Democracy’s Problems with Islam
18 November, 2006
A relatively recent demographic
change—significant increase in Muslim population—poses a serious
challenge to the American system of governance—democracy.
Historically, people from all over the world came to this
land-of-take-all and made it their home. In becoming American,
each new aspirant had to meet specific provisions and take the
“Pledge of Allegiance” as sworn affirmation of his highest loyalty
to his new homeland. After a couple of generations, all hyphenated
Americans saw themselves as Americans with a special affection for
their ancestral heritage. An Irish-American, for instance,
considered himself every bit as American as a German-American, or
Traditionally, America did not homogenize its diverse people. The
notion of the “melting pot,” is inaccurate. Instead, America did
one better. As it welcomed its diverse people, America united them
around a set of core values such as respect for human rights,
democratic governance, and the rule of law.
The large number of Muslims arrival of recent years is posing a
serious problem to this nation of all nations. Bluntly speaking,
no one can be a Muslim and an American at the same time. Here are
some of the reasons.
* A Muslim is, first and foremost, an Ummehist—a citizen of
international Islam. So, when a Muslim takes the Pledge of
Allegiance, he is either ignorant of the implication of his pledge
or is lying willfully. Ignorance is never a valid reason in the
court of law, and lying in the process of becoming citizen is a
ground for denying the application and even deporting the
violator. Sadly enough, tagyyeh—lying, or dissimulation—is not
only condoned, it is recommended to the Muslims in their
scripture. Hence, a Muslim can and would lie without any
compunctions, whenever it is expedient.
* Muslims, by belief and practice, are the most blatant violators
of human rights. We hardly need to detail here Muslims’ systemic
cruel treatment of the unbelievers, women of all persuasions, and
any and all minorities across the board. To Muslims, human rights
have a different meaning, and it protective provisions are
reserved strictly for Muslims—primarily for Muslim men. Just a
couple of examples should suffice for now.
Oppression of women, for one, is so systemic in Islam that to this
day women are, at best, second class citizens under Islamic law.
Saudi Arabia, the custodian of Islamdom, denies women the right to
drive, vote or hold elective offices—the most basic rights of
citizens in democratic societies.
For another, no non-Islamic literature are allowed in Saudi
Arabia. A visiting Christian, for instance, is denied to enter the
Kingdom with a Bible. Further, severe punishment is meted out to
anyone daring to disagree with Islam or espouse a different
religion. Iran’s resurgent Shiism often vies with Saudi Arabia in
its mistreatment of religious and non-religious minorities. To the
fanatical ruling gang in Iran, it is their brand of Islam or
disenfranchisement of rights of citizenship and even death for the
“sin” of apostasy. And of course, there is no point at all in
talking about the savage Islamic Taliban.
* Respect for the rule of law, as it is understood and practiced
by civilized people, is an instrument of convenience to be used to
advantage and to be violated when it is not, for the Muslim. A
Muslim believes in a different law—the Shariah: a set of stone-age
rules. Violation of the non-Muslim laws, therefore, is no
violation at all to a Muslim.
What is incredible is the gall and audacity of Muslims in
demanding that Western and other democracies legalize Shariah in
their societies. Large populations of Muslims, mostly recent
arrivals, in countries such as Canada, Great Britain, and Sweden
are experiencing the insistent demands by Muslims to have Shariah
rule their Islamic communities. This is just the beginning and it
may seem relatively harmless to the simpletons in our midst. Yet,
once Shariah is recognized to any extent, it will reach out to
rule not only on matters that concern Muslims, but also those that
may involve a Muslim and non-Muslim. Under Shariah, a Muslim man
married to a non-Muslim woman is able to divorce the woman at
will, automatically have custody of the children, and literally
toss the wife out of “his” home with just about no compensations.
* As for democracy, the rule of the people, Muslims have no use at
all. Muslims believe that Allah’s rule must govern the world in
the form of Caliphate—a theocracy. Making mockery of democracy,
subverting its working, and ignoring its provisions is a Muslim’s
way of falsifying what he already believes to be a sinful and
false system of governance invented by the infidels.
To Muslims, Ummeh-ism—international Islamism—is the legitimate
form of government. Ummeh-ism is another form of despotism such as
Communism and Fascism, with the added feature of enjoying “divine”
The world has good samples of Ummeh-ism in practice to scrutinize
in Islamic autocracies. Khamenei of Iran is not called “Caliph.”
He is called the “Supreme Guide.” The Saudi King is just another
Caliph vessel of the “divine.” These Islamic despots are every bit
as vile as the Hitlers, the Stalins, the Pol Pots, and the
Mussolinis. The government these Islamic autocrats head is
infested to the core with the Islamic disease of oppression,
corruption and the absence of accountability to the people.
Democracies believe that government must be of the people, by the
people, and for the people. Ummeh-ism is anathema to this
sacrosanct fundamental democratic ideal.
As more and more Muslims arrive in non-Islamic lands, as they
reproduce with great fecundity, as they convert the disenchanted
and minorities, and as petrodollar-flush Muslims and Muslim
treasuries supply generous funds, Muslims gather more power to
undermine the democratic rule. A consortium composed of pandering
politicians, blinded with short-term self-interest and egoism;
attention and fund-seeking self-proclaimed prima donna professors;
and, bastions of useful idiot liberals, universities, is the
witting or unwitting promoter of Ummeh-ism.
It is human nature to be concerned, first and foremost, with his
personal well-being. Some people evolve to a higher level of
humanness and place the welfare of the general public above their
own. Yet, many remain fixated at the constricted stage of “self
first, self, last.” Even if you belong to this latter group, your
self-interest demands that you do all you can to make sure that
the disease of Islamofascism does not devour democracy. Democracy
is both fragile and corruptible. It takes vigilant citizenry to
protect its integrity.
We fully agree with Churchill’s observation, “Democracy is the
worst form of government, except for all the rest.” Yet, as
imperfect as it is, democracy is still humanity’s best system of
self-rule. We, one and all, must defend it with our all.