IN THE SHADOW OF THE SWORD PART II
THE CRIMES OF MONOTHEISM
‘Man makes religion, religion does not make man…‘The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo…Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower. The criticism of religion disillusions man, so that he will think, act, and fashion his reality like a man who has discarded his illusions and regained his senses, so that he will move around himself as his own true Sun. Religion is only the illusory Sun which revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself.'
Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right
“With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.”
― Steven WeinbergIn considering the crimes committed in the name of monotheism in general, and Islam in particular, the case of the Muslim invasions of India surely stands out, beside which the horrors perpetrated during the Crusades, considerable crimes in their own right, are placed into the shade: -
‘The Muslim conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter. The Bahmani sultans (1347-1480) in central India made it a rule to kill 100,000 captives in a single day, and many more on other occasions. The conquest of the Vijayanagar empire in 1564 left the capital plus large areas of Karnataka depopulated…’From Koenraad Elst, Negation in India.
However
in the name of the true Christian God the Crusaders certainly did not hold back when it came to their own predilection for slaughter: -
‘The Crusaders gave the Jews two choices in their slogan: "Christ-killers, embrace the Cross or die!" 12,000 Jews in the Rhine Valley alone were killed as the first Crusade passed through. Some Jewish writers refer to these events as the "first holocaust." Once the army reached Jerusalem and broke through the city walls, they slaughtered all the inhabitants that they could find (men, women, children, new-borns). After locating about 6,000 Jews holed up in the synagogue, they set the building on fire; the Jews were burned alive. The Crusaders found that about 30,000 Muslims had fled to the al Aqsa Mosque. The Muslim were also slaughtered without mercy.’
As to the Jews, more used to being the victims of their Abrahamic monotheist brothers than perpetrators, though they too seem just as capable
of mass murder should a vicious and sadistic God give the order,
’…And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword."[Joshua 6.21]
All long ago and far away you might say, and you would be
right – though with constant references being made to the Crusades across the
Muslim world you could be forgiven for imagining that the Crusades represented
a much more contemporary phenomenon.
Unfortunately a
glance at this morning’s headlines indicate that the savagery of the
monotheists is still very much alive and wreaking havoc across the globe. To
name but the major news items, Israel is reducing great swathes of Gaza to
rubble, indiscriminately killing men, women and children in the name of a
viable Zionist state. Whilst in Gaza Islamic fundamentalists hold sway, with
Allah at their side, determined to drive the Zionist occupiers from the lands
of Islamic caliphate. In Iraq ISIS have already declared a caliphate and are
slaughtering Christians, Yazidis, and Shia Muslims,[1] forcing women into
burqa’s and young girls to have their genitalia mutilated. A young American man
in Syria with explosives strapped to his body declares his intention to blow
himself up, along with as many others as he is able, so that he might die a
martyr. 'I want to rest in heaven', he says. I fear he may be riding for a
fall. In Tripoli, Libya, the American embassy is evacuated as the country
descends into chaos, ‘part of a nation-wide struggle between an Islamist-led
alliance and fragmented opposition.’
These are just the stories I found on this morning’s
Guardian website, there are many more stories lurking on the inside pages, from
the Nigerian schoolgirls kidnapped by the Islamacist group Boko Haram, cases of
Christians persecuted in Pakistan, Muslims persecuted in Burma, homosexuals
being persecuted in Uganda by Christians. I could go on. What about the
indoctrination of children around the world, including here in the UK, with perverse
religious ideologies?
So,
what is it with monotheism? - Now I am aware that other religions often have
unsavoury aspects, the Hindu Caste system comes to mind, or the veneration of
the warrior in Shintoism. - However what distinguishes the two most prominent
monotheisms is that unlike polytheistic religions they cannot keep themselves
to themselves, they refuse to leave the rest of us alone – in short they are proselytizing
cults.
Now
if I found the secret of happiness and the guarantee of eternal life in
paradise you might think it would make me rather pleased, that it might, if I
was feeling suitably altruistic, make me want to share this secret with others.
You would not expect me to seek to impose my new found knowledge upon everyone
I encountered under the threat of violence. This is however precisely what the
Christians from its adoption as the state religion of the Roman Empire and of
Islam from its very inception sought to do; the history of Europe, the Middle
East, and the Americas is a catalogue of the violent imposition of monotheism
and of the culture, mores and values of Christianity and Islam. Of the three
Abrahamic religions only Judaism seeks not to proselytize, - it does not, of
course, follow that it is a particularly tolerant religion, it is not. The
history of monotheism is a landscape of corpses, sometimes mountains of them.[2]
All victims of the insane idea that everyone on the planet must worship the
same god.
And
what a god he is, found in the Old Testament and the Quran, cruel, vain,
ruthless, sadistic, demanding and hostile the very idea of human freedom and
dignity. It is surely correct to identify the birth of totalitarian ideas, - as
adopted by Fascism, and Communism of the Stalinist variety, - with the ascent
of monotheism? With the worship of the great invisible leader in the sky, who
knows all, sees all, and demands absolute obedience and daily acts of
prostration and worship; with those who offend him facing sadistic punishments
beyond human imagination.
This
insecure and jealous tyrant, like a North Korean dictator demands constant
worship, self-abasement and prostration:-
“Praise the Lord! Praise God in his sanctuary; praise him in his mighty heavens! Praise him for his mighty deeds; praise him according to his excellent greatness! Praise him with trumpet sound; praise him with lute and harp! Praise him with tambourine and dance; praise him with strings and pipe! Praise him with sounding cymbals; praise him with loud clashing cymbals!” Psalm 150: 1-6.
“I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me…” Exodus 20:5 King James Bible
Or
from an Islamic perspective:-
“Our worship must show our adoration and loyalty to God for His grace in providing us with the way to escape the bondage of sin, so we can have the salvation He so much wants to give us. Besides, purpose of worship is to bring to Him praise and thanksgiving and adoration with great joy and exuberance. The nature of the worship God demands is the prostration of our souls before Him in humble and contrite submission. Our worship to God is a very humble and reverent action.”[3]
This
requirement for constant abasement and adoration of the great one is linked to
a demand for acceptance of absurd fairy stories, often contradictory, sometimes
downright nonsensical. Winged horses, ocean waves parting to create a dry
crossing, Ark’s that can accommodate every known species of animal.
Whilst
like all totalitarian societies there can be no room for private space in a
properly ordered monotheistic society; the ideology is all pervasive.
“…so therefore every Muslim has to try to implement the shariah completely as much as they are able in their life, both individually as individuals and collectively as nations. We have to implement the shariah both individually and collectively because Islam is a complete way of life. It is a deen, it is a deen. This word that they use ‘religion’, you have to understand the word that is used, ‘religion’, does not sufficiently describe Islam. Because when the people in the West, which you have to remember is a secular society, they talk about religion, they have something already programmed in their mind. To them religion is something that is your own personal affair, it’s your own personal business. You go to the church, you go to the synagogue, you go to the gurdwara, you go to the mosque, in their idea that’s it. Your religion is something in your own personal life. But as for government, as for rulership,[sic] as for the laws through which and by which we live, then that is not, in their mind, in the realm of religion. This is not the case with Islam at all”.31
METAPHOR AND LITERALISM/ ISLAM AND THE THREAT FROM WAHHABISM
Now
of course the apologists for both Christianity and Islam argue that the
fanatical fundamentalism that drove the crusades, the Inquisition and more
recently Al Qaida and ISIS are distorting the true message of their respective
religions.
With
Christianity, certainly respecting the use of violence, there is some truth to
this claim, - Jesus offered a philosophy of nonviolence and I think we can
definitely say he was not in favour of beheading people. Not so with Mohamed, I
believe I have dealt elsewhere with the claim
that Islam is the religion of peace. Thus whilst none of the three major
monotheisms have a monopoly of exhortations to commit acts of gross inhumanity,
Islam has violent injunctions at its very core.
In
a recent newspaper report a reporter noted that an ISIS fighter had written on
the wall of a now desolate Christian home, ‘Kill them wherever you find them.’
What he did not say, perhaps because he did not know, that this is a direct
quote from the Quran. In Sam Harris’s well researched book, ‘The End of Faith’
he details quote after quote from the Quran and the Hadiths inciting hatred of unbelievers, apostates.
Still
it is worth emphasising that millions upon millions of Muslims live their lives
in peace and harmony with their neighbours, Christians, Jews and unbelievers
like myself. Thus I think I could safely enter into a conversation with, say
Baroness Warsi, in the knowledge that on hearing of my unbelief she would not
spend the remainder of our time together trying to cut my head off. Just as
Christians do not wake every morning and then adhere literally to the word of
the Bible, -
"If you wish
to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will
have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me." Mathew 19.21
So
do most Muslims find it fairly easy to negotiate the day without dropping
everything to go and practice Jihad in Iraq. However should a Christian choose
to give up all his possessions and take to the road that might be of some
concern to his immediate family, but the rest of us could live with the
decision? Whilst a sudden desire to undertake violent Jihad has severe
implications for the rest of us.
Most
contemporary Christians eschew a literal reading of the scriptures, great
swathes of the bible are now consequently explained, sometimes disingenuously,
in terms of myth, metaphor and simile. Thus they are able to function perfectly
well in the world without biblical literalism getting in the way. They feel no
desire, for example to stone their neighbour’s wife for adultery. There are of
course a few literalist fanatics, particularly in the US ‘bible belt,’ who
insist that every word is the word of God and must be understood literally, but
they are increasingly few in number.
The
same is true of most Muslims living in non-Muslim countries. Though it is worth
mentioning that there are aspects of the teaching and practices of Mohamed that
are very difficult to render metaphorically. Beheading all the male members,
including pubescent boys of the Jewish Qurayza tribe, as described in the
Quran, cannot be honestly rendered as a metaphor.
On
the other hand try going on Saudi television and explaining that Mohamed did
not really fly overnight from Mecca to Jerusalem on a winged horse, this is a
metaphor for an exercise of spiritual imagination. You will find yourself
behind bars quicker than you can say blasphemy.
And
this leads directly to the most troubling aspect of contemporary Islam, the
increasing dominance of the Wahhabi school of Sunni Islamic teaching,
supported, funded and propagated by Saudi Arabian money.
‘The importance of Saudi Arabia in the rise and return of al-Qa'ida is often misunderstood and understated. Saudi Arabia is influential because its oil and vast wealth make it powerful in the Middle East and beyond. But it is not financial resources alone that make it such an important player. Another factor is its propagating of Wahhabism, the fundamentalist 18th-century version of Islam that imposes sharia law, relegates women to second-class citizens, and regards Shia and Sufi Muslims as heretics and apostates to be persecuted along with Christians and Jews. This religious intolerance and political authoritarianism, which in its readiness to use violence has many similarities with European fascism in the 1930s, is getting worse rather than better. A Saudi who set up a liberal website on which clerics could be criticised was recently sentenced to a thousand lashes and seven years in prison.[4]’
This
poisonous ideology has been pouring into the west since the 1970’s like sewage
from a broken pipe. The aim has been to make the Wahhabi brand the only game in
town. In this the Saudi government, armed with trillions in petro-dollars, have
been remarkably successful.
Across
the UK countless Mosques, Community centres, schools and bookshops have all
been funded by Saudi ‘beneficence.’ The same is true across the Indian
subcontinent, Malaysia and the rest of the Middle East.
This
‘beneficence’ however has come at a very high price indeed. You see there is
one slight problem with Wahhabism and that is that it is incompatible with
western liberal values. Thus in Western Europe generations of young Muslim men
and women are coming of age hostile to the values of the society in which they
live. The consequences are now clear for all to see.
I
now want you to engage in what Martin Amis calls a ‘thought experiment:-’
It
is 1941, SS killing squads are surging across Western Ukraine, slaughtering
Jews, Communists, Orthodox Priests, Poles and anyone else who gets in their
way. Now imagine young men handing out leaflets in Oxford Street imploring
fellow Aryans to travel to the Ukraine and fight along with their SS brothers
in the creation of a new homeland.
 |
| ISIS IN IRAQ |
Pretty
horrible eh, well that it the position we have now reached.[5]
In the East End of London there exists groups of ISIS supporters who are happy
to fly the ISIS flag and to travel to Syria and Iraq to participate in the
slaughter.[6]
Things are very serious indeed.
WHAT IS TO BE DONE?
Words
mean something, I think the government should declare that we are in a state of
war with ISIS. Those in this country who engaged in fundraising, recruitment or
who actively go and fight in Syria or Iraq for ISIS,[7]
would in the first two instances be guilty of aiding and abetting the
enemy, in the latter they would become enemy combatants and will have committed
treason.
Alongside this
approach we must be more nuanced in dealing with anyone wishing to return, to
quote Neil Inkster the former MI6 Intelligence Director, “We probably need to start thinking about rather more nuanced approaches
to the problem of returning foreign fighters. It is certainly the case that not
all these people will be committed, some of them will want a way out. I think
there is a need to start developing policies and approaches that might
constitute a ramp down which some of these people can be led and brought back
into mainstream society. There's no magic bullet here but a one size fits all,
throw everyone in jail approach, is perhaps not wise."[8]
The
DPP enjoys quite a lot of discretion as to whether a prosecution is in the
national interest. However anyone who has committed war crimes must be
prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Finally
a word on citizenship. It seems to me that those who do not hold to the values
of free speech, democracy, and a secular legal system, should be able to
renounce their citizenship and supported in finding accommodation more to their
liking. Those who chose to waive this right would by default be declaring their
willingness to abide by the norms and values of this society.
In
his book ‘Lights Out’ Mark Steyn quotes a gay writer from Amsterdam, once one
of the most liberal cities in the world. Now there are whole areas of the city
too dangerous for gay men to be open about their sexuality, since groups of
young Muslims have taken up the old skinhead activity of ‘gay bashing.’ He says
that he does not know how to fight for his rights and freedoms, he has only
ever learned how to enjoy them.
Well
he is going to have to go on a steep learning curve since he and we are in a
fight now and the ostrich position is no longer an option.
[1]
Though it seems that the more progressive wing of the movement are willing to
offer the alternative option of conversion to Islam or exile, with little more
than the clothes on your back.
[2]
Indeed one charming custom adopted by some of those seeking to maintain the
grip of the caliphate was to build mountains of skulls, as in Nis, Serbia.
[5]
The London Evening Standard recently reported ISIS supporters handing out
leaflets in Oxford Street urging their Muslim brothers to join the struggle.
[6]
Some 500 Britons are believed to have gone to Syria and Iraq and joined
Islamist groups fighting there. Some 200 are estimated to have returned to the
UK.
[7]
It seems to me essential that we do not prevent people from going to fight for
the secular Free Syrian Army or indeed for the Kurds against ISIS. Treating
everyone who travels abroad to fight in the same way strikes me as insane. I
have not included ‘propagandising for ISIS in this list since we then enter
into the very murky world of censorship. I believe the existing law already
covers incitement to murder, and other contingencies. I believe that amongst
other things we are now fighting for free speech. There is all the difference
in the world between saying western society is rotten to the core and those who
engage in elections are doing the devils work, and saying that those who
participate in elections are infidels who must be killed.
