A lot has been said about Islam being a “Religion of Peace”, at every occasion in the past couple of weeks and occasions there have been, sadly, many. In the light of an increasing number of terror attacks it may have dawned on an increasing number of people that some devotees of Islam have rather atrocious ideas about peace. Yet, another question that could be raised against this backdrop may be whether Islam qualifies as a religion at all. In order to qualify as a religion, a belief system must adhere to two principals: it must A) uphold the universal sanctity of life and B) be beneficial to emulate for all of mankind (A is the necessary and B is the sufficient condition). All major religions fulfil both conditions, except Islam maybe.
Considering what has been happening in the last two decades it seems to be pertinent to raise a few question about the nature of Islam. We have seen people murdered in its name, Muslim and Non-Muslim alike. We have witnessed some of the most brutal and heinous crimes imaginable in our lifetimes. Planes have been flown into skyscrapers, masses of people have been suicide-bombed, kidnapped, beheaded, crucified, thrown from tall buildings and even skinned alive in the name of Islam. Maybe this should give people pause to think about what Islam really is. And yes, more and more people notice something is very, very wrong with the official take on events. Repeatedly, we’ve been told Islamism wasn’t the true Islam but a corrupted form of one of the great monotheistic religions of this world. To tell Islamism and Islam apart has become a much-loved pleasure the self-styled media and political “elite” enjoy at dinner tables across the country. But to differentiate between Islam and Islamism is not a mainstay of Islam itself. Consequently, all that results from this rhetorical trickery is an entirely Western mirage of “The Religion of Peace” whereas in reality Islam sees itself in a constant struggle, a.k.a. “jihad”, with itself. But more importantly with unbelievers, apostates and wrong-believers, particularly those in more developed countries.
In order to differentiate the “Religion of Peace” from the holy war waged in its name it has become fashionable to call the less savoury forms of Islam “Islamism”. That’s the same thing that goes by its original name of “jihad” in Islamic countries across the globe. But in order to make Islam more palatable to Western tastes this side of it has to be concealed. So that rhetorically at least, Islam can be neatly separated from some of its more shocking practical effects. As long as this deception works well enough, it will calm the nerves of most Western “experts” and their audiences in the mass media, too. Of course there’s a narrative behind this differentiation: it is quaintly reminiscent of a father lashing out at his children and telling them it’s not him who’s doing the hitting, it’s his hand. To separate religious theory from religious practice is obviously wholly inappropriate. This also only happens with Islam. Nobody would claim the Spanish Inquisition had nothing to do with the Church of Rome. Neither would anybody say the Reformation wasn’t a thoroughly Protestant affair altogether. But in this case there’s Islam “The Religion of Peace” and its doppelganger: Islamism as the “Religion of Pieces”, so there. A bit like Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, at least according to the “experts”.
The rhetorical effort to differentiate between the sacred theory and the murderous practice only makes sense from the media-political “elite’s” point of view: it is supposed to keep the plebs and peasants in their place. It is however a differentiation that cannot hold its own water in the Muslim world. Apart from the existence of God, Islam takes as its main tenet the furthering and fomenting of its deity’s rein on earth by means of Sharia law in the political construct of the caliphate. Violent proselytising conquest and submission under the rule of Allah are intrinsically linked to its sacred texts and its cultural practice. Warfare is a constitutive, not an accidental, part of Islam: it’s its core strategy. The central, inherent aim of this religion is total and absolute power at the cost of all social liberties and personal freedoms. Its strive is to rule humanity by subsuming it under the will of Allah – world domination, simple as that.
Seen against this background the Quran is as much divine revelation as political playbook. To its disciples, it serves as the perfect self-legitimisation and self-empowerment tool. It allows them to do anything from lying to cheating to murdering: if it furthers the advent of the caliphate anything goes. And this is not only a feature of its most notorious fringes but of its mainstream ideology, echoed by its political and religious heads in Riyadh, Marrakesh, Kuala-Lumpur and Teheran. Or Paris, London, New York and Berlin for that matter.
Beyond its faith in a supreme being that transcends all time and space Islam’s practical purpose is purely political and not otherworldly at all: it craves absolute power over anything and everybody. To achieve its aim Islam must wage war on the Muslim and the Non-Muslim world alike. Its dream is the materialisation of the kingdom of Allah. Yet, according to its own beliefs, this kingdom can never be perfect or completed in this world because mankind is inherently weak and feeble and fallible. Hence the need for a constant purge of non-believers, apostates and wrong-believers. The latter are of course its co-religionist with whom Islam finds itself in a constant, self-destructive battle over the soul of its religious mission. (A bit like the Labour party under Jeremy Corbyn, come to think of it.)
But from Western eyes, all this is neatly concealed by counterfactually distinguishing “Islam” from “Islamism”, by condemning the latter in order to endorse the former. This artificial and erroneous distinction, it has to be repeated, is typical of Western thinking. It is not quintessential for Islam. And it is a disingenuous and highly dangerous way to deal with political Islam.
It should be patently clear by now that Islamism and Islam have as much in common as Marxism and Marx: they are two sides of the same coin. They are theory and practice united by a canon of ideological writings supposed to be a blue print for conquering the world. And where socialism placed all its faith in proletarian masses which would build the communist utopia of this world, Islam has every confidence that its army of jihadists will bring on the caliphate. Or failing that, at least the 12th Mahdi. If this is supposed to be a religion, then that raises a lot of questions – not least of those whether Islam really is a religion.
A religion, as far as I can tell from standard definitions, is an organised belief system centred around divine existence which may be monotheistic or polytheistic. Its social organisation may be more or less stratified and its spiritual goals may be more or less totalitarian in theoretical outlook and practical outreach. There may be certain rites and rituals performed to mark the passing of collective and/or individual time. Also, during the year there may be feasts and occasions for specific religious holidays. Of course this definition is so formal that practically anything could qualify as a religion, e.g. The Great Spaghetti Monster.
But beyond these formal aspects religion is supposed to help understand the meaning of existence and to support moral guidance in a way that would benefit the whole of mankind. Also, major religions realise the sanctity of life and by extension the sanctity of creation. (The Green idolatry of Mother Gaya that’s currently fashionable in certain quarters tries to fill a spiritual void in the modern world but that cannot be our focus now.) When it comes to faith in the universal sanctity of life Islam seems to fail utterly: since its inception it has turned on its own and other people in the most destructive and murderous forms possible to further its objective.
Christianity has done this too, it is true, but stopped doing so many centuries ago. The idea that life is sacred and must not be arbitrarily destroyed has also been very prevalent in Buddhism and Hinduism and is quite quintessential for Christianity and Judaism. Islam apparently has yet to learn that the taking of another man’s or woman’s life is not admissible under any circumstances (with the notable exemption of state sponsored military defence by but this also cannot be the focus now).
So which spiritual values has Islam to offer? Salvation? Deliverance? Redemption? Liberation? Peace and prosperity? Serenity? Improvements to the human condition that’d make a happy and civilized existence more viable for all of mankind? Well the long and the short of it is: Islam has none of this to offer. Its gift to the world is submission under the will of Allah as it is enshrined in Sharia law which must be embodied by the Islamic caliphate. Nothing more and nothing else than that. And Islam certainly isn’t making an enigma of its intentions – only Western governments and their stooges in the mass media do so.
And it works: the majority of “kuffar” still believe in the “Religion of Peace” mantra pumped out by compliant media-political “elites”. Decades of progressive brainwashing have had an effect, obviously, particularly in the gullible West. Haven’t our political and media “elite” been eager to step up to the plate when word went out that they had to deliver their respective populaces suitably dumbed down so that it would be easier for our new overlords to rule over us! Schools and media worked perfectly as the civil arm of the totalitarians’ quest for power, too.