PARALLELS: ISLAM AND SOVIET SOCIALISM – AND CONSEQUENCES by Radu M Oleniuc (must

PARALLELS: ISLAM AND SOVIET SOCIALISM – AND CONSEQUENCES

by Radu M Oleniuc (must read)

Islam, like soviet socialism, is founded on a dual basis : on the one hand the ideological foundation, and on the other the imposition of that ideology through armed force. The combination of the two is characteristic. The earliest person to speak of this was Sima Qian, one of the greatest intellectuals in China, a historian, who was also prime minister. As an intellectual and as prime minister, he was perfectly acquainted with a system based both on ideology and on violence. In his letter to Jen An, which dates back to 91 B.C., he explains that, in such a system, there can be only two solutions :

– physical death : you oppose the system and in that case you are killed

– spiritual death : you pretend to believe in the ideology, and in that case you wear a mask.

(but “the mask sticks to your face”, as Sima Qian said later in his books. The mask becomes you, and you become what you did not ever wanted to be. The whole process can last for years, or several generations, but JUST AS IT HAPPENED IN COMMUNISM, the phenomenon always ends with exactly the same results – and btw, this explains also the high approval rate of Putin, or the 99% who voted for Saddam. It’s not only fear driving these men, it’s much much more).

Thus, according to Sima Qian, in a system founded both on force and on ideology, one can choose only between physical death and spiritual death.

That is precisely the structure of Islam, founded both on ideology and on the use of armed force. Then there’s the interior violence that is exerted on the ‘dhimmis’, or peoples conquered by the Muslim armies, who lose all their political rights and the greater part of their civil rights, and who become foreigners in their own country. They are driven to extinction by a combination of methods.

Throughout antiquity, and right up until the second half of the 19th century, there were fluctuations in population due either to famines, or to epidemics, or to wars. After each decline, the population would increase again until it reached its equilibrium, that is, the maximum number of people who could live on the land considering the agricultural techniques available. The Muslims built new towns, Oran, Cordoba, Cairo, etc. while slaughtering or deporting the local populations, and peopling the towns with Arabs either from the Hedjaz region or from Syria.

It is a general phenomenon. Thus the Turkish population, initially 100% Christian, had fallen to 30% Christian by 1900, and is 0.2% Christian today. [We have the similar example of Pakistan today, or Egypt, Syria etc]

Secular constitutions in Europe evolved and are separated from religion only where Christianity was properly applied. Because this concept exist only in this part of the world, for thousands of years. In Islam is not like that. In Islam the religion IS the state. 90% of Islam deals with civil problems, administration, regulations and so on.

For Muslim scholars, Islam is “Dîn, Dunya, Daoula” (i.e. religion, society, state). And even a single comma is “sacred” in their book, thus cannot be changed – not like here, where we had dozens of versions (some conflicting among themselves) of the Bible. Hundreds of light years away from Virginia Convention or from “Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and to God what belongs to God”. Hundreds of years away from the “wall of separation” of Roger Williams (a priest) or later, Jefferson. This is why they will NEVER reform their states. Not to mention the fact it is enforced with the sword at every step.

In Christianity there is the concept of sword as well (Matthew 10:34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace, but a sword.”). But it is not used as a violent means to something (only for defensive purposes – at his trial “bring only two swords”), and only to separate “mother from the daughter, son from father” etc. As any sin is an individual sin, not a collective one (a revolutionary concept again, at the time). And here comes individual responsibility in jurisprudence and coutumes. Yakuza and Japanese culture doesn’t understand this at all. They can pass “sins” (in the Old Greek the word for sin is debt) among others, and usually a low tier subaltern pays / takes the punishment for the boss, a habit that is so typical for any collectivist society (and this with ‘honor’ – crazy).

This is a very long talk. At the end, I guess we must understand why Marcel Gauchet said “Christianity is the religion to end all other religions”, as it is the exit from dogma, cheap mysticism, forced morals (good by force), collectivism and so on. As all of the concepts we take from granted evolved very hard, but to conclude, we must understand why they happened ONLY in this part of the world.

https://www.facebook.com/oleniuc/posts/10153609756561565