Saturday, August 20, 2011
Hesperado's Second Law
Following my first "law" (see my posting immediately below), I now unveil my second "law". One rule for such "laws" is that they be formulated as concisely as possible. I will do so, then follow up with an explanatory elaboration:
Hesperado's Second Law:
Any Muslim who defends Islam as non-violent and as harmonious with modern Western human rights is either a) lying, or b) seriously delusional. There is no third alternative.
The elaboration of the above "law" is as follows:
Given what anyone of elementary intelligence and responsible diligence knows (or should know, by now) about Islam -- its essential and massive evil contextualized by its paradigmatic militarism and expansionism against all others, all evident in the sayings and actions of its founder, Muhammad, along with the teachings of its core texts and tenets, its history, and the behavior and speech and writings of innumerable Muslims all around the world in our time following the aforementioned -- any Muslim who continues to defend Islam as good, supportive of modern human rights, non-militaristic and non-expansionist, either a) is trying to deceive us, or b) is seriously delusional. There is no third explanation for such a stance of defending Islam. The logical conclusion of this law is that, therefore, we cannot trust any given Muslim, no matter how sweet the nothings he or she whispers in our ear -- for any given Muslim will be either a stealth jihadist or, at best, mentally and emotionally deficient and unstable.
As for the non-Muslim PC MCs who continue to defend Islam, that is a more complex subject about which I have written at great length, and which will be the subject of a third "law" coming soon.
There is the special case of the non-Muslim Westerner who converts, as an adult, to Islam. Such converts are either Gnostic Leftists who hate the West, or are garden-variety PC MCs -- which (unfortunately) constitute probably the majoriy in the West. Most Western non-Muslim PC MCs, however, persist in their "intelligent stupidity" about this by virtue of the fact that they largely don't bother to research the subject, and simply follow the givens and axioms of the paradigm of PC MC without really thinking about them, or about the data concerning Islam and Muslims.
A Westerner who converts to Islam, on the other hand, doesn't have that excuse, for he is choosing a path by which he is ipso facto deepening and broadening his acquaintence with the data of Islam and Muslims. Nevertheless, initially, as long as he is not a West-hating Leftist, he may be given a "grace period", so to speak, during which we do not impute anything especially more damning of him than we do normally of any non-Muslim PC MCs. I.e., such converts may well have gravitated toward Islam by virtue of the variety of unremarkable assumptions about Islam which their own Western PC MC inculcates: it's a wonderful, "diverse", "interesting" and "uniquely spiritual" religious tradition -- just another "world religion" perfectly harmonious, of course, with the other two "Abrahamic faiths" (Judaism and Christitanity), with the added spice of a marvelous "tapestry" of ethnic "cultures" which, needless to say, must always -- on pain of being branded a "bigot" or a "racist" -- be admired and embraced and accepted and never criticized much less condemned for anything they inculcate.
After that "grace period" during which we do not especially blame the recent convert for his stupidity, however, his persistence in admiring and defending Islam becomes suspect, for the more one knows about Islam, the less will one wish to defend it -- if one is a good, decent person who supports modern human rights, that is. I don't know for sure where to situate this "Muslim Unicorn" (see my preceding essay, immediately below here); but all indications suggest that he (like the convert "Tom Haidon" -- again, cf. supra) has been a Muslim long enough, and has had the time and motivation to learn about Islam and Muslims long enough, to have long passed his "grace period".
For further amplification, see my previous essay on my first "law" (immediately below.