Thomas Friedman learns something new:
(After) two decades in which U.S. foreign policy has been largely dedicated to rescuing Muslims or trying to help free them from tyranny — in Bosnia, Darfur, Kuwait, Somalia, Lebanon, Kurdistan, post-earthquake Pakistan, post-tsunami Indonesia, Iraq and Afghanistan — a narrative that says America is dedicated to keeping Muslims down is thriving.
Although most of the Muslims being killed today are being killed by jihadist suicide bombers in Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan and Indonesia, you’d never know it from listening to their world. The dominant narrative there is that 9/11 was a kind of fraud: America’s unprovoked onslaught on Islam is the real story, and the Muslims are the real victims — of U.S. perfidy.
He would have done better to read an old book.
Him and every HS & College student in America.
Fat chance….
The person who believes that Christ was never resurrected and Christianity therefore not absolutely true has Bernard Lewis’ analysis to explain the backward nature of Islam, such as slavery being approved by Allah, and therefore not an evil practice. But the person who believes that Christ has been resurrected and Christianity absolutely true has the words of an even earlier author, the apostle John, who says, “Every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.” (John 4:3) and “The whole world lies in the power of the eveil one.” (1 John 5:19b)which leads to an entirely different conclusion as to where the problem in Islam lies. Methinks Mr. Lewis fell a bit short of the foundational explanation.
Even a few members of my notoriously far-left/liberal Synagogue are beginning to recognize that The Narrative may have some big flaws. Like when one of their darlings, Chavez, starts making virulently anti-Semitic and anti-Israel statements that somehow run counter to their own starry-eyed view of all things anti-US. And that people deliberately held in educational bondage may not be best served by those who set themselves up as their spiritual guides and leaders.
One liberal at a time…
VR,
Comjam
Please help me understand this. How do Jews support liberals – when those liberals are usually not pro-Israel. We have friends who are devout Jews yet think the sun rises & sets on Obama; before that is was Kerry and before that it was Gore. It’s like Catholics being Democrats and being pro-choice.
How do these faiths reconcile their religious beliefs with their political ones?
Is it not fair to say that Judaism has a long, proud, and good tradition of understanding justice as not merely punishment for evil, but working for the good of others? I also have Jewish friends, including a medical school dorm-mate, who understand the ideals of liberalism to be closest to the ideals of Judaism – to help our fellow man. Trying to put myself in their place, I imagine that it would be hard for me to accept that a liberal politician is anti-Israel for any reason other than “their own good” – which in fact has been expressed by members of J street. It is hard to believe that one’s fellow man is truly evil at the core when one’s culture, belief and conscience cry out to do mitzvahs on his behalf.
Can any Jews amongst us confirm whether my gentile perspective is close to answering Kris’ question?
Bill:
Keeping it short and simple, let me just say that if you want at least three to four ferociously argued opinions on any subject, just ask two Jews! (ba-boom!) My faith, like Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and even Hinduism has multiple branches, many of whom are utterly sure they have The One True Interpretation of the faith, so asking what the “Jewish” point of view is on anything leads to the reply “Who’s view do you want?”
Tell you what, rather than engage in wholesale thread-creep, if not outright hijack, next time we’re both at ‘Hook start buying me drinks and I’ll Explain Everything.
As to the reason why so many of my faith vote, as I’m told many of Irish, Hispanic and Italian descent vote, for the Democratic Party candidate by reflex, that answer lies, I believe, in the history of Jewish immigration and assimilation into American culture over the generations. There are lots of reasons, but as the liberals seem to move farther left, past “Progressive” (their term) and into odd eddies of radical thought I am finding more and more doubt on the part of those one certain of their own ideological purity. Take a look at “Why Are Jews Liberal” by Podhoretz (http://www.amazon.com/Why-Jews-Liberals-Norman-Podhoretz/dp/0385529198/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259533336&sr=1-1) for a discussion. For an extended and in-depth series of histories that cover the differing Jewish ethnic groups and their very different values, who came to make a life in this new land, look to the works of author Stephen Birmingham.
More to the point of Lex’s original post and links, my own experience from the Northwestern edges of Africa, east through the Gulf and further, point to a faith united in a few key points and riven with regional, cultural, ethnic and massive doctrinal differences. With no agreed upon framework it is easy for ruthless “true believers” to suppress all dissent, especially in those places where political submission is as equally a part of life as spiritual. In other areas, I found believers much like those of our faiths who will affirm a religious faith but who’s lives are less guided by that than by other factors.
VR,
Comjam
Thanks, I’ve heard of his book, now you’ve given me a reason to read it.
My husband is just finishing The Closed Circle, which you, Lex, recommended a few weeks ago. Now I get my chance at it. He contends that it is an excellent instruction book on the Mid East mindset. We’ll see.
I’m still trying to understand a way of thought which is thousands of miles away from my own, and from anyone else brought up in the Judeo-Christian sub-text of society… a mindset which considers me, and every other woman, as an inferior chattel, subject to the harshest kind of discipline for the most minor of ‘infractions.’
It just doesn’t ‘compute.’ And I fear its increasing presence in my country.
Marianne
Marianne, you’ll learn more from The Closed Circle than from What Went Wrong. Lewis is far too reticent to take up certain unpleasant facets of Islam, while Pryce-Jones, while almost never mentioning doctrinal Sunni Islam, provides a narrative that demonstrates conclusively that Muslims were hating us long before Qutb, and conducting acts of terrorism, too–even the ones that seemed best adapted the Western world. It is a curiosity for Pryce-Jones that Arabs can be so genial and friendly, and still so riven by warfare.
Zane: And if you’ve ever spent much time around North African or Mid-Eastern Arabs–which I believe you have IIRC, it is that way on an individual basis (the genial but violent bit) as well as a collective one. Besides my own personal first-hand experiences, I have yet to meet anyone whose personal experiences differ very much from that view, as well as practically every personal memoir I have ever read written by Westerners who have lived in/spent much time traveling among the inhabitants of those lands…
Besides The Closed Circle, one should also read Sam Harris’ “The End of Faith” & “Letter to a Christian Nation” in which he makes some telling points (although he is an atheist himself
and critical of all religions in his works) about the fact that, of all religions, Islam is a uniquely violent religion–a fact that we in the West are “suicidally naive” to ignore. And that the fundamentalist Jihadist fanatics are the ones who, in their quite literal interpretation of the actual words of the Koran and Haditha, far from hi-jacking the religion of Islam, are it’s most faithful adherents.
And having read the entire Koran, I must confess that if I bought into its argument, I’d be rooting for OBL myself! My conscience rejects the book as evil, but on one point, I wholeheartedly agree with Osama when he says the problem with liberal Muslims is that they are not sufficiently Muslim – they love the comforts of this life more than the promises for the next. The Koran itself is uniquely violent, and there is nothing to be done for that fact. It is like trying to defend Mein Kampf as the “philosophy of peace”. Let us discuss on the plane of ideas, and not men. I hold no quarrel with Muslims as people any different from any other people.
Don Surber pointed out the money quote (for me anyhow) from this article.
“Whenever something like Fort Hood happens you say, ‘This is not Islam.’ I believe that. But you keep telling us what Islam isn’t. You need to tell us what it is and show us how its positive interpretations are being promoted in your schools and mosques. If this is not Islam, then why is it that a million Muslims will pour into the streets to protest Danish cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, but not one will take to the streets to protest Muslim suicide bombers who blow up other Muslims, real people, created in the image of God? You need to explain that to us — and to yourselves.”
My somewhat liberal daughter in law used to say “But Islam is a religion of peace”. To which I’d retort “I’ll believe it when I see Muslims rioting against suicide bombings”.
Or, to quote a great American “You’re either with us or against us in the fight against terror.”
Lex,
Thanks for sharing this. Further proof that Friedman is just a partisan hack. What has changed over the last few years? Oh yeah, a Democrat got elected. The facts were largely the same when Bush was in office, but the mantra was slightly different then.
First, most people translate “Islam” as “peace.” Islam actually translates as “submission.” Regarding why Jews support liberals…I’d be tempted to say that it’s the in-breeding. The fact is that most Jews today are secular rather than religious. The conservative (read: Republican) positions tend to be associated with anti-semites and anti-semitism, so the Jews went more for the liberal (Democratic) party. After that, things ossified, and the majority of Jews vote the way that their parents and ancestors did. Interestingly, the more religious Jews tend to be conservative, and post-election polling in heavily Jewsih areas (Williamsburg, etc) showed a HEAVT weighting towards McCain/Palin.
I switched party affiliation from D to R in the early 80′s, after a close examination of Carter and the others who were moving into power in the liberal/Democratic circles. As the old saying goes, I didn’t leave them, they left me. The party of Truman and FDR is no longer.
By the way, Tom Friedman is an idiot. Another anti-semitic Jew with an inflated opinion of himself, and who thinks he’s G-d.
Sincerely,
RPL, a conservative leaning non-religious Jewish Republican who’s thinking of going independent is Sarah Palin moves that way.
RPL, I’ll defer to your judgment for US Jews, which essentially rejects my Judaism = idealism = liberalism hypothesis, but I get the opinion from reading several Israeli sources (Haaretz, JPost, Ynet, etc) that Israeli Jews are both more conservative and more religious (rising haredi population) than here. Which brings up another question – why are Israelis more conservative? I see 2 answers but don’t know which is more important: 1)Israelis are the “mugged liberals” that have learned and are learning from their “in-your-face” local experience. -or- 2) Those who have predominantly made aliyah to Israel represent the self-selected people of conviction, whereas the assimilated American Jews represent the “couldn’t care less about religion or persecution unless it’s me” people. If #2 is true, I expect that in time, American Jews will be JINOs, the equivalent of RINOs. Any thoughts?
Bill, we’re pretty much in sync. If you have never been to Israel, it’s an interesting country, with both a strong religious and secular tradition. The country’s founders were, essentially socialists (the kibbutzim, et al). Basically, the Jews could never rely on anyone besides themselves, so we were responsible for each other. The far left, which originally sympathized with Israel, got worn down with the propoganda from the Palestinians. Every time “peace” talks are held, it’s more of a delaying tactic for the other side to re-arm and re-supply. “Hudna” doesn’t meant truce in the traditional sense, but rather “suspension of hostilities.” The Israelis now pay lip service to the idea of a lasting peace, and are hoping that the Arabs will get fed up with the Palestinians. As one of the patriarchs remarked of the Jews “They are a stiff-necked people.”
The one man the Arabs truly feared was Ariel Sharon, as he played by their rules and fought on their terms. If the Israelis are forced to use nukes, they will refer to it as “the Samson Option,” for reasons that should be apparent.
Regarding American Jewry, JINO is as good a term as any I’ve ever heard. Basically, their connection to the countyr of Israel is tenous at best. Basically, they have no real interest in what goes on over there. The American concept of Judaism is more the cultural aspects, such as food, music, and other non-religious factors. Charles Krauthammer refers to himself as a Shinto Jew, meaning he worships his ancestors. While I’m not religious, I do beleive in G-d, and I’m rather conservative (mugged by reality, as you have noted).
rpl,
Many of us who are theologically aware would have a problem with you last paragraph. Biblical Judaism (which no longer exists as it can’t be practiced without the sacrificial system) is the foundation of Christianity.
The left in this country has tried to foist an idea of Judaism on this country that simply does not comport with history. ADL, for example, is not a Jewish organization. It’s simply a leftist organization trying to mascarade as Jewish. By the same token, Krauthammer is not Jewish either. Calling himself a Shinto Jew makes as much sense as calling yourself a Muslim Jew.
I realize the term “Jew” has come to be seen as a racial label, but like so many things it isn’t correct. Hebrew is the racial term. Jew, on the other hand, is deeply rooted in the Religion of Judah. In fact it means “practitioner of the religion of Judah.”
At present, ingeneral terms, there isn’t much religious zeal among US Jews. The situation that is being set up in the ME will change that when we see Ezekial Chapters 38-39 come to pass. Aliyeh will change from a trickle to an explosion. Even many of the non-religious types will have their eyes opened.
Hey, QM. I didn’t mean to offend you. I was just trying to take some shortcuts and avoid cluttering Lex’s bandwidth.
First, I’m aware that the early Christians were actually a sect of Jews. Second, I’ll relate a story that has been told that reflects my outlook. I’ve actually used it before, and Lex heard the sermon regularly when he was on the Bar/Bat-Mitzvah circuit. Someone once asked Rabbi Hillel, the greatest Talmudic scholar, if he could teach him the Torah while standing on one foot. Hillel propmptly stood on one foot and said “Do not unto others as you would have others not do unto you. The rest is just commentary. Now go and study.” While I’m not religious, I do subscribe to many of the teachings that my religious upbringing held as relevant.
Believe me, I know how fouled up the ADL is. They don’t speak for me and most of the Jews I know. And you’re right about the coming explosion. It will be horrific.
No offense taken. Your still alive aren’t ya?
Hillel’s response was much like Christ’s, love the Lord with all your being, and your neighbor as yourself. Hillel fell short on the attitude towards God. Perhaps he thought his audience assumed it.
Next week: Tom explains to us how the Global Warming narrative has been spread so gosh darn successfully.
I’ve read that Tom is a bit busy now with his modest 11K square foot home, especially the Hall of Mirrors room in honor of the French and the Palace of Versailles.
Takes Tom a long time to walk thru the room and admire himself.
This whole thing boils down to a very basic issue; Islam is a traditional, patriarchal, and closed society and the West is a threat to its survival. Within that sphere there are actors that have the means and the will to do whatever possible to protect that traditional society. Those actors fear things like equality for women, freedom of speech and press, choice of religion, looser moral values. And anything that places Islam and the Koran second like the Constitution of The United States.
This interesting discussion pretty well answers my query of why there seem not to be any authentic “moderate Muslims” and why no “moderate Muslims” protested against and tried to control their more violent religious brethren during their terrorist acts. They fear that they will be killed if they protest. So the Western world can expect no hope or aid in our struggle with them. If Muslims try to disassociate themselves from the strict constructionists who take the Koran literally, they automatically become ‘infidels’ themselves.
There’s an interesting side comment in the essay “Arabs Don’t Think Like Us,” which was quoted on Maggiesfarm back in 2006 and then reprinted recently. The comment said in essence, that Muslims were pleasant and likable, but hard to respect. Israelis, on the other hand were sometines hard to like, but impossible not to respect. I don’t entirely agree, since I usually like the Israelis, as well as admire and respect them. The Muslims here in Houston, on the other hand, I am wary of, for good reason. And I find them quite cranky and patronizing, if they notice me at all.
Marianne
P. S. As usual, I can’t do the linky thing, but if you’re interested in reading that essay, you can google ‘Arabs Don’t Think Like Us + maggiesfarm.