Thursday, January 31, 2008

The Primacy of Politics

The author Douglas Murray wrote the book on neoconservatism. In his 2006 illumination "Neoconservatism, why we need it" he writes that the intellectual father of this philosophy, Leo Strauss posited in his work "On Tyranny" - a commentary on Xenophon's Hiero (or Tyrannicus) - that he (Strauss) ...

"maintains that in his own time, 'when we were brought face to face with tyranny - with a kind of tyranny that surpassed the boldest imagination of the most powerful thinkers of the past - our political science failed to recognize it', (...) one of the clearest allusions (...) to the early lessons observed by the philosopher in Weimar Germany."
Political scientists may not have been particularly observant, neither is humanity as a whole. After having past a century of great wars and tribulations resulting in the deaths of over 100 million lives sacrificed upon the altars of relativist ideologies, they still appear not to have learnt the lesson that Murray puts forward: that relativism is democracy's disintegrating component..

But then, the result of relativism is invariably a (deliberate) confusion of ideas and definitions, imprecision and fallacies against reason; revisionism and the erasure from the collective memory of pre World War II history, coupled with the debilitating influence emanating from generations of people rendered permanent wards-of-state: they would not recognize an ukase if they were to fall over one.

As a consequence we fail to see the ominous signs that are taking place before our very eyes: people being made subservient to ideas, legislation casting surrogate morality into law at the expense of freedom and true equality, resulting in the criminalization of the most unlikely categories of persons: grannies taking an offence at bare gay posteriors, clergy refusing to perform same sex marriages with an appeal on the freedom of conscience, which is increasingly seen as second class liberty, the list goes on.

Groups of people are emerging whose ends are so vile they must be stopped whatever the means, justifying even violence against them. To be specific, against rightists of various hue: neocons, Classical Libertarians, neo Nazis, nationalists (often no more than good patriots), Stop Islamization activists, what have you, they are equivalenced to the same subhuman level. Where did we hear that again?

Good intent producing bad results, the absurdity and injustice of it all, nothing sets off the alarms bells! This is happening while bullying and intimidation, repeated threats and (minor) acts of terrorism against private citizens, officials and scholars go with impunity. The police seem to be unwilling or unable to guarantee safety. The result is toleration of the intolerant: a message that in Strauss' book equals nihilism. Indeed cynicism and nihilism are enshrined today. The mad man never recognizes his own folly.

The political Left have reverted to the radical mode, only selectively defending freedoms and rights when at the expense of the 'Power Structure': the classical Marxist dialectic expressed in repressive tolerance. Just in the nick of time they've restored contact with their totalitarian memes, triggering the realisation of the roots they share with a theist branch of relativist thinking, Islam; timely bringing to semi subconsciousness the recollection that the unremittant promotion of permissiveness and self-indulgence was just part of the same strategy to undermine Western civilization's hegemony.

Through the remarkable rationale that is the Left's pecking order of victimhood, they have managed to throw overboard without hesitation or any cognitive dissonance the former position of serving the minority interests of women, blacks and gays. That is because the victimhood detection apparatus is minutely fine-tuned to recognize the superior social mileage that can be sqeezed out of the new gays: Muslims. Every prior held conviction and moral highground has by now been jilted in favour of furthering the causes of the intolerant.

That it is proving increasingly difficult to distinguish the well-willing innocents from the radical bullies is through another pernicious peculiarity that calls relativism home. On the basis that it isn't fair to lump the innocents with the radicals, the moral choice between the two has been abdicated: the terrorists have now become lumped with the innocent. As a consequence they don't get the support they need to distance themselves from Islamist influence: not a gratuit process by any means, but one wrought with personal danger and hard choices. They are left behind, caught in the multicultural ghetto. Perhaps even more importantly, any chance there is of reforming Islam from within may hence been forfeited.

The refusal to make the moral choice for the good has the effect of getting the radicals a free pass: the Left's abdication of passing judgment even extents to blatant evil. In fact, all things being equivalent evil isn't even recognized when at stares them in the face, let alone that it is condemned for what it is! And so we are left defenseless in the face of present danger. At this point the hammer on moral bankruptcy finally falls.

Westerners who take an opposing stance, taking up their duty to defend the values of liberal democracy against encroaching Sharia type laws and Muslim privileges, are harassed by the radical elements as well as criminalised by their own political representatives. In Europe the pernicious peculiarity has been cast into law, thus insulating terrorists and radicals even from verbal critique. Like innocent Muslims lumped with the radical camp, the defenders of Western values are cast into the Right-wing asylum for the ultimately vile.

The current tendency is blaming the victim. The reasoning goes along lines like "as it is well known that Muslims are a temperamental lot, why speak your mind and offend them?" The next position will be that freedom of expression must be punitively curtailed to prevent provocation! From the looks of it, far from conducting a war on terrorists, Europe has unleashed a wave of repression on the critics of the Third Jihad!

The theme of this assignment is, why should we care about politics and involve ourselves in the political process. I would say that the preservation of the state of liberty is about as good as it gets. We must realise that freedom isn't free, that ideas have consequences (especially bad ones), and that liberty requires a permanent state of vigilance against forced and unforced error.

America waits a difficult task. On her shoulders rests the responsibility to choose a new leader of the free world. His is not an ordinary job. It takes a person of outstanding character to perform this task with dignity, wisdom and courage. The world is facing some tough choices. He may be facing crises of importance and magnitude not seen since 1962. Please choose wisely.

- This article was first published on All American Blogger on 17th January 2008, and picked up on even date by 2nd Amendment blogger Concealed. It was seeded by Daweb on Newsvine. -

- Filed on Articles in "Postmoderism", cat. Philosophy

Review: "Farewell Israel: Bush, Iran and The Revolt of Islam"

The political video documentary"Farewell Israel: Bush, Iran and The Revolt of Islam", written and directed by Joel Gilbert is - on the whole - a beautifully produced opus that delves into the origins of the confrontation between Islam and the Jews at the time of the Prophet Mohammed and is insightful in that respect, to say the least.

It is introduced as "a historic journey from the birth of Islam, through its 1,200 year reign over the civilized world, to the last 300 years is Islamic decline, overtaken and dominated by the West - then humiliated by a Jewish state. Islam's historic trials with Jews, and its relationship with conquered non believers, help illustrate the Islamic world view - all through the eyes of Muslims."

And this is exactly where the problem with this effort lies, resulting in part omission, part subjectivism, part revisionism. While it is appreciated that Judeo-Christian history is not part of this 'narrative', it is a serious objection to completely ignore the scene in which Islam from its inception, found itself. History begins with Mohammed, the measure of everything, so is the message.

The suggestion is made, that Christendom emerged from 'the obscurantism of the Dark Ages with the discovery of the Americas', ignoring centuries of social, cultural, religious, scientific and philosophical development under the influence of the Roman Church, and everything else for that matter, that has taken place before AD 610. The suggestion is ludicrous.

The author also missed the opportunity to stress the emergence and conquests of the Turkish tribes in the twelth and thirteeth centory, which could have clarified the Christian origins of the Levant and Asia Minor. Likewise, that the Crusades were as much a reconquest as the Spanish Reconquista.

The rich roots of pre Christian Greco-Roman culture, of which Islam was the custodian during the often praised 'Golden Age of Islam', is ignored altogether, as is Middle Eastern paganism. Islam, apparently, is an island. In that respect Gilbert indeed paints an accurate ' version of reality' .

On the other hand, an important insight is provided by describing more recent history. During the course of the last century Amin Al Husseini, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem between 1921 and 1948 and uncle to Yassir Arafat, is correctly identified as the link between the precedent of the massacre of the Jewish tribes at M'dina at the hand of Mohammed for failing to accept Dhimmitude, and the justification of the Turkish genocides of Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians in the aftermath of World War I, as well as the Nazi Holocaust (recommended video) during World War II.

The last two occasions of genocide and alleged genocide were encouraged and sanctified by Amin al Husseini on the grounds of the M'dina precedent: Dhimmis behaving in a manner unbecoming of their status. The M'dina Jews refused conversion as well as taxation, resulting in their 'justified' annihilation.

As Mohammed is the measure of everything in Islam, the less than loyal attitude of the Dhimmi groups that were subjugated and unwillingly integrated into the Turkish (Ottoman) Empire, likewise resulted in their mass murder.

Strikingly Adolf Hitler came up with the so-called Dolchstoss legend against the Jews, 'treason' resulting in the loss of World War I on the part of the German-Turko side - a similar justification for Holocaust. (More on the Unholy Alliance between (National) Socialism and Islam on files, Part I and Part II.)

Interesting is the suggestion that Anwar Sadat's 1977 Camp David Accords with Israel actually constituted not an offer of peace, but an attempt at destroying Israel by diplomatic efforts. The question is such case is, why was he assassinated by Al Zawahiri c.s. Apparently the effort was wasted on the Muslim Brotherhood.

The document' s central assertion is that - contrary to what is suggested by the title - the Islamic world doesn't seek as much the destruction of the state of Israel, as the wish to reduce it to Dhimmi status - tributaries under Islamic rule - the natural and solely acceptable status of infidels under Islamic rule. This suggestion is a fresh attempt at literally playing dice with Evil at the price of a second Holocaust. The very notion is despicable and worthy of denunciation as a irresponsible, Postmodern piece of amorality!

Nonsensical is the idea that the Bush administration played into Al Qaeda's hands after 9/11 by attacking Islamic lands. The suggestion is, that this would so much outrage Muslims that they'd dispose of their despotic rulers on a mass scale. In effect, the only changes of regime that have occurred have taken place in the countries thus liberated by the Coalition.

Gilbert further suggests that the establishment of democracy will merely result in radical Islamist regimes being voted in all over the Middle East. Indeed, the Hamas regime in Palestine has nothing to do with Fatah corruption and mismanagement, and everything with spiting the West.

Artistically "Farewell Israel: Bush, Iran and The Revolt of Islam" is a fine piece of work. Historically it is insuffient, it is politically wanting, and moraly irrelevant.

- Filed on Articles in "The Unholy Alliance", Part II -

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Libertarianism vs illegitimate State

The State is not legitimate, since it initiates force on its citizens.

The idea of a social contract is bogus, since you cannot opt out (without fleeing your country, mind you). If a special form of contract exists between individual and state, then a similar contract exists between rapist and victim, kidnapper and kidnappee, enslaver and slave etc. The State is just one violent actor among others.

Democracy does not make the State legitimate. The consent and approval of the majority of humans within an arbitrarily defined geographic region does not turn immoral actions into moral actions.

Democracy is, in fact, just a weak patch on the social contract. Democracy allows you to change this or that clause of the contract. The problem, however, is that the social contract in itself is illegitimate.

The only social contract that exists in the world is that between individuals. To respect this contract, one need only refrain from initiating violence and force against others. To respect the State's social contract, one must accept being the subject of violence and force.

The only way to make the State legitimate, is to allow citizens to secede.

The Minarchist State, however, is legimate, since it does not initiate force, relying instead on voluntary donations for funding. It only serves as a robot, protecting the natural rights of its citizens.

Your thoughts?

Monday, January 28, 2008

Pyro Terrorism Goes America

Further to our post on 26th October "The Wild Fires of Pyro Terrorism", with respect to the now infamous Pakistani secret service (ISI) developed remote bomb triggering devices, we have been informed that since 2004 the NATO forces in Afghanistan have noted the Taliban began using mobile phones to detonate car bombs and booby traps.

The contraptions have now surfaced in the US, while terrorist related websites apparently are calling for ' Forest Jihad': "Jihad is an art just like poetry, music, and the fine arts. There are people that draw and there are others that are jihadists. They both act upon inspiration.” Hm, reminds me of the perverted Postmodern aesthetics of blood, death and revolution ... reverting.

1389 Blog is reporting as follows:

1389 Blog: " California Theft Ring Bust Yields Remote-Detonated Bombs"

Triggered by cellular phones?

Remember all of the discussion in the summer of 2007 about wildfires in California and in Greece? Many people raised questions about whether some of those fires were, in fact, ecoterrorism. There was also some evidence that devices made from cellular phones may have been used to ignite wildland fires. This is plausible enough, considering that remote bombs triggered by cellular phones have been used in other terrorist attacks. But after the fires were extinguished, the story disappeared from the news.

These mysterious remote cell phone bombs have now surfaced - in California.

Undercover Op Leads To Cell Phone-Triggered Bomb

San Jose and Santa Clara police chiefs announced Wednesday the results of a massive sting operation in their cities. Operation Meltdown, as the joint effort was called, netted investigators hundreds of criminals, tons of stolen copper, dozens of stolen cars and weapons, and in one case, homemade bombs.

A Fremont man was arrested in October as part of Operation Meltdown. He is accused of trying to sell the officers improvised explosive devices capable of being denoted remotely by a cell phone. During a news conference at San Jose Police headquarters Wednesday morning, police showed a video, recorded by hidden camera, of the suspect demonstrating the technology to officers by detonating a bomb for them.

Operation Meltdown was begun in March 2007. Undercover officers from both departments opened a fake metal-recycling business in the city of Santa Clara called Jose Clara Co-Op.
Within days, San Jose Police Chief Rob Davis said, customers started showing up offering to sell what appeared to be stolen copper. Over the course of the next year, the undercover officers purchased 14 tons of copper with a street vale of almost $100,000. Soon after the officers began buying the copper, though, Davis said visitors to the recycling shop started offering to sell other stolen goods. The officers eventually purchased 40 stolen vehicles and 74 firearms, including 21 assault weapons.

Over the life of the operation, Davis said, 273 suspects were investigated, 63 of whom were arrested over the course of the investigation. Another 73 suspects were picked up during a sweep Tuesday. There are still another 70 suspects with outstanding warrants yet to be arrested…

Vehicle theft was also part of the picture, including some mighty fancy rides:
40 stolen vehicles were purchased. The vehicles include a BMW, Porsche Carrera, Nissan 350Z, Audi, Toyota MR2, SUV’s, sedans, motorcycles and a new Ford Edge SUV.
Who is involved?

The article mentioned that “many of the suspects were identified as gang members,” but no suspects were named, nor were the gangs identified.
In case you have any doubts:

Forest Fire Jihad Being Threatened on Terrorist Websites

U.S. officials monitoring terrorist web sites have discovered a call for using forest fires as weapons against “crusader” nations, in what may explain some recent wildfires in places like southern California and Greece.

A terrorist website was discovered recently that carried a posting that called for “Forest Jihad.” The posting was listed on the Internet on Nov. 26 and reported in U.S. intelligence channels last week.

The statement, in Arabic, said that “summer has begun so do not forget the Forest Jihad.”
The writer called on all Muslims in the United States, Europe, Russia and Australia to “start forest fires.”

The posting quoted imprisoned Al Qaida terrorist Abu Musab Al-Suri, as saying “Jihad is an art just like poetry, music, and the fine arts. There are people that draw and there are others that are jihadists. They both act upon inspiration.”

- Filed on Articles in "The Wild Fires of Pyro Terrorism" -

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Understanding Change (III): the Declining Stages

~ Continued from Part II: "Understanding Change: the Rising Stages",
by Dr Sam Holliday ~

We can view changes as either progress or cycles. Today progress is the assumption of most Europeans and Americans. Yet this "progress" is the pursuit of many different Utopias. Yes, it is change, but is it building (true progress) or is it decline, the outcome of manipulation by those with a political agenda. Cycles provide an attractive alternative to "progress".

Following the two rising stages discussed in Part II, Part III looks at the declining Stages, the last two that make up a full four part Cycle. The Conclusion will be followed by a practicle example from current affairs, the ongoing US Presidential elections.

Declining (Fall) Stages

Over-sophisticated and corrupt "elites" advancing self-interests--and desires--is the fundamental cause of decline during the Contentment and Decay stages. No longer do all of those with political power work for the interests of the whole group; instead they increasingly advance the agenda of factions, and/or personal interests.

During the declining (fall) stages there is an increase in humanization along with a softening of both customs and laws, and a greater reliance on the rule of law (secular authority). Also the feminine increasingly replaces the masculine.

Edward Gibbon spent his life studying the declining stages and recorded his conclusions in several volumes of "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire". He attributes decline to the disappearance of vitality and creative power. He saw the start of the decline with the people replacing their vigor and public spirit with pleasure seeking and factionalism. He saw evidence of the decline in the degeneration of art and literature combined with obsession with materialism. He saw the completion of the decline with the degeneration of the military, first in discipline and then in courage.

- Caption: Edward Gibbon -

The Contentment stage of cycles is a time of eclecticism, easy, comfort, and sophistication with nothing original. Its art is decadent and rarely supports traditional institutions, yet it is widely acclaimed. Its science and technology are complex and costly, yet do little to advance the human spirit. Intellectuals are concerned with causality, feelings, and intentions; they stress thinking rather than action and the ideal rather than the practical. Yet the Contentment stage is often considered a "Golden Age", since there is usually peace, prosperity, rights, a complex legal system, and a privileged intelligentsia.

Respect for authority, discipline, and common identity give way to humane and easy tolerance-to benign, nonjudgmental behavior. Feelings replace reason and right. Many of the characteristics of an organism are lacking in a group in the Contentment stage; it becomes a special kind of aggregate of individuals and factions with patterns of relationships. Roles, rules and standards are either absent or are largely symbolic. Behavior is increasingly controlled by the rule of law rather than shared convictions of right and wrong.

There are increases in material prosperity, social security, humanitarianism, and bureaucracy. With the erosion of virtues (shared moral, ethic and religious beliefs) there is an increased reliance on secular authority (rule of law), which results in an escalation in the wealth consumed on litigation. Secular authority dominates sacred authority (the inner compass of individuals), and even secular authority is "flexible". There is an increase in the number of intellectuals, materialists, and hedonists who believe they are living beyond values, beyond right and wrong. There is advocacy for universal laws to achieve equality among all people in wealth, economic outcomes, and rights.

The Contentment stage is a time of refinement and sophistication. In defending his humanist code of ethics Kug Fu-Tse (Confucius) said: "Without knowing the force of words, it is impossible to know men" While Socrates wished to counter those Sophists who saw the best life as one of self-indulgence or tyrannical power he was not a man of action, and thus he only looked into the human soul, uncovered assumptions, and questioned certainties while the society around him began its slide into chaos.

In the Decay stage the group has become a polyglot, borrowing from others to create a vulgar and violent underclass, yet a delicate, refined, and dissolute upper class. It has crude, disturbing art, and sterile, ethereal beliefs. There is disintegration and a lack of common identity. A group in the Decay stage has become simply an aggregation of individuals with no purpose beyond those of the individual--its organism roots have deteriorated into artifacts of the past.

There is no spirit of sacrifice for the group or sense of duty. Factions within the group are as competitive with each other as they are with those outside of the group. Only secular authority remains and it is often ignored. Equality of outcomes has replaced equality of opportunity. There is economic depression, and a decline in the standard of living. License has replaced freedom. Votes go to demagogues who promise the most. There is ever-increasing hostility and violence between factions, which sometimes becomes a civil war.

The liberal democrat Hilaire Belloc (1870-1953) predicted slavish submission during the Decay stage: "The internal strains which have threatened society will be relaxed and eliminated, and the community will settle down upon that servile basis which was its foundation before the Christian faith, from which that faith slowly weaned it, and to which in decay of that faith it naturally returns."

The history of each group with a collective biography has an end. Just as individuals recognize their own mortality, each group will someday be extinct. The group might die from external blows, but most likely the end will come from self-destruction. However, before a group’s end there are usually transfers, which start new groups. The lands a group claims will someday belong to others; their language might remain on paper, their art might remain in museums; other groups might take many of their ideas and much of their technology, but the authority of every group will lose its power--the kinship will no longer survive.


The cycle of Rise through Birth and Maturity, and then Fall through Contentment and Decay is a hypothesis, yet it does not satisfy the rigid requirements some associate with science or the expectations of academic scholarship. Nevertheless, it is a useful way for any one to view the present and consider the future. It does allow us to see more clearly the groups of which we are a part.

As with all hypothesis that presented here it is subject to revision. If the words do not accurately describe reality they need to be changed, or defined, so as to insure communication of the concept. No words are perfect; words are only tools that help or hinder communication. The words must be sufficiently well defined to achieve clear communication, yet accurately describe what happens in the real world.

- Caption: "End of Time", illustration by Lester Ralph in "Eve's Diary" by Mark Twain -

Some groups are able to skip the Birth stage because of transfers from a previous group that has failed; some groups are able to remain in a stage for a long time while others go rapidly from one stage to the next; some are able to reverse to an earlier stage and gain new impetus; some decline then rally for several iterations; and some groups never make it through the full cycle--they collapse from within or are destroyed from without.

The cycle presented here will surely not receive academic acclaim; hopefully it will be a help to anyone who wants to understand why groups rise and fall and to determine what action should be taken to affect the process. Hopefully, it will be of benefit to the brave, strong and skillful who want to influence events.

What are the advantages of this conceptual framework of cycles? It gives an accurate, simple, generalization of the cycle of any collection of related persons. Rather than seeing history as facts of specific events and times and studying parts, it permits the study of wholes. It dispels the mist that obscures vague conditions, thus helping us understand the past and the present as we contemplate the future. It provides a check on mindless pursuit of some utopia in the name of progress. It helps us cope with change.

The American Presidential Elections

Change has become a key issue in the Presidential campaigns. The candidates seem to define "change" as anything different and expect their version of some Utopia to carry them to victory. This is only surface level change.

So far there seems to be little interest in whether this "change" is an improvement or not. Of course, in keeping with the assumptions of progress, each candidate claims his "change" is an improvement. Why? Because he considers his vision of progress superior to that of others.

- Caption: Cartoon related to the campaign of the United States’ eighth president, Martin Van Buren -

This is certainly a very limited view of change. But it is no surprise since that is the focus of most policy debates--and the adversarial approach in general. It is easy to critize past decisions and easy to make promises. Demagogues have always sought power through promises, although their goals are self-interests and self-aggrandizement.

The presidential candidates seem to calculate what they say in terms of political advantage, rather than public interest. They want to win votes, not solve problems. Can our politics handle anything beyond surface level change?

It is more difficult to understand the future and to develop policies for the long-term general good. Yet this is what national interests require. This is how any nation builds, grows, and lasts. Has postmodern thought become so dominant that most Americans are only interested in surface level change and their own self-interests?

Is there a better definition of change? It is time we become free from the bitterness and pettiness that are the outcomes of the Hegelian dialectic and the adversarial approach to progress. If we are a nation worthy of the name, it is time to stress both cooperation and conflict; it is time to work with our rivals for the common good. It is time to insure that any change is an improvement, not a decline.

Copyright © 2008 Armiger Cromwell Center

More on the author and the "Armiger Cromwell Center" on Articles.

The entire essay is filed on Articles in "Understanding Change", cat. Philosophy (includes a printable format).

Understanding Change (II): the Rising Stages

~ Continued from Part I: "Understanding Change (I): Not Progress, Cycles",
by Dr Sam Holliday ~

We can view changes as either progress or cycles. Today progress is the assumption of most Europeans and Americans. Yet this "progress" is the pursuit of many different Utopias. Yes, it is change, but is it building (true progress) or is it decline, the outcome of manipulation by those with a political agenda. Cycles provide an attractive alternative to "progress". Part II looks at the rising Stages, the first two that make up a full four part Cycle.

Building (Rise) Stages

Birth and Maturity are the first two stages. The building stages of cycles are a time of struggle. The overcoming of obstacles releases the energies of the group to respond effectively to challenges. The survival instinct brings out the ferocity, avarice and ambition in humans; this creates leaders able to build and defend the group. Individuals support the group in their own self-interest. Hegel often refers to each group having a particular "spirit of the people". This is his way of noting the importance of virtues (sacred authority), which are shared moral, ethical, and religious beliefs.

The building stages are the realm of the Faustian man. In literature we find such a person in Shakespeare’s Lear, and Goethe’s Wilhelm Meisler. As expressed by Hegel, history "has ever decided in favor of the stronger, fuller and more self-assured life--decreed to it, namely, the right to exist, regardless of whether its right would hold before a tribunal of waking-consciousness."

While a group is rising the masculine dominates the feminine; although this is less pronounced in the Maturity stage than it is in the Birth stage. For some groups the struggles during the building stages are too great and they are destroyed and absorbed by more powerful groups. Also the tragic truth is, that after the building stages have run their course, the fall begins.

The Birth stage of cycles is a time of troubles and challenges with extinction always close at hand. The driving force of the group is intellectual ignorance and morale baseness. In the group the most violent and enterprising gain power from their ability to provide protection from chaos and extinction. This results in unprecedented effort, unity, sacrifice and loyalty to a single leader who is father, ruler, priest and prophet. The leader is the arbiter of right and wrong, good and bad. A group in the Birth stage is clearly an organism that is more than its parts, and the parts are not interchangeable; the individual is often sacrificed for the benefit of the group.

It is a time for brutish men--not for the timid; for action--not for words; of unity--not of diversity; of passion--not of reason; of myth, legend, custom and tradition--not of science and political correctness; of simple, direct behavior--not of clever, hedonistic behavior; of sacrifice--not of selfishness; of inequality and obedience--not of equality and license.

Some groups are able to skip the Birth stage because they are able to borrow from another group that has failed.

During the Birth stage individuals realize they can only be human as members of a group, for only within the group can they experience the attributes of freedom and morality. Outside of a group an individual would be no more than an animal with sensations. At the end of the Birth stage there is greater personal freedom, greater equality of opportunity, and less reliance on myth and legend.

During the Maturity stage there is an increase in knowledge, numbers, and territory; there is an accumulation of surplus, the development of new technology and new ways to do things. Moreover, the knowledge and technology uses the surplus to increase the power of the group. In the Maturity stage the group exists for the sake of its members, yet the group is still enough of an organism to be able to hold on to the customs, traditions, roles, and sense of duty developed in the Birth stage. While the parts are not interchangeable, there is greater mobility than in the Birth stage.

Heroes are the distinctive feature of the Maturity stage. They become the magistrates of order to provide protection from internal and external threats. The heroes are what some have called "great men" since they are doers and often use wealth to achieve power. They form a ruling class that has a monopoly of both secular and sacred authority, they hold all of the leadership and opinion making positions, and they know how "to win the favor of the gods", i.e., they have earned the "mandate of heaven". They use symbolic language characterized by imagery and metaphors. As Rousseau has said: "What is the object of political association? It is the preservation and prosperity of its members."

Heroes shaped events and are considered the wisest, bravest and best; they are found in different spheres of human activity. Their status is based on merit and is earned by successful performance of duties related to the growth of the group. Among heroes Thomas Carlyle listed: Odin of Scandinavian mythology, Mohammed, Dante, Shakespeare, Luther, Samuel Johnson, Robert Burns, Cromwell and Napoleon. To these could be added: Elizabeth I, Catherine the Great, Thomas Jefferson, Otto von Bismarck, Rudyard Kipling, Theodore Roosevelt, Cecil Rhodes, Andrew Carnegie, John D. Rockefeller, Indira Gandhi, and the Chinese leaders that followed Mao Tse-tung.

In the Maturity stage heroes are examples of loyalty, dedication, and patriotism. Their behavior demonstrates honor, discipline, duty, and a sense of purpose. Their demeanor is stern and severe. They are usually motivated by God’s will and the ecstasy of belief. They enjoy a high degree of individual freedom because a strong internal compass controls their behavior. Most heroes favor rule of the few who have demonstrated dedication to the group’s interests, and are united by their wealth, ability, and vigor. Also most heroes favor the structures and processes of governance that discriminate against those that would shift wealth from the "haves" to the "have-nots" or would create a welfare state.

By the fifth century B.C. in the Greek city-states a ruling-class of heroes had taken power from their Kings, and had evolved into the Maturity stage. From then until the end of the wars with Persia (479 B.C.) there was a struggle between authoritarianism and democracy. This period saw the development of the essence of Greek culture: philosophy of Thales, science of Anaximander, mathematics of Pythagoras, Greek drama, Greek architecture, and the idea that every group has a history. The rich and powerful quarreled and dominated both sacred and secular authority. But the rights of all citizens and the overall, long-range interests of the group could not be ignored.

While most of those living in Greece (foreigners, women, and slaves) were ignored, discontent among merchants, craftsmen, and small farmers created effective political opposition. The phalanx of farmer-citizen hoplites, rather than the cavalry of the heroes, became the decisive element in combat. Yet in Greece the Maturity stage came to an end with the degeneration of the proud citizen-soldier into a mercenary tempted by bribery and treachery.

~ To be continued in Part III: "Understanding Change: the Declining Stages" ~

Copyright © 2008 Armiger Cromwell Center

More on the author and the "Armiger Cromwell Center" on Articles.

Filed on Articles in "Understanding Change", cat. Philosophy

Monday, January 21, 2008

State vs Nation: Migration and Racism

In this article, I'm trying to distinguish the notions of "Nation" and "State" and show how the second one stole the first. I'll take a concrete example, the problem of immigration.

The article is inspired by Pascal Salin. You can find his outstanding writings at "Le Québécois Libre" (however, only in French ...).

Before exposing the core of the problem, there is a parenthesis to open. As I was about to write this - being a Frenchie - I had to check in the dictionary for the translation of the word "étatiser", which means "decide that a "private" matter becomes a "public" matter, ruled by the State." What a surprise! In English, "étatiser" is translated "to nationalize"! THIS WORD IS FALSE!!! State and Nation have to be opposed. So in this article, I'll create a word for "étatiser": STATALIZE.

Let's try to explain. A free society is a society in which every individual has the right to do whatever he wants to, provided that it respects the legitimate rights of the other individuals. Ergo, a free society is based on the acknowledgment and defense of property rights.

This libertarian vision is based on a realistic perception of the human being. The collectivist detractors insist that the libertarian theory conceives human beings as lonely particles, hostile to one another but it's truly the opposite: the libertarian individual is fundamentally a social being.

Indeed every human being belongs to societies, big or small, and he has the feeling to be part of these groups. The Nation is such a groups, the largest one. Nation represents combined social ties born in history and revealed through culture, language and religion. Nation comes under spontaneous order, it is multiform, evolutionary and difficult to grasp. It's the result of multiple perceptions, somewhat different among members.

That is why it is a mistake to assimilate Nation to State which is, on the contrary, a very precise and institutionalized reality. And it's pretty striking to observe that today, just as in the triumphant statism era, we see once again the rise of nationalism. That is proof that States forced the creation of social systems, and not Nation as perceived by citizens--to whom they allowed themselves to give this name. And of course the State exerted all its energy in convincing people that nationalists are all somewhat Nazistic ...

I insist that Nation results from a feeling of belonging to a community, and that is why the "State-Nation" is a lie: it is not possible to statalize feelings. Then as always, when statalization occurs the State creates a monopoly for itself and defends it. And so it fights against regional particularisms; State destroys spontaneous Nations.

As an example, the struggle in France to destroy regional languages in the name of the republican equality in the 19th Century. That is followed by the most perverse move: in order to deceive you, STATE IS PERSONIFIED to ease the assimilation of Nation to State.

So they say: "Germany decides to..." or "France exports..." In the first case, they make you think that the entire German population decides, as if some type of collective mind did exist. In the second case, they make you believe that export is a collective act, that it's a common interest and that ergo State is able to determine it. LIES! Germany doesn't decide; the German government decides. France doesn't export; some French producers do.

- Caption: the 85 m/279 feet tall statue of Mother Motherland commemorating the Battle of Stalingrad in Volgograd, Russia -

This shows that a mythic, collective interest does not in fact exist, but that some particular interests do: those of the ones who are holding power or the ones who are producing goods. The use of these abstractions has a well defined goal: to abuse you. To make you think that Nation is assimilated into State; even that Nation is a property of State which ergo reserves the right to manage the national territory.

From there emanates the myth of "public property". The intellectual legitimation of "public property" consists in saying that State can "produce" some goods and services in an optimal way, while private companies can't. ANOTHER LIE.

Let's consider the immigration problem. The starting point of a libertarian reasoning about immigration would be to say that immigration (as emigration) is a fundamental right of a human being. How can you advocate the free exchange of goods and oppose free movement of human beings? Thus the best immigration policy would be not to have one at all!

Let's compare free trade with immigration. How can we define the free exchange of goods? Free trade simply means that public power should not use its monopoly to hinder the trade, wanted by both partners. So free immigration doesn't mean that an individual has the right to move wherever he wants, but that he has the right to move wherever he's welcome. In a private property system individual rights are conditional: you may enter someone else's property if you're welcome and respect the rules established by the owner.

In such a system, a free exchange one, both immigrants and inhabitants of the welcoming Nation should benefit from the deal. Otherwise there should be no immigration. If immigration is allowed and accepted, it's because there's a win-win situation.

In a collectivist system (our States) - with the notion of public property/public services - the situation isn't so fair. Because the public goods are produced in a collective way, they have a hidden cost. And so, these goods/services are for free or are inexpensive: it's financed through taxes, the productive citizens paying a high price, the less productive ones paying little or zip.

This is why the State induces bad immigration: it becomes advantageous for unproductive immigrants to come and benefit of all the services that are free or almost free, while contributing as little as possible; whereas potential productive immigrants are less enthusiastic: they know they'll pay too much through taxes for what they get in services.

Lets take an example, California vs Texas. An article in The Wall Street Journal in 1993 explained why immigration from Mexico was three times higher in California than in Texas, while the Texas-Mexico border is far longer than the one separating California from Mexico. It's because the social security system in California is much more developed than it is in Texas. As stated by an immigration official in Texas: "It's impossible to live from welfare here".

In the actual situation where the immigration policies are defined for the Nation by the State - I mean where social policies tend to subsidize the immigration of the less productive people - some who favor immigration as we know it, claiming their generosity through speeches against racism, are not touched by the problem; whereas others, who see their environment degraded by this system are opposed to it, seek help through the State to solve their social problems--a waste of time.

So the State is creating RACISM. What can we expect? The people leading the State are pretty comfortable come election day: all these assisted men who came in and got their voting rights will vote for them to perpetuate the system; whereas they don't have to worry too much if productive citizens get fed up and leave the country for a less unfair one: after all, they would have voted against them!

Immigration is not the problem. THE PROBLEM IS THE STATE. We, the people, citizens, have to find a way to recapture what it has stolen from us, the Nation, our Freedom, control over our Fate!

Here it is, only a short introduction about a matter I value very much. And the subject is worth further in-depth development.

- Filed on Articles in "The Post Democratic Preferences of the Neotots", cat. Neo Totalitarianism

Sunday, January 20, 2008

Understanding Change (I): Not Progress, Cycles

And now for something completely different ...

In a three part article Dr. Sam Holliday has worked out how change - in the very general sense - is effected.
Parts I, II, and III will be linked to each other, and will finally be integrated into one single dossier on Articles, with a printable link provided.

Change has never been so rapid. Is it possible to cope with such change without anxiety, frustration, broken dreams, and despair?

We can view changes as either progress or cycles. Today progress is the assumption of most Europeans and Americans. Yet this "progress" is the pursuit of many different utopias. Yes it is change, but is it building (true progress) or is it decline, the outcome of manipulation by those with a political agenda. Cycles provide an attractive alternative to "progress".

Cycles more accurately describe reality. This conceptual framework helps us understand the past and the present while we contemplate the future, and it can be an assistance to the brave, strong and skillful in their efforts to influence events.


Plato, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam sowed the seeds for progress. However, progress did not become a common assumption until the science of Western culture surpassed religion as a belief system. Christianity and Islam had provided an end superior to that offered by the myths and mysteries, which preceded them. Then science convinced many that man had achieved mastery of nature and was not a slave to fate. As a result it was possible to consider the possibility of indefinite improvement. Sir Thomas More gave substance to this view and added the word utopia to our language.

In l8th Century Europe the idea of universal human progress through science and secular authority were core concepts of The Enlightenment. Then Karl Marx used Hegel's ideas and defined utopia as a classless society of perfect freedom and equality, which would be realized after a series of class struggles and bloody revolutions. Classical Liberalism and the logic of the hierarchy of knowledge reinforced this view of unstoppable progress.

World War I damaged the belief in science, reason, and progress. It became clear that science, and man's domination of nature, produced bad as well as good consequences. If science could not insure indefinite progress to utopia, what could? Some turned to politics: nationalism, communism, socialism, fascism, the rule of law, or world government. However, World War II showed that politics was no better than science and reason as the basis of unstoppable progress. Today Islamic true believers and postmodernists have their own paths to utopia, based not on science and reason, but on feelings and emotions.

All fundamentalism stresses unquestioned acceptance of doctrine over reason and balance. Such acceptance has produced true believers of pre-Christian mysteries, nature worship, and witchcraft. But of greater significance is the certainty offered by two movements. One is an extreme version of Islam. It is the fuel of the global Islamic revivalist movement known as the Third Jihad. The other is the homogeneity of ideas and lack of intellectual diversity in Western Culture resulting from postmodern thought.

The flaws of all true believers are intolerance for others, the danger of extremism, and the vulnerability of individuals to manipulation. Currently the leaders of the Third Jihad manipulate those seeking a way to know ultimate reality. In the other movement many in the West have sought certainty through postmodernism. This movement has used a vision of a nonjudgmental, nondiscriminatory future, in which disagreements are resolved by debate and compromise. Actually both of these movements have filled new bottles with old wine, yet they gain true believers because they claim to have found "the way" to a better life-in the next world or in this one. However, a clear Utopian message can obscure reality. Unanswered is whether the outcomes of the "progress" offered by these movements will be a rise or a decline.


Cycles are probably better than progress as the way to understand change. During the dominance of progress in Western thought, cycles were kept alive by thinkers such as Bodin, Vico, Nietzsche, Spengler, Sorokin, and Toynbee. The rise and fall of families, communities, states, nations, cultures and civilizations are no longer seen as the work of gods, as they were in ancient times. It is now understood that cycles are never identical and that no cycle is deterministic. Each group has its unique origin, growth, contentment, and decline--its own virtues and its own secular authority. However, similarities can be noted and patterns can be found.

Cycles are the oldest attempt to give meaning to change. The most primitive of people saw the natural world as stages in cycles of birth, growth, decay and death. People living close to nature through fishing, hunting or farming think in terms of spring, summer, autumn and winter. Babylonian, Indian, Chinese and Aztec myths were often placed within cycles. Hindu and Buddhist visions are those of an eternal cosmic process, which repeatedly rises to a golden age and then declines into a watery or flaming ruin. Aristotle wrote of civilizations as a continuous "coming to be and falling away." Both Stoics and Epicureans in the Roman Empire saw history as endless cycles. Although the names for the parts of the cycles often changed, the cycles were the primary way to explain change until the rise of Christianity, Islam, and Hegelian dialectic.

It is possible to describe the similarities and patterns in cycles of any group: family, gang, tribe, commune, community, polity, state, or nation. Cycles are never identical and cycles are not the results of antecedent causes. However, each collection of persons related in someway shares some virtues and have some means of governance, and it is possible to identify cycles of four stages--thus to have a conceptual framework to help us understand change.

The distinguishing characteristic of all groups is a common identity--a sense of kinship. Those in a group need not have common genes, or speak the same language, or even have the same culture, but they must think of themselves as "we". As Vico has stated: the past is "the record of the result of wills, of human facts themselves, the order of the succession, and the circumstance of the production.". Some groups spend a long time in one stage, yet others move rapidly through the stages. Other groups are able to reverse to an earlier stage, while others go through several iterations of decline/rally, disorder/order, and stagnation/prosperity. Therefore, it is from the cycles of past organisms with a collective biography, i.e. groups, that we can understand our present and gain a glimpse of our future.

There is no agreement on the names of the four stages of cycles. However, it is suggested that the stages be referred to as Birth, Maturity, Contentment, and Decay, and the first two stages as Building (or Rise) and the last two stages as Declining (or Fall).

A conceptual framework of cycles can only be seen confusedly. However, an attempt to dispel the mist, and to fix the outlines of the vague form that is looming through the mist, is a noble goal. Perhaps words to satisfactorily describe cycles are an impossible dream, yet that should not prevent a quest.

~ To be continued in "Part II: Understanding Change: the Rising Stages" in which the first two Stages that make up a full four part Cycle are further developed.

Copyright © 2008 Armiger Cromwell Center

More on the author and the "Armiger Cromwell Center" on Articles.

Filed on Articles in "Understanding Change", cat. Philosophy

Saturday, January 19, 2008

Europe's Speechless, Frantic Surrender

This post was published on 16th January on The Brussels Journal under the title "Grand Mufti of Syria Threatens Europeans at EU Parliament, EU Media Silent", and is yet another worthy effort written by Fjordman. We reproduce it here in its entirety for insight and comprehension.

In the next few days we hope to present you with a view from Holland. Those who know how to deal with bullies are franticly anticipating the Wilders film. Polls and surveys are proliferating, all posing questions leading to outcomes expressing various stages of mass hysteria.

Elsevier is reporting today (link in Dutch) that the police admitted to have been instructed to treat those pressing charges against Wilders with leniency. Charges of 'insult' and discrimination need not be beefed up by criminal evidence. If one didn't know any better, one would almost suspect a plot.

Surprised? You won't be, after reading Fjordman's article on the most massive act of treason in human history.

This information was brought to my attention by the blog Snaphanen. As a part of the deliberate merger of Europe and the Islamic world [Eurabia] that is the policy of the European Union at the highest levels, yet almost never debated in European media, 2008 will be a "Year of Intercultural Dialogue," which means that Europeans will be bombarded with propaganda about how good it will be to submit to Islamic rule, and some veiled threats about what happens if we don't.

The visiting Grand Mufti of Syria threatened Europeans over the "misuse" of free speech to criticize Islam. This has been carefully left out of the official EU reports from his speech at the EU Parliament. One of the EU Commissioners, or unelected pan-European Ministers, addressed the European press a while ago, hoping that they would participate in this brainwashing of the public. Not in those exact words, of course, but the journalists got the message, and disturbingly enough didn't seem to protest.

This is the hallmark of a totalitarian state, where the authorities instruct the press on what to write and which ideologies to broadcast. That is what the EUSSR is rapidly becoming, as former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky has warned.

Perhaps the most shameful aspect of the history of Eurabia is how the supposedly critical media has allowed itself to be corrupted or deceived by the Eurabians. Most of the documents about the Euro-Arab Dialogue place particular emphasis on working with the media, and the Eurabians have played the European media like a Stradivarius.

A conference on "Racism, Xenophobia and the Media" in Vienna in May 2006 was coordinated by the EU. By the end of 2006, the network of media practitioners involved in the Euro-Arab Dialogue had grown to over 500 (pdf). These included people, media and organizations from all 37 countries of the Euro-Mediterranean partnership. European and Arab journalists produced dozens of recommendations on how to enhance their cooperation and promote "mutual understanding" between their cultures and religions in the media.

Benita Ferrero-Waldner, European Commissioner for External Relations and European Neighbourhood Policy (read: Eurabian affairs), addressed the assembly of journalists. According to her, "we do not believe the media should be regulated from outside, but rather that you find ways to regulate yourselves. [...] 2008 is the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue, and I am determined that by then we will have made significant improvements in the level of mutual respect and understanding our communities have for one another. In the months and years to come we must reach beyond the elites to the man and woman on the street. That is a vital part of the fight against racism and xenophobia. And you will be the key to achieving that."

This document is available on the Internet, but I doubt most Europeans have heard about it. Ferrero-Waldner also stated that "Freedom of expression is not the freedom to insult or offend. Hate speech is always abhorrent." The EU has in numerous agreements with Muslim countries made it clear that "Islamophobia" is a form of racism and hate speech. The EU is now practicing this media censorship.

According to Dutch blogger Klein Verzet, the Grand Mufti of Syria threatened Holland [link to Elsevier article added]: "Should it come to riots, bloodshed and violence after broadcasting the Quran movie by PVV-leader Geert Wilders, then Wilders will be responsible." This was said by the Grand Mufti of Syria, Ahmad Badr Al-Din Hassoun, Tuesday in the European Parliament, where he gave a speech at the invitation of the fraction presidents.

If Wilders tears up or burns a Quran in his film 'this will simply mean he is inciting wars and bloodshed. And he will be responsible', according to the Grand Mufti. Al Hassoun thinks it is 'the responsibility of the Dutch people to stop Wilders'."

If you read the official texts by the EU media, this threat has been totally removed., a website subsidized by the EU, reports today: "No 'conflict of cultures', Islamic leader tells EU Parliament" - "The Grand Mufti of Syria yesterday told MEPs that he did not believe in the conflict of cultures because 'we are all building one culture', becoming the first religious leader to address the Parliament during the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue."

A series of eminent religious and cultural leaders are set to address the plenary session of the European Parliament on the subject of intercultural dialogue throughout 2008. The Grand Mufti of Syria, Ahmad Badr Al-Din Hassoun, yesterday (15 January) told Parliament's Strasbourg plenary that perceived clashes of culture were instead conflicts of 'ignorance, terrorism and backwardness'. He stressed that although religion gave culture its moral values, 'it is we who build civilisation', arguing that 'we must create states on a civil basis' rather than a religious one. Moreover, he said there was 'no such thing' as a holy war.

Meanwhile, around 400 Muslim groups signed a charter last week (10 January) outlining their rights and responsibilities in European society. The charter contains 26 points, among which are clauses aimed at dispelling myths surrounding the link between Islam and violence and clarifying the term 'jihad'.

In a separate development, a UN project designed to combat terrorism by promoting 'cross-cultural understanding', particularly between the West and the Islamic world, began its first forum yesterday in Madrid. The 'Alliance of Civilisations' initiative, co-sponsored by Turkey and adopted by the UN in 2005, was proposed by Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero in the wake of the Madrid bombings in 2004.

José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero was brought to power by the Islamic terror attacks in Madrid in 2004 and has been appeasing Muslims through his "Alliance of Civilizations" idea ever since. He has pledged to drum up EU support for building an undersea tunnel physically connecting Spain and Morocco, and thus Europe and Muslim North Africa. Zapatero claims this project will 'change Africa and Europe.' He's certainly right about that.

Yesterday, the EU Commission’s website for intercultural dialogue wrote: "Grand Mufti of Syria: a single culture unites us all." - "In a speech to MEPs on Tuesday on the subject of intercultural dialogue, the Grand Mufti of Syria, Ahmad Badr Al-Din Hassoun, stressed the value of culture as a unifying rather than a dividing force. Dr Hassoun was addressing a formal sitting of Parliament as the first speaker in a series of visits by eminent religious and cultural leaders in 2008, which has been designated European Year of Intercultural Dialogue. Opening his address, the Grand Mufti stressed that 'there is one single culture' in the world, the culture of humankind. Indeed, he said, "we are all building one culture, so I do not believe in the conflict of cultures".

Closing his speech, Dr Hassoun praised Europe today as embodying 'a miracle' in overcoming two world wars and bringing down the Berlin wall without bloodshed. Seeing the European Parliament as a model, he called on the EP 'to help us build a universal parliament'. And since Damascus is this year the Cultural Capital of the Arab World, he asked the EP, as a practical gesture, to hold a meeting there 'to show that the world is one'.

In his introductory speech, European Parliament President Hans-Gert Pöttering said "peaceful coexistence between cultures and religions, both in the European Union and in relations with peoples in all parts of the world, in particular on the other side of the Mediterranean, in the Middle East, is both possible and essential". He added "we must build an intellectual and cultural bridge across the Mediterranean, one founded on mutual enrichment and shared values".

In 2006, the above mentioned German Christian Democrat Hans-Gert Pöttering stated that European school textbooks should be reviewed for intolerant depictions of Islam to ensure they don't propagate prejudice. He suggested that the EU could co-operate with the 56-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference to create a textbook review committee.

Islamic countries are thus supposed to decide what is taught about Islam throughout the European Union. One would assume that 'prejudice' against Islam will include any mention of almost 1400 years of continuous Jihad warfare on several continents, including Europe. This confirms my view that the only way to save Europe now, or even parts of it, is to totally dismantle the entire European Union.

- Filed on Articles in "Big Bro's Smoke and Mirrors", cat. Control

Thursday, January 17, 2008

Reforming Islam: Beware of the Fifth Column!

Dr Sam C. Holliday, director of the Armiger Cromwell Center - a valued and regular guest author in these pages - is commenting on, and seriously cautioning for some taqiyyah related efforts in reforming Islam.

The review ('The Limits of Liberal Islam' in Wilson Quarterly, Winter 2008 ) of "The Politics of God" by Lilla (NYT Magazine, 19 Aug 07) highlights several important issues. The analysis is right on target and the solution suggested should be our goal; but the Muslim "renovators" mentioned are part of a fifth column.

Lilla accurately notes how Islam differs from other religions, and even from the other monotheistic religion with universal claims (Christianity). For Islam the way to salvation is obedience to Muhammad and the Koran; for Christianity salvation is the acceptance of Jesus' death as the removal of sin.

He correctly identifies Hobbes' argument that "humans must surrender to absolute rulers (secular authority) in order to achieve peace" as the foundation of the separation of church and state as well as of postmodern thought. He accurately notes the influence of the counter argument by Rousseau that "human beings need religion (sacred authority) both as an expression of their natural goodness and as a moral compass". However, he fails to note that the siren's call of progress toward some utopia is a fundamental belief of postmodern thought.

He concludes with the observation that when any belief is "trimmed to fit the demands of the moment, the fewer reasons it gives believers for holding on to that faith ..." It is true that achieving the "Great Separation" of politics and religion, which the West takes from granted, will be very difficult to achieve among Muslims.

The same is true for his conclusion that a "self-confident, modernized Islam that is able simply to coexist with the West ought to be enough". Nevertheless, this is the solution we should seek. The alternative of killing or converting all Muslims is not a very attractive solution.

The West should do whatever is necessary to neutralized hirabahists (unholy warriors, the correct term for those often called jihadists or holy warriors) and this includes supporting Muslim reformers working to renew Islam from within.

The goal should be furthering modern Islamic counties with which the West can live in peace. Everyone should encourage and support Muslims within Islamic countries attempting to change their countries or Muslims in the West assisting in the fight against the Third Jihad.

However, the "moderates" mentioned are neither. They are intellectuals living in the West that are attempting to get us to "understand Islam". They attack those that point out the true nature of Islam, or describe how Muslims treat those that do not submit to "the way of the Prophet". Also these intellectuals attempt to undermine any actions against the aggressive actions of the Third Jihad.

The "moderates" sited are Tariq Ramadan, a Swiss-born cleric, and El Fadl, a UCLA law professor. It is wise to consider both members of a fifth column in the West attempting to weaken our resolve; such "moderates" facilitate success of the Third Jihad. These "moderate" Muslims and their naive supporters are a major threat.

They are the led elements of a global Islamic movement that seeks the destruction of the West. They can be found in our prisons, both as inmates and as Muslim clerics. They can be found in our colleges and universities. They can be found among anti-war activists. They can be found among the translators in the military.

They can be found at the very top of the US Defense Department (See: "Coughlin Sacked" by Bill Gertz, Washington Times, 11 Jan 08, pg. 6; "The Fifth Column: the Enemy Within" on Politeia Articles). The top counterterrorism analyst (Stephen Coughlin) of the JCS was recently fired after his confrontation with a "moderate" Muslim (Hasham Islam) who is a special assistant to Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England. The "moderate" Muslims wanted Coughlin removed because they opposed his hard-to-refute views on the relationship between Islamic law and Islamic Jihad doctrine and his challenging of the politically correct view of Islam as a religion of peace hijacked by extremists.

In the name of religious freedom we should welcome those Muslims that limit their belief to the personal, inner, nonviolent Jihad al Akbar in struggles to improve their own lives. Yet we must be on guard against those Muslims who believe that authentic Jihad, in accordance with the words of the Prophet, requires a struggle against all non believers and agree with the 1998 declaration that killing “the Americans and their allies, civilians and military, is an individual obligation for every Muslim".

We must remember that according to Islamic teaching it is morally acceptable to deceive non believers (taqiya). This is especially true regarding intellectuals living in Europe and America that know Western ideals, values, attitudes and weaknesses.

Copyright © 2008 Armiger Cromwell Center, 3750 Peachtree Road, NE, Suite 374, Atlanta, GA 30319-1322 Permission is granted to forward this essay to friends or colleagues, on a fair use basis. For reprint permission contact Armiger Cromwell Center.

Sam C. Holliday is a graduate of the U. S. Military Academy at West Point, a former director of Stability Studies at the Army War College, and a retired Army Colonel. He earned a Master's in Public Affairs from the University of Pittsburgh and a doctorate in InternationalRelations from the University of South Carolina. Currently he is Director of The Armiger Cromwell Center, a small nonprofit Internet clearinghouse for thinking "outside of the box of conventional wisdom." By means of its online essays, the ACC seeks more effective foreign policies to achieve stability through equilibrium.

Earlier by Dr Sam Holliday in Politeia:

- "Civil Right vs Human Rights"
- "The Corruption of Patriotism"
- "The Fable of the Water Buffalo and the Sparrow"
- "The Fable of the Knife"
- "Effectively Communicating Jihad: a spade is a spade"

- Filed on Articles in "The Fifth Column: the Enemy Within" -

RatePoint Business Reviews