I truly wish for a Democratic party the once and for all purge the virulent anti-Americanism that's taken root in their party. They've become a party of parisites, socialists who feed on American capitalism like a leech and breed this horrible cancer plaguing the nation germinated in the university. But when I think of their history of slavery, Jim Crow, Wilson and segregation, KKK, FDR erasing American limited governance, LBJ cynically signing on and taking as his own the civil right bill after democrats filibustered noting we'll have these nig$&#$ voting for us for 50 years I lose hope. They truly are the human shadow, everything bad about our human essence now forever corrupted by bloated governments and the easy availability of grift. I truly love the idea of their party, representing the interests of the poor, working class long forgotten by today's grifters.
Indeed, and that's exactly why the left's influence on our education, does NOT teach the foundations of freedom. So, we're stuck, unless we can unseat the left in education.
One other note. There is a pervasive, insidious influence from both parties, and most Americans, that if corrected, would have a daily influence, but it would not be popular. The civil right of each man to his life and property, and the express denunciation that anything is owed to Americans, except negative rights. Government policies and programs, supported by both parties, explicitly, and implicitly, exercise positive rights- a first-order infringement of civil rights, which corrodes the concept of civil rights. We should phase out medicare, social security, subsidized health, housing, and food programs, student loans, etc. The only moral expropriation of private property should be for the three branches of limited government. But Americans are mostly interested in their short-term interest, so as long as the country isn't destroyed in their lifetime, to hell with their progeny.
A key element. When I taught negative and positive rights to high school students, to a person they had no idea of the difference. In the same vein, when I taught why it was the 'liberal' element of liberal democracies that differentiated western civic government from authoritarian governance, again, they had no idea but saw it unfold and regress in the Arab Spring but now understood why democracy alone is insufficient to their shared rights.
Indeed. I recently saw a Public TV C Span CIVICS BEE contest .. High school students.. Civics class are about Civilian Civilization roots and fundamental structures of a Free American People.
"Western" began in Greece well beyond the Eastern "Orient Express" from Rome ! or Paris
Colleges, Universities Hospitals Libraries Theatre Orchestra are all part of ......Western Life.
A good article, although I would point out that opponents of State policy were generally treated very harshly in ancient Greece and Rome, unless you belonged to the favoured few who had the right to an opinion on these issues. The subsequent constraining of State authority was really a product of Christian civilisation, and the determination of individuals to not accede to any demands which interfered with their freedom of conscience and right to worship as they pleased. For this, many willingly went to their deaths, over many centuries, and thus laid the groundwork for the balanced constitutions that define the Western world.
Why should non-Muslims try to understand Islam? Does it matter?
Let me start by saying: "Islam is unique among the world's major religions at the structural level, that is rarely discussed plainly." it contains, within its own authoritative legal tradition, a framework for governing people who never chose it. What i mean by that is: That those who follow Islam [The house of Islam] are required to govern those who never chose to follow Islam [the non-believers or house of war]. This is not an interpretation from the fringes. It is the mainstream position of classical Sunni jurisprudence. Ibn Kathir, Al-Suyuti, Al-Shafi'i. These are not extremists. They are the tradition's own most respected voices, and they say it plainly.
Every other major religion exists to transform the lives of those who voluntarily embrace it. [Islam does that too]. But Islam also contains a legal architecture that is derived directly from its foundational texts, which divides the world into the house of Islam and the house of war. Islamic doctrine imposes perpetual conflict between Islam and those who do not embrace Islam, until the house of Islam prevails against the non believers. ALL of the Islamic branches and sects across the various Islamic theological and legal schools have codified this. And it has been established by its greatest classical jurists. Mandating ongoing conflict until Islam absorbs the kafirs, and specifies legal conditions under which non-Muslims may be permitted to continue to live, under Islamic authority. And subject to specific taxes, restrictions, and formal ritualized humiliation. This is why Shariah law creeps into our law codes.
There is a second thing non-Muslims need to understand, which is abrogation.
The Quran contains verses of patience, coexistence, and tolerance. It also contains verses commanding perpetual warfare against unbelievers until Islam prevails. These two sets of verses do not coexist as equal options. The Islamic legal tradition has a formal mechanism called naskh. In English we say abrogation. Abrogation is a fancy way of saying that the most recent instructions over ride the older instructions. Like a software update. But it can also help to think of it in a historical seance when looking at the Quran, where later revelations override earlier ones. Because the Quran was not written down all at once, but piecemeal, as it became convenient for Muhammad to receive words from his pet Angel. Al-Suyuti counted more than one hundred peaceful verses abrogated by a single later verse. The peaceful Quran that is typically presented to Western audiences is from the earlier verses. Because the Quran is entirely out of chronological order in an effort to impress the critics by placing the bigger and more impressive chapters at the front of the book and the smaller ones tucked away at the back. This is when Shariah law creeps into our law codes.
And then there is taqiyya. The doctrine that grants permission, under subjectively convenient conditions, to be deceptive. To an enemy, to your wife, or to further the goals of Islamic domination. According to the judgment of the deceiver. It is not a conspiracy theory. It is a documented feature of Islamic jurisprudence, debated and defined by the tradition's own scholars. And agreed upon by the top schools of Islamic studies. This is precisely how shariah law creeps into our institutions and law codes.
None of this means every Muslim is your enemy. It means that understanding Islam from its own authoritative sources, not from its most marketable presentations, is not optional for anyone who wants to think clearly about the world they are living in.
I admire you but you are just another voice crying in the wilderness. given the deliberate corruption of our electoral system , none of these diseases will be corrected except at the end of the barrel of a gun. History proves this to be so.
That title nails it. It's a form of brainwashing that far too many people refuse to believe is true.
It's like raising your kids to find virtue in burning down their parent's house.
I truly wish for a Democratic party the once and for all purge the virulent anti-Americanism that's taken root in their party. They've become a party of parisites, socialists who feed on American capitalism like a leech and breed this horrible cancer plaguing the nation germinated in the university. But when I think of their history of slavery, Jim Crow, Wilson and segregation, KKK, FDR erasing American limited governance, LBJ cynically signing on and taking as his own the civil right bill after democrats filibustered noting we'll have these nig$&#$ voting for us for 50 years I lose hope. They truly are the human shadow, everything bad about our human essence now forever corrupted by bloated governments and the easy availability of grift. I truly love the idea of their party, representing the interests of the poor, working class long forgotten by today's grifters.
Indeed, and that's exactly why the left's influence on our education, does NOT teach the foundations of freedom. So, we're stuck, unless we can unseat the left in education.
So true. Civics should be required for all students and for all immigrants
In every western liberal democratic country.
Excellent column! Thank you.
One other note. There is a pervasive, insidious influence from both parties, and most Americans, that if corrected, would have a daily influence, but it would not be popular. The civil right of each man to his life and property, and the express denunciation that anything is owed to Americans, except negative rights. Government policies and programs, supported by both parties, explicitly, and implicitly, exercise positive rights- a first-order infringement of civil rights, which corrodes the concept of civil rights. We should phase out medicare, social security, subsidized health, housing, and food programs, student loans, etc. The only moral expropriation of private property should be for the three branches of limited government. But Americans are mostly interested in their short-term interest, so as long as the country isn't destroyed in their lifetime, to hell with their progeny.
A key element. When I taught negative and positive rights to high school students, to a person they had no idea of the difference. In the same vein, when I taught why it was the 'liberal' element of liberal democracies that differentiated western civic government from authoritarian governance, again, they had no idea but saw it unfold and regress in the Arab Spring but now understood why democracy alone is insufficient to their shared rights.
Indeed. I recently saw a Public TV C Span CIVICS BEE contest .. High school students.. Civics class are about Civilian Civilization roots and fundamental structures of a Free American People.
"Western" began in Greece well beyond the Eastern "Orient Express" from Rome ! or Paris
Colleges, Universities Hospitals Libraries Theatre Orchestra are all part of ......Western Life.
A good article, although I would point out that opponents of State policy were generally treated very harshly in ancient Greece and Rome, unless you belonged to the favoured few who had the right to an opinion on these issues. The subsequent constraining of State authority was really a product of Christian civilisation, and the determination of individuals to not accede to any demands which interfered with their freedom of conscience and right to worship as they pleased. For this, many willingly went to their deaths, over many centuries, and thus laid the groundwork for the balanced constitutions that define the Western world.
Her thesis is absolutely true!
Brava
Why should non-Muslims try to understand Islam? Does it matter?
Let me start by saying: "Islam is unique among the world's major religions at the structural level, that is rarely discussed plainly." it contains, within its own authoritative legal tradition, a framework for governing people who never chose it. What i mean by that is: That those who follow Islam [The house of Islam] are required to govern those who never chose to follow Islam [the non-believers or house of war]. This is not an interpretation from the fringes. It is the mainstream position of classical Sunni jurisprudence. Ibn Kathir, Al-Suyuti, Al-Shafi'i. These are not extremists. They are the tradition's own most respected voices, and they say it plainly.
Every other major religion exists to transform the lives of those who voluntarily embrace it. [Islam does that too]. But Islam also contains a legal architecture that is derived directly from its foundational texts, which divides the world into the house of Islam and the house of war. Islamic doctrine imposes perpetual conflict between Islam and those who do not embrace Islam, until the house of Islam prevails against the non believers. ALL of the Islamic branches and sects across the various Islamic theological and legal schools have codified this. And it has been established by its greatest classical jurists. Mandating ongoing conflict until Islam absorbs the kafirs, and specifies legal conditions under which non-Muslims may be permitted to continue to live, under Islamic authority. And subject to specific taxes, restrictions, and formal ritualized humiliation. This is why Shariah law creeps into our law codes.
There is a second thing non-Muslims need to understand, which is abrogation.
The Quran contains verses of patience, coexistence, and tolerance. It also contains verses commanding perpetual warfare against unbelievers until Islam prevails. These two sets of verses do not coexist as equal options. The Islamic legal tradition has a formal mechanism called naskh. In English we say abrogation. Abrogation is a fancy way of saying that the most recent instructions over ride the older instructions. Like a software update. But it can also help to think of it in a historical seance when looking at the Quran, where later revelations override earlier ones. Because the Quran was not written down all at once, but piecemeal, as it became convenient for Muhammad to receive words from his pet Angel. Al-Suyuti counted more than one hundred peaceful verses abrogated by a single later verse. The peaceful Quran that is typically presented to Western audiences is from the earlier verses. Because the Quran is entirely out of chronological order in an effort to impress the critics by placing the bigger and more impressive chapters at the front of the book and the smaller ones tucked away at the back. This is when Shariah law creeps into our law codes.
And then there is taqiyya. The doctrine that grants permission, under subjectively convenient conditions, to be deceptive. To an enemy, to your wife, or to further the goals of Islamic domination. According to the judgment of the deceiver. It is not a conspiracy theory. It is a documented feature of Islamic jurisprudence, debated and defined by the tradition's own scholars. And agreed upon by the top schools of Islamic studies. This is precisely how shariah law creeps into our institutions and law codes.
None of this means every Muslim is your enemy. It means that understanding Islam from its own authoritative sources, not from its most marketable presentations, is not optional for anyone who wants to think clearly about the world they are living in.
That is what my work is about.
Yes
I admire you but you are just another voice crying in the wilderness. given the deliberate corruption of our electoral system , none of these diseases will be corrected except at the end of the barrel of a gun. History proves this to be so.