En uheldig synergi mellem skyldskultur og anklagekultur

Problemets kerne er ikke Islam i sig selv. Islamisme ville ikke have en jordisk chance, hvis man klart og ubetinget sagde nej tak til den.

Den Islamiske og kristne kultur er vertikalt anderledes i deres udgangspunkt, som behandlet for længe siden af Mordechay Lewy:

The west has a "guilt culture" (accepting one's own guilt), while the Arab / Islamic world, which Lewy calls the Orient, has a "blame culture" (blaming others). I summarize and/or quote key portions of the essay:

Lewy examines the key question: why is it that the west can produce so many intellectuals such as Susan Sonntag, Noam Chomsky and Arundhati Roy who are so ready to criticize western civilization and blame the United States for the problems in the Islamic world. The latter, on the other hand, accepts little responsibility for its own inadequacies, and instead embraces conspiracy theories that typically blame the west.

Lewy identifies eight principle reasons:

1. In the Orient, one's own guilt and inadequacies are always assigned to others. Self-criticism is seldom practiced. The ability for self-correction is accordingly limited.

2. In the Orient, the preferred role is that of the victim. Conspiracy theories are forged to rationalize this behavior.

3. Islam does not have the concept of "original sin" and therefore no historical tradition of collective guilt.

4. Islam does not promote the formation of free will and individual responsibility. In the Islamic notion of man, free will is subordinate to Allah's all-encompassing pre-ordained plan.

5. In the West, there is a tendency toward the avowal of guilt, whether rightly or wrongly. Therefore the role of culprit is readily adopted.

6. The guilt society in the West promotes self-criticism, and also the capacity for self-correction.

7. In the modern West, the religious-based notion of "original sin" has been secularized to some extent, and also expresses itself in acceptance of blame for the Islamic-Arab world.

8. In the overt or covert conflict between the two cultures, the West cannot operate with a free hand, by virture of its own self-imposed moral constraints. These self-imposed restrictions will be interpreted as a weakness by the aggressive blame society of the Orient. They will not be respected in conflict situations, but exploited.

Islam does not have the same concept of original sin as in the West. The expulsion from paradise was not a key experience in the Koran. Allah forgives all sins, large and small, if the sinner shows remorse and willingness to change. In the Koran there are no explicit battles between good and evil. In western tradition, Satan can lead men astray (the Faust motif). In Islam the devil disarms himself voluntarily so that he cannot exert any power over man. A practicing Muslims becomes certain of attaining salvation, solely by fulfilling Allah's commandments. This spares him the moral dilemmas that are inherent in Christianity.

Kilde:

Så er der dog citater fra Muhammads side, der peger i retning af altruistisk moral.

Men det er ret klart ved nærmere eftersyn, at denne gavmildhed ikke gælder flokken uden for Islam:

The brotherhood in Islam does not extend to everyone. The Quran (9:23) states that the believers should not take for friends and protectors (awlia) their fathers and brothers if they love Infidelity above Islam. In fact there are many verses that tell the Muslims to kill the unbelievers and be harsh to them. A clear example that Islam is not based on the Golden Rule is the verse (48:29): “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other.” This is the perfect definition of fascism.

Ali Sina - Islam and the golden rule

Profeten selv blamerede først kollektivt mekkanerne, som han angreb. Derefter blamerede han kollektivt de jødiske stammer i Medina, som han angreb og konfiskerede alt deres ejendom - fordrev dem.

Kollektivismen i Islam indbefatter både de "rettroende" og de "afgudsdyrkende". Det er enten eller, enten er man muslim, er så er man imod Islam, uanset hvor meget man logrer med halen og taler pænt.

Ikke at vælge den mest overlegne religion, den sidste og største profet, det i sig selv er jo, at vælge falske guder og vantro, omend man er af den opfattelse blandt islamister, at Islam på sigt vil blive religionen for det absolutte flertal på denne jord. Heldigvis er Jihad ikke det eneste redskab i skuffen, men også Dawa, eller mission. Problemet er blot, hvor Dawa fejler, der må man nødvendigvis ty til Jihad, før eller siden.

Det var netop det Muhammad selv gjorde - startede med Dawa i både Mekka og Medina og endte med Jihad, da Dawaen ikke havde den store succes.