Islam is the Western-manufactured, fluffy, cuddly, hijabby, ‘Ramadan in Lakemba‘-style Religion of Peace™ version advocated by Obama, Kerry, Cameron, Abbott etc, where jihad means nothing more than making the effort to go to the gym regularly, and in which our Western politicians (who have probably never even opened a Qur’an in their lives) tell Islamic ‘scholars’ with a bunch of PhDs and masters degrees in Islamic theology what their religion really means.
And they do it with straight faces while the ‘scholars’ are laughing themselves silly. That’s some achievement.
This is the version that helpfully allows our politicians to watch an infidel’s head being sawn off, accompanied by a tuneful medley of quotes from the Qur’an and followed by a rousing chorus of ‘Allahu akbar’, and still be able to say it has nothing to do with Islam.
It also allows law enforcement agencies to scratch their heads and ponder sagely as they ‘look for a motive’ to avoid any Racist, Bigoted or Islamophobic™, but usually blindingly obvious, link back to the Religion of Peace™.
This version raises difficult questions about ‘radicalisation’ which cannot easily be answered. How did X suddenly become ‘radicalised’? Surely Islam is the Religion of Peace™? The answers that are proposed are typically anti-Western: X was ‘alienated’, felt ‘disengaged’ from society. Boredom is even cited. When we were bored as kids we’d go out and kick a ball, not try and behead a police officer, but still…
In other words, it’s all our fault. If we could only do more to bend over backwards to accommodate every demand of the Islamic community, including sacrificing, without a second thought, our hard-won democratic freedoms (of speech, for example), they would like us.
It also allows media and government to call Islamic State ‘extremists’, and run the inevitable ‘tiny minority thereof’ line. Because dealing with a few nut-cases who have gone troppo is easier than the alternative…
Most importantly, however, it avoids having to deal with Islam as an ideology, which as we all know, would be Islamophobic, Racist and Bigoted™, and of course, as we all know, it’s the Religion of Peace™.
But the reason this fiction is so convoluted and hard to maintain is because it is exactly that – a fiction. It isn’t Islamic State that is the extremists. Islamic State ≡ Islam*.
Islamic State believes that the reason Allah has stood by and watched as Muslim countries fall into unparalleled chaos (mostly of their own making), is that Muslims are simply not Islamic enough. They have not followed the words of the Qur’an and the deeds of Muhammad as closely as they should, and Allah is therefore displeased with them.
So Islamic State’s role is to put this right. Only by obeying the commands of the Qur’an to the letter will Allah be pleased with Muslims again and help them in their quest to make the whole world Islamic (forgetting for a moment the problem with the rest of the Universe).
So lets have a look at the various issues raised above to see how they can now be explained.
- Beheadings, murders, rapes and crucifixions: in the Qur’an, it’s Islam.
- Radicalisation: it’s not radicalisation, it’s simply a return to the true faith. There is no need to invoke any excuses like ‘alienation’ or disenchantment or boredom. It also means that predicting which Muslims will return to the true faith is almost impossible.
- Extremism: Islamic State is not extremist, it merely embodies and represents the pure Islam of Muhammad in the 7th century.
- Bigotry, Racism and Islamophobia™: just excuses made by apologists seeking to avoid the difficult truth that it is Islam itself that is extreme, not those who criticise it.
The corollary of this is that the majority of ‘Muslims’ in the West, including Australia, are really not Muslim at all. They follow some tenets of the religion called Islam, but certainly not enough to call themselves Muslims. And thank goodness for that, because if they were, we would be in even more strife than we are at the moment. It’s those like the would-be police beheader who are following the religion more closely.
So how does this help us in our present predicament?
If we can free ourselves from the shackles of political correctness and finally admit that it is the ideology of Islam that is the root cause, it will allow us to look for proper solutions.
For example, instead of desperately trying to appease Islamic ‘scholars’ in Australia, claiming that every terrorist act carried out in the name of Islam is ‘nothing to do with Islam’, we should be pressuring them to distance themselves (and their preaching) from the pure Islam of the Qur’an.
We should be looking to them to lead a reformation of pure Islam (version 1.0) to a modernised Islam (version 2.0) in which the unpleasant aspects of the version 1.0 are excised permanently.
Islam version 2.0 should, amongst others:
- allow followers to believe that the Qur’an was divinely inspired, but it must be read in the context of the prevailing conditions, customs and behaviours of 7th century Arabia;
- accept, subject to the above, that the Qur’an is not the infallible and immutable word of god, and that a literal interpretation is expressly ruled out [likely to be the sticking point…]
- not preach hatred of non-Muslims nor classify non-Muslims as inferior and unclean;
- not require Muslims 2.0 to forcibly convert non-Muslims;
- not require Muslims 2.0 to spread Islam throughout the world, by violence if necessary; and
- operate on a ‘live and let live’ basis: if Muslims 2.0 wish to avoid pork and alcohol, then they are free to do so, but they should not impose their choices on others.
If Muslims 1.0 wish to practise Islam 1.0, it must NOT be in Australia. They must relocate to an existing Islamic country, and if from there they attempt to uphold the tenets of Islam 1.0, then, to paraphrase the Qur’an:
“The West will be harsh against the Muslims 1.0, merciful to one another (and to Muslims 2.0)”
* ≡ means ‘identical to’