Desert Storm Navy Combat Veteran here... I've seen heroism, I've witnessed brilliance in leadership and put my life in the hands of true subject matter experts. Ayaan is not only a hero of mine, but a brilliant SME whose voice is so important at this moment in history.
Dear Ms. Ali, I am sorry to see that the comment section of this second article is filled with so many naysayers. Your mission is noble and your method is worthy. Please ignore these nattering nabobs of negativism. May God be with you!
I am a college professor with graduate degrees in two separate STEM fields. You cannot explain how 26 fundamental constants of physics remain constant across the approximately 3 million trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion points of the space-time continuum of our universe without God. Your explanation is either 1) it's all just an incredible coincidence, or 2) a circular argument from science, whose very consistency is what is at stake. A universe without God would be so utterly chaotic that atoms could not form, let alone molecules, or life forms.
Your ongoing misery and/or anger does not change the facts of the universe. Its very predictability is proof of God's existence.
Wouldn’t it be better to call that list “Enlightenment values” rather than “Judeo-Christian values”? Many secular-minded people (such as myself) would be less likely to support you if you use the latter term.
Enlightenment values, if they are merely "secular," have no solid roots and shift with the wind. Judeo-Christian values, from which the Enlightenment sprang, are rooted in reality, in enduring truth—not to be confused with "religiosity."
Kosmos is measurable, not boundless. Astrophysics can "see" that it's expanding from a beginning, and if it has a beginning, it has a Beginner. Check the evidence from astrophysics.
Wrong. It is straight up Aristotelian metaphysical thinking (unrelated by method from reality's arbitration) to assign an agency and the agency's cause to movement (in this case, what we select based on an absence of further evidence to be a 'beginning'). Your assignment of agency - and then claim this assignment is 'evidence' doesn't make it so IN or FROM reality. For that extraordinary claim to have any knowledge basis rather than imported metaphysical musings mistaken for 'evidence', we need reality and not you and your beliefs, nor Aristotle's, to provide it.
While I find there to be laudable developments within certain Enlightenment thinkers, I think of them to be specialized continuations of classical and scholastic thought (namely those like Locke and Montesquieu). These are in the Judeo-Christian tradition.
But to suppose the Enlightenment ideas of Rousseau or Condorcet are to be valued would be unacceptable. The French Revolution spawned some of the worst ideas and tyrannies in human history: namely all the proto-forms of socialism (later inspiring nazism and bolshevism).
Cultural tradition, yes but not derived from it. This is a common misunderstanding. Hirsi should know perfectly well that even a Richard Dawkins claims to be a cultural Christian but in no way does this association become causal to liberal principles. In fact and history, Christianity had to be overcome in political authority before these liberal values could find a home in reason and human rights.
Thank you for your constructive reply! I would add a caveat that the cultural tradition of the west is not arbitrary nor unfounded. It is a good thing because it a good thing throughout the ages.
To your point about the non-causality of Christian society to liberal principles. St. Gregory the Great spoke about human equality in the 6th century. Natural rights theory was systematized in the 12th medieval Europe. Free market principles were developed in the 16th in Spain. Education and healthcare were projects of the Church. Property rights of nonChristians was confidently defended by Vitoria and De Las Casas. And this is just the Catholic realm!
Enlightenment ideas and thinkers stand upon the shoulders of giants. The history reveals as much.
This is like claiming the principle of equality law was a Christian concept because the Magna Charta was produced in a Christian country by Christians in 1215. The point is that the Christian religious belief itself did not produce or cause any of these ideas you mention but, most often and throughout most of its history, was actually used by various Christian authorities as divinely authorized to stand contrary to them. My criticism here is that by basing the defence of liberal values on assumed and assigned 'Christian' heritage and faith of them by Hirsi automatically, fundamentally, and fatally undermines them. These liberal values are not religious in any way but fully and importantly secular. No need for any god or gods from which to derive authority for them but an emergent and sufficient property of simply being human (as in 'We the people' from the US Constitution that declares this authority - the people - and no other like some god or gods to be sufficient). So not an auspicious beginning to defending liberal values, methinks.
A rose, by any other name is still a rose. Similarly , replacing A.D. with B.C.E. Doesn’t change the fact that 95% of the world’s time is based on the life of Jesus Christ, whether or not a believer. If the first term would prevent you adhering support to the cause, perhaps Ayyan will accommodate you.
Exactly, I cringed when I read that. Not that It isn't a foundation of Western civilization, it's that Western civilization only began it ascendency when society became sufficiently secular.
Yes, Christianity strongly *opposed* “freedom of conscience and expression” for most of Christendom, and it was only with The Enlightenment, when Europe began getting secular, and many people stopped being religious, that freedom of speech and religion came to the fore.
It’s true that many Christian institutions often crushed dissent, but the very moral language the Enlightenment used to argue for conscience and human dignity was also nourished by Christian ideas—so the story is less ‘Christianity vs freedom’ than ‘power vs conscience,’ but it's also true that we find professing Christians on both sides.
I can understand atheists not wanting to sign up to an organisation that may be promoting religious ideas.
However, the West actually and historically IS based on the values of the Jewish and Christian religions.
It's just a historical fact. I think of it like this:
We all know that historically, scientists extracted the key compound of the drug aspirin from the willow tree, yet now, aspirin is unrecognisable as a part of that tree.
It stands as little pills in a pack or box that alleviates pain and thins the blood.
We all recognise what it is and how useful to humankind it has been but we don't have to study botany to value it.
It’s true that the West was Christian for most of it’s history, and it’s true that Judeo-Christianity has a way better set of values than Islam, but many important Western values today are improvements on Judeo-Christianity. For example, of the Ten Commandments, the first four are the opposite of “freedom of conscience and expression”, and it’s only vastly later that such values emerged, and that emergence was often coupled with secularisation. .
Like you, I immediately saw the problem between making a religious ownership claim about "individual liberty, equality before the law, freedom of conscience and expression, and the dignity of every human being," and what's factually true about these being revolutionary liberal principles. Promoting antithetical religious beliefs in the name of the enlightenment values they undermine is just another dishonest bait and switch religious apologetic tactic to claim what it didn't create and doesn't own.
What a great topic of discussion and raison d'etre. All the nonsense from the left is on every level preposterous. Yes, we did kill off and conquer and assimilate (more of the fomer most likely) the indigenous people of N. America. At least in the US. Our friends to the south are very interested in getting all their indigenous people to leave their countries for some strange reason..... and go to El Norte. The only real difference is that our conquest came about fairly recently in recorded history. We are ALL the descendants of slaves. Our ancestors were booted out of every place they came from. Otherwise, why would they have left "civilization". Might has almost always made right for all of human history and most of modern history including today too if you look around the world (i.e. Iran, China, Russia, etc). The world emulates...... the western model because it is WILDLY SUCCESSFUL. If they want to help, they should feel free to donate their time and money to help others. There is plenty of need within 5 miles of where any of us are reading this. Either here at home, or where-ever. The problem of foreign aid not tied to individuals is that most of it ends up in the hands of the very tyrants enslaving their people.
Speaking for myself, it would be a much better start to the program if it dropped the baggage of misinformed and dishonest religious claims to the liberal values being forwarded for support. I cannot in good conscience overlook the former to support the latter because the latter stands on its own merits.
A very thought provoking article. I am looking forward to to reading your writings. The comments add so much to the discussion and my attempt to grasp the nuances of the various arguments. Just the rambling thoughts of an old hermit. (Hope I haven't upset anyone.)
A wonderful manifesto. That's the attitude of a free person who knows that freedom must be defended every day, because it's the essence of a full and dignified life.
TO LIVE IS TO DEFEND ONESELF.
Maravilloso manifiesto. Esa es la actitud de una persona libre que sabe que la libertad hay que defenderla todos los días, porque es la esencia de la vida plena y digna.
During 95 years of relentless struggle, respondent has never heard better. Drive on, in hope that vigilance plus fast provolving tech will propel us to ecodise & to the stars.
Desert Storm Navy Combat Veteran here... I've seen heroism, I've witnessed brilliance in leadership and put my life in the hands of true subject matter experts. Ayaan is not only a hero of mine, but a brilliant SME whose voice is so important at this moment in history.
Dear Ms. Ali, I am sorry to see that the comment section of this second article is filled with so many naysayers. Your mission is noble and your method is worthy. Please ignore these nattering nabobs of negativism. May God be with you!
No deities exist...
I am a college professor with graduate degrees in two separate STEM fields. You cannot explain how 26 fundamental constants of physics remain constant across the approximately 3 million trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion points of the space-time continuum of our universe without God. Your explanation is either 1) it's all just an incredible coincidence, or 2) a circular argument from science, whose very consistency is what is at stake. A universe without God would be so utterly chaotic that atoms could not form, let alone molecules, or life forms.
Your ongoing misery and/or anger does not change the facts of the universe. Its very predictability is proof of God's existence.
God of the gaps argument. It's a fallacy BTW, a basic thinking error shown to be a killer - if we let it - of acquiring knowledge (goddidit).
Nice!!
Thank you for this mission, for helping us put our thoughts into words.
Wouldn’t it be better to call that list “Enlightenment values” rather than “Judeo-Christian values”? Many secular-minded people (such as myself) would be less likely to support you if you use the latter term.
Enlightenment values, if they are merely "secular," have no solid roots and shift with the wind. Judeo-Christian values, from which the Enlightenment sprang, are rooted in reality, in enduring truth—not to be confused with "religiosity."
But if you build a campaign on that claim, then you’ll alienate roughly half of your potential supporters who don’t agree.
Rubbish. They stand on their own principled merit and owe fealty to no contrary religious belief that dishonestly claims to own them.
Historically, yes, but the kosmos is quantal, boundless, ineffable & inexplicable. We live & perish w/o meaning, love our sole assuage.
Kosmos is measurable, not boundless. Astrophysics can "see" that it's expanding from a beginning, and if it has a beginning, it has a Beginner. Check the evidence from astrophysics.
Wrong. It is straight up Aristotelian metaphysical thinking (unrelated by method from reality's arbitration) to assign an agency and the agency's cause to movement (in this case, what we select based on an absence of further evidence to be a 'beginning'). Your assignment of agency - and then claim this assignment is 'evidence' doesn't make it so IN or FROM reality. For that extraordinary claim to have any knowledge basis rather than imported metaphysical musings mistaken for 'evidence', we need reality and not you and your beliefs, nor Aristotle's, to provide it.
While I find there to be laudable developments within certain Enlightenment thinkers, I think of them to be specialized continuations of classical and scholastic thought (namely those like Locke and Montesquieu). These are in the Judeo-Christian tradition.
But to suppose the Enlightenment ideas of Rousseau or Condorcet are to be valued would be unacceptable. The French Revolution spawned some of the worst ideas and tyrannies in human history: namely all the proto-forms of socialism (later inspiring nazism and bolshevism).
Cultural tradition, yes but not derived from it. This is a common misunderstanding. Hirsi should know perfectly well that even a Richard Dawkins claims to be a cultural Christian but in no way does this association become causal to liberal principles. In fact and history, Christianity had to be overcome in political authority before these liberal values could find a home in reason and human rights.
Thank you for your constructive reply! I would add a caveat that the cultural tradition of the west is not arbitrary nor unfounded. It is a good thing because it a good thing throughout the ages.
To your point about the non-causality of Christian society to liberal principles. St. Gregory the Great spoke about human equality in the 6th century. Natural rights theory was systematized in the 12th medieval Europe. Free market principles were developed in the 16th in Spain. Education and healthcare were projects of the Church. Property rights of nonChristians was confidently defended by Vitoria and De Las Casas. And this is just the Catholic realm!
Enlightenment ideas and thinkers stand upon the shoulders of giants. The history reveals as much.
This is like claiming the principle of equality law was a Christian concept because the Magna Charta was produced in a Christian country by Christians in 1215. The point is that the Christian religious belief itself did not produce or cause any of these ideas you mention but, most often and throughout most of its history, was actually used by various Christian authorities as divinely authorized to stand contrary to them. My criticism here is that by basing the defence of liberal values on assumed and assigned 'Christian' heritage and faith of them by Hirsi automatically, fundamentally, and fatally undermines them. These liberal values are not religious in any way but fully and importantly secular. No need for any god or gods from which to derive authority for them but an emergent and sufficient property of simply being human (as in 'We the people' from the US Constitution that declares this authority - the people - and no other like some god or gods to be sufficient). So not an auspicious beginning to defending liberal values, methinks.
This!
A rose, by any other name is still a rose. Similarly , replacing A.D. with B.C.E. Doesn’t change the fact that 95% of the world’s time is based on the life of Jesus Christ, whether or not a believer. If the first term would prevent you adhering support to the cause, perhaps Ayyan will accommodate you.
Exactly, I cringed when I read that. Not that It isn't a foundation of Western civilization, it's that Western civilization only began it ascendency when society became sufficiently secular.
Yes, Christianity strongly *opposed* “freedom of conscience and expression” for most of Christendom, and it was only with The Enlightenment, when Europe began getting secular, and many people stopped being religious, that freedom of speech and religion came to the fore.
It’s true that many Christian institutions often crushed dissent, but the very moral language the Enlightenment used to argue for conscience and human dignity was also nourished by Christian ideas—so the story is less ‘Christianity vs freedom’ than ‘power vs conscience,’ but it's also true that we find professing Christians on both sides.
I can understand atheists not wanting to sign up to an organisation that may be promoting religious ideas.
However, the West actually and historically IS based on the values of the Jewish and Christian religions.
It's just a historical fact. I think of it like this:
We all know that historically, scientists extracted the key compound of the drug aspirin from the willow tree, yet now, aspirin is unrecognisable as a part of that tree.
It stands as little pills in a pack or box that alleviates pain and thins the blood.
We all recognise what it is and how useful to humankind it has been but we don't have to study botany to value it.
It’s true that the West was Christian for most of it’s history, and it’s true that Judeo-Christianity has a way better set of values than Islam, but many important Western values today are improvements on Judeo-Christianity. For example, of the Ten Commandments, the first four are the opposite of “freedom of conscience and expression”, and it’s only vastly later that such values emerged, and that emergence was often coupled with secularisation. .
Agree. And “Five Pillars”? Really? What a marketing faux pas to directly reference Islam’s core principles in an effort to fight those beliefs!
Because Islam has five pillars of belief, that negates any mission from having five completely different pillars?
Like you, I immediately saw the problem between making a religious ownership claim about "individual liberty, equality before the law, freedom of conscience and expression, and the dignity of every human being," and what's factually true about these being revolutionary liberal principles. Promoting antithetical religious beliefs in the name of the enlightenment values they undermine is just another dishonest bait and switch religious apologetic tactic to claim what it didn't create and doesn't own.
Thank you, Ayaan! Looking forward to hearing more. 🙏
These guiding principles and manifesto statements are truly inspiring. Bravo!
What a great topic of discussion and raison d'etre. All the nonsense from the left is on every level preposterous. Yes, we did kill off and conquer and assimilate (more of the fomer most likely) the indigenous people of N. America. At least in the US. Our friends to the south are very interested in getting all their indigenous people to leave their countries for some strange reason..... and go to El Norte. The only real difference is that our conquest came about fairly recently in recorded history. We are ALL the descendants of slaves. Our ancestors were booted out of every place they came from. Otherwise, why would they have left "civilization". Might has almost always made right for all of human history and most of modern history including today too if you look around the world (i.e. Iran, China, Russia, etc). The world emulates...... the western model because it is WILDLY SUCCESSFUL. If they want to help, they should feel free to donate their time and money to help others. There is plenty of need within 5 miles of where any of us are reading this. Either here at home, or where-ever. The problem of foreign aid not tied to individuals is that most of it ends up in the hands of the very tyrants enslaving their people.
Thanks for starting this Ayaan. Publications like ours may prove vital in the information wars.
We're not fighting for the soul of the West, as much as we are claiming ground in the digital landscape, one which will define future norms.
Speaking for myself, it would be a much better start to the program if it dropped the baggage of misinformed and dishonest religious claims to the liberal values being forwarded for support. I cannot in good conscience overlook the former to support the latter because the latter stands on its own merits.
A very thought provoking article. I am looking forward to to reading your writings. The comments add so much to the discussion and my attempt to grasp the nuances of the various arguments. Just the rambling thoughts of an old hermit. (Hope I haven't upset anyone.)
I love this new platform Ayaan! I have been a fan since I first read "Infidel". Thank you for everything you do!
A wonderful manifesto. That's the attitude of a free person who knows that freedom must be defended every day, because it's the essence of a full and dignified life.
TO LIVE IS TO DEFEND ONESELF.
Maravilloso manifiesto. Esa es la actitud de una persona libre que sabe que la libertad hay que defenderla todos los días, porque es la esencia de la vida plena y digna.
VIVIR ES DEFENDERSE.
You are awesome! I love reading your perspective and views.
👏👏👏🌿🗽
I have been following you for several years now...Nial also...and you could not be more on point!
During 95 years of relentless struggle, respondent has never heard better. Drive on, in hope that vigilance plus fast provolving tech will propel us to ecodise & to the stars.
🕰️ 📝 ⛓️3/5/1946 x 80th Anniv of W Churchill's
IRON CURTAIN speech in Missouri 🇺🇲 🌐 🇬🇧🗽
https://claude.ai/public/artifacts/eb204ec5-1192-4552-96b5-97c9ca4089eb
.......🔔🪖⚓ to live in interesting times!🧐 🕋 🇨🇳🛢️⛪ 🇮🇷