Thursday, August 2, 2007

MUST READ: THE RHETORIC OF APPEASEMENT

The Rhetoric of Appeasement
by Rebecca Bynum

The corruption of man is followed by the corruption of language --Emerson


...


Analysis of Islam will quickly yield the fact that, like materialism, it is a closed system of thought with logic operating within a limited set of constraints. It might even be said that Islam is simply materialism with the addition of direction (increasing perfection of Islamic practice both personally and socially) and certainty of destiny (destiny of the individual in an eternal Islamic Paradise, and destiny of society in a temporal Islamic Paradise).

In Islam, Paradise is given to the individual as a reward, like a bone to a dog. Allah himself is not conceived as either approachable or attainable, even in the afterlife. There is no bridge between God and man in Islam, which was one of the main points the Pope tried to make at Regensburg, but which was ignored in the melee over his use of an ancient quotation.

Here is a major difference between Islam and Christianity that needs to be understood. For Christians, following the teaching and example of Christ leads one closer to God, but under Islam, growing closer to Allah is not possible because he is portrayed as absolutely transcendent and ultimately unknowable. Even in the supposed “paradise” of Islam, man is still shut away from God and truth is not revealed.

It is also useful to remember that the goal of Islam is not to advance human happiness, morality or salvation, but to advance Islam itself, regardless of the cost to human happiness, morality and salvation.

True religion, on the other hand, is an open system with a direction (god-ward) for both society and the individual, but without a defined end point. In true religious systems, God is approachable, that is, the individual may self-identify with the attributes of God (Truth, Beauty and Goodness) in order to grow closer to God and, at the same time, increase in righteousness, peace and happiness. Variations on this theme are fairly universal in religion with the glaring exception of Islam.

Socialism and Islam both envision a material end-point when, under world socialism or world Islam, utopia is realized. True religious systems allow for growth (both for society and the individual) which is open-ended, owing to the perceived nature of God as being infinite and eternal. In Islam, Allah has decreed “this far and no farther,” and thus both man and his society are conceived as essentially unprogressive: indeed, evolution is an abhorrent idea. This world view cannot help but have real consequences in human societies, consequences we see from Thailand to Iran and from Bosnia to Sudan.

Defining religions in this way does not “create divisions” (for they are pre-existent) but rather helps to make the reality of these religions more intelligible. The pretence that to ignore differences aids understanding is pure sophistry and those engaging in it are self-deluded if they think they serve humanity well.




Pertinent Links:

1) The Rhetoric of Appeasement

No comments: