Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Misunderstanding Taqiyya

We, in the still beleaguered minority of autodidacts learning the full horror of Islam, all know generally speaking that
taqiyya is an Islamic concept which means, approximately:

Deceiving the non-Muslim in order to advance Islam in situations where Islam cannot be advanced through frank warfare.

A misunderstanding persists, however, among many of us aforementioned autodidacts; and this misunderstanding, I suspect, has its source in the asymptotic tendency to ascribe human psychology and human motivations to Muslims (where "human", whether the user of the term knows it or not, denotes a complex of Western qualities, among them foremost the historical feat, achieved uniquely and magnificently -- though, naturally nevertheless, imperfectly -- by the West, of transcending tribalism toward the philosophical and socio-political ideal of universalism).

Briefly put, the misunderstanding of taqiyya manifests itself as imputing to the Muslim a self-awareness of wrongdoing. Muslims, however, do not believe they are pursuing wrong. They sincerely, if psychopathologically, believe they are pursuing right. Their efforts at taqiyya, then, are equally sincere. The way that many (if not most) in the still inchoate anti-Islam movement seem to portray Muslims who practice taqiyya, one would think they are cackling mischievous demons who know they are evil and yet still revel in it. There may be some Muslims who are truly demonic in this way, though I tend to think that such a demonism confutes the crucial point of Satan's invention of Islam: Satan's genius in fabricating Islam consists precisely in being able to possess masses of people with the conviction that they are on the side of the angels (not the fallen ones) even as they simultaneously pursue every objective and every deed of God's original enemy. This masterfully ingenious trick, then, would collapse were Muslims indeed simple Satanists.

Ironically, this mistaken demonization of Muslims is consanguineous with the humanization of Muslims -- equally mistaken: the humanization of self-awareness of evil. The further darkness of psychopathology will help us to better understand the Muslim mind: How can it be that a person could genuinely, sincerely, in good conscience, enable and enact ideas and deeds of Islam which a sane person recognizes are grotesquely and ghoulishly evil? The answer to that rhetorical question lies in the darkness of psychopathology.

This approach has another advantage as well, and it is a critical one in terms of understanding the nature of our enemy during our time when Muslims for the first time in history are reviving and advancing Islam through a preponderance of taqiyya -- albeit in tandem with terrorism -- rather than through frankly military means. This model of psychopathology also explains all those millions of seemingly nice and peaceful Muslims out there who seem to be not following Islam (if by Islam we mean the one and only Islam of supremacist hatred and violent subjugation). The standard explanation -- even by otherwise tough-minded anti-Islam analysts and civilians -- for these seeming millions is that they are either "ignorant of their own Islam" or they are secularly "lax" and thus apparently consciously ignoring their own Islam for the most part even while continuing to remain "cultural Muslims" or "Muslims-for-identification-purposes-only". These latter types are also conjectured to be too afraid of their more Islamic brethren to come out of the apostate closet.

Given the mountain of evidence, however, indicating that Islamic culture and psychology is uniquely fanatical and cohesive, there is perhaps a better explanation for these hundreds of millions of seemingly nice and peaceful Muslims: they are psychopathic liars. They know perfectly well that their Islamic tradition is based on supremacist hatred and violent subjugation -- from the very beginning enshrined in the words and deeds of Mohammed and throughout history into the hot present with Muslim mujahideen trying to advance on every front around the world of its bloody borders, from the Philippines to Morocco, from India to England, from Russia to America -- with differences only in style, where in more regressive backwaters (e.g., the Philippines, Thailand, Sudan, Afghanistan, Chechnya, etc.) a more brazen guerilla effort is employed, while in more formidably advances societies (Europe, America) a subtler strategy is necessary, combining punctuations of terror attacks with a broad-based stealth jihad that requires taqiyya through and through.

It is eminently reasonable for us to err on the side of assuming that all Muslims know this perfectly well, are proud of it, and are helping in one way or another to enable it, but will lie about their knowledge when they think the naked truth would hurt the cause. But they do not lie out of shame for the truth, as though they were humans on a par with us who must surely see how evil and preposterous and monstrous their beliefs are. No: rather, they are lying to protect the truth, which they believe, sincerely in their heart of psychopathic hearts, is the summum bonum.

Once we in the still-inchoate anti-Islam movement realize this coherently, it will help to disabuse the movement of its subsidiary hope-cum-project to save us from the problem of Islam by saving Muslims from Islam, as though a sufficient number of the 1.2 billion Muslims out there will jump ship because they can be shamed by the truth of their own Islam of which, it is hypothesized, they remain strangely ignorant or in oh-so-human denial out of embarrassment.

The truth is grimmer than that, and we are advocating a reckless letting down of our guard when we imagine it to be rosier than it is.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Wow, you make absolutely no sense, man. Sadly, you're one of those people who sincerely believes in his intellectual prowess, but scratch but beneath the surface, it's an empty vacuous hole of nothing.

Firstly, you write incoherently. I don't know where to even begin. Secondly, you have no idea or understanding of the statements you make thinking these assertions will give gravitas to your point of view (ie "the darker corners of psychopathology" etc ... wtf!?!) Thirdly, you keep contradicting yourself.