Sunday, January 11, 2015

On the Charlie Hebdo Carnage


The killing of the staff at the French satirical publication Charlie Hebdo by Moslem assailants who said that they wanted to die as martyrs, and the subsequent killing of the assailants, together with their hostages, by the French police, could not have failed to produce strong emotions. For instance, my friend Bruno had this to say. I don't entirely disagree, especially about the undue haste of the French police, but I do want to make a few points about methods.

No matter how difficult it is, what's needed in such a situation, at least on the level of those aspiring to any sort of social adequacy, is a dispassionate look, with an eye toward what would qualify as a political fix that can win the peace, rather than some combination of police/military/judicial action that is virtually guaranteed to lose the war, by making the situation worse. You see, police/military/judicial action is only effective when the enemy could potentially admit defeat, surrender and make amends. When the enemy wishes to be martyred, police/military/judicial action is akin to combating alcoholism with bottles of booze.

What Bruno proposed—capture, torture, public humiliation, public execution—worked very well for Jesus Christ. Here we are over 2000 years later, and he is still the world's best-known, most widely celebrated martyr. If, by the standards of one of the world's greatest religions, poking fun at prophet Mohammed is a sin, and if the perpetrators of the Charlie Hebdo can be said to have died for that sin, then that, by a rather simple calculus, does qualify them as martyrs, even in the Christian tradition.

I was not a reader of Charlie Hebdo, and so I don't know whether they properly satirized the American invasion of Iraq, the seeding of Basra, Fallujah and other parts of Iraq with depleted uranium munitions causing a large number of cancers and birth defects, the wholesale slaughter of Iraqi civilians, or the use of torture at Abu Ghraib and other US-run detention centers. Or whether they shined a comic light on the utter futility of the NATO war in Afghanistan, whose only result seems to be a speedy return to status quo ante as soon as the troops pull out. I think there are gems of comedy there: the Americans are still sending in advisers—as if they ever knew what to do there themselves! I hope they did satirize these events; if they didn't, but on the other hand saw it fit to poke fun at Islam, then that would seems a tiny bit lopsided to me, but I hope to stand corrected.

Nor do I know if Charlie Hebdo properly savaged the Israelis for their various practices, such as shelling UN-run schools because there might be “terrorists” lurking among the women and children, or for the Israeli military propaganda along the lines of “shoot pregnant Palestinian women and kill two for the price of one.” Is there humor in such things? I don't know. Nor is there humor in the Qur‘an, or in any of the acts ascribed to prophet Mohammed. And yet the satirical geniuses at Charlie Hebdo found some there. So why does Israel get the kid glove treatment? Again, I hope to stand corrected, but if that's the case, then there is a bit of lopsidedness there as well.

There is also the tiny matter of taste. I know that the French are not alien to the idea of mauvais goût. And given what has been happening in many Islamic countries around the world—from outright invasions and bombings to drone strikes, to US-funded political corruption and régime change, to sanctions maintained over decades, to many acts of discrimination in the western countries to which circumstances force the refugees from the destroyed countries to flee—it seems like poking fun at their religion using cartoons, however gently, is akin to joking about rope in the house of the hanged. By analogy, consider writing such oeuvres as “Auschwitz, the operetta.” Or how about a song-and-dance troupe composed of non-Jews, called “The Not Ready for Holocaust Players”? Would that be in bad taste? You bet! Of course, none of these particular expressions of mauvais goût are likely to happen, because people in the west are deathly afraid of being labeled anti-Semites. On the other hand, they are not yet particularly afraid of being shot in the head by furious Moslems. Why the disconnect, I wonder? The instinct of self-preservation does not seem fully engaged yet.

I want to keep this to below 1000 words, so I will close simply by noting what the solution may look like. The only solution I see is a duopoly, where Moslems and non-Moslems run their respective segments of society according to different sets of rules. Some rules they must have in common, such as a ban on incendiary, extremist speech. The prohibition against “shouting fire in a crowded theater” applies to such arrangements.

Examples of such arrangements being successful include the Republic of Tatarstan (Russian Federation) where Orthodox Christianity and (majority) Islam coexist peacefully, and mixed marriages can offer a choice of religions to the children they produce. Another example is the Republic of Chechnya (also Russian Federation) which, having fought a bloody separatist conflict financed by the Saudis and the US, can now successfully combat Islamic terrorism on its own, without involving federal authorities. Russia is now a dual Christian/Islamic federation; if current demographic trends continue, then at some point it will become an Islamic/Christian federation. So be it. If peace is maintained, nobody will notice or care. France can embrace the same choice, forming Les Républiques Françaises, and probably will, because what choice does it have—other than losing the war?


gekauftepresse said...

Thank you for this thoughtful article. Not what you can find in the MSM. Excellent writing.

Anonymous said...


Although a French Roman Catholic by birth, I'm certainly not very keen on organized religion. However, comparing JC's martyrdom to these suspect souls might be considered a bit of a stretch. JC was principally a man of pace after all.

One clarification, if I may. As far as professional torture goes, I should have been clearer. It was not the utterly inhumane torture called for. I was thinking more in terms of highly effective interrogation techniques....

But honestly, I'm a bit torn here as well..................a poor choice of words on my part.

Moreover, the overriding interest I have for the judicious application of harsh interrogation techniques, is that It may well provide the opportunity to have the terrorists cough up who or what is really behind the mindless mayhem. For all we know they might point us to the CIA and/or Mossad.

Thanks very much for sharing my piece with your viewers Dmitry, I consider it a tremendous honor.

All the best,
Bruno de Landevoisin

Thomas Baspeyras said...

Charlie Hebdo has always been proudly de mauvais goût, and in recent years had turned "a tiny bit lopsided" on certain issues. French leftists tend to get obsessive over Islam since the 1990s, perhaps as a result of the quasi vanishing of their historical enemies: the French Catholics (think of all those anti-USSR pundits who sunk into depression following the USSR collapse and their own symbolic victory, suddenly reinvigorated and rejuvenated now that being anti-russian is fashionable — you get the picture).

The long demographic trends in France are much more optimistic, though. Mixed marriage rates are high, religious practice is becoming nearly as lax among French Muslims as it is among French Christians, muslim families are spreading upward the social ladder (slowly, due to national and international economic conditions, but steadily thanks to a nearly free but decent education system).

If there is one thing that France has done successfully over centuries of history (and there are not many) it is the integration of every wave of migrants putting down their bags on that patch of land. This in spite of hate groups, bureaucrats and politicians — thanks Gods and the Flying Spaghetti Monster for bestowing us a wholly unskilled "elite" class. Demographer Emmanuel Todd has a cultural explanation for the high integration capability of this country, and it goes like this : "It is perfectly natural for an anglo-saxon man to not marry a very pretty black girl. That is asking too much of a Frenchman."

Michael Murry said...

It seems to me that persons objecting to certain kinds of satirical cartoons -- but not all such cartoons -- might consider responding in kind to what they claim has offended them. For example: by drawing a cartoon of French President Hollande and German Chancellor Merkel on their knees serially bestowing a "Monica Lewinsky" on U.S. President Obama and A.Z.E. (Apartheid Zionist Entity) leader Bibi Netanyahu. Fight satire with satire, in other words, rather than by murdering satirical cartoonists.

Glenn Greenwald, unsurprisingly, gives a good example of this tactic at

As the Buddha said: "You can't give offense to anyone unwilling to take it." (Note the active nature of the transitive verb "to take.")

Dmitry Orlov said...

Bruno -

I didn't summarize your argument fully, trying to keep my piece down to 1k words.

About men of “peace” vs. violence, in a violent conflict the choice is a matter of tactics, the stock in trade still being violence. Violence is for the strong, “peace,” or martyrdom, is for the weak. Growing up in Galilee, Christ saw the Romans crucify scores of his countrymen all along the major roads. He saw clearly that crucifying the Romans right back is not the answer. But by being crucified voluntarily he planted a bomb that went off centuries later, blowing Rome apart.

It is easy for us to see the perpetrators of the Charlie Hebdo massacre as extremist, but that is not the relevant perspective. The question is, how extremist are they from their own world-view. The prohibition against graven images and idol-worship is part of the 10 commandments, and is adhered to by a number of Anabaptist Christian sects that take the Bible literally. It is also followed by the Orthodox Christian, where icons are allowed, but must adhere to a canon that imposes a layer of abstraction and bans realistic renderings. It is more extreme in Islam, but these are shades and gradations. Different religions have different prohibitions, and these must be respected. When Pussy Riot desecrates a cathedral with their music, or when Charlie Hebdo violates a prohibition in the most crass way possible, they are playing the game of victimhood, but what are they martyring themselves for? The right to fart in public? Looks like it to me...

Thomas -

France is similar to Russia in this respect: to be Russian has nothing to do with genetic makeup or skin color; it is do be part of a certain cultural tradition, predicated on one's perfect command of an intricate and ancient language.

I am not sure I buy the argument about interracial marriage. It is still a rarity among higher-class Anglos to marry a negresse, no matter how pretty she may be.

Unknown said...

Dmitry, he changed his point D after I commented on it. Now it looks like I am an ultra shithead ! Lol

Thomas Baspeyras said...

Dmitry> "I am not sure I buy the argument about interracial marriage. It is still a rarity among higher-class Anglos to marry a negresse, no matter how pretty she may be."

Yes, that is the point. When Todd was working on european marriage statistics in the 1990s, he noticed that mixed marriages of second generation of daughters of immigrants (the reference indicator for such questions according to demographers) were about :
— 2% in Germany (with women of turkish ancestry)
— Barely mesurable in UK (with women of pakistanese ancestry)
— 25% in France (with women of north-african ancestry)
"At that point", he said, "I ceased to believe in a convergence of European nations. Nations can't help being what they are." (All quotes from memory.)

Dr. Doom said...

Dmitry, in the forth paragraph, concerning depleted metals used in Iraq (and elsewhere?) by the US military, it is and was depleted uranium, not plutonium. It is mostly U-238 that has had the fissile U-235 isotope removed, hence it is depleted of that isotope. All plutonium isotopes are fissile, and would be too precious (and radioactive) "DU". It nevertheless has the long-term health hazards you mention. What were they thinking, or not?

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your considered reply Dmitry;

Upon your measured input and my further reflection, you will be pleased to know that I have edited my piece now, in order to more accurately describe what I was contemplating and trying to articulate.

Thank you for addressing this, and helping me better express myself.


Unknown said...

I completely disagree with the approach of different laws for different people. We have that to some extent in Israel, and what a grim disaster. It is racist and cruel to have different standards for different people because it essentially denies some rights to some portions of the population. For example if I get shot by a family member in Israel, justice will be done. If an Arab woman gets shot by her family in an honor killing (and before you call me an Islamophobe I will mention this did actually happen in my neighborhood) well, don't hold your breath for justice because of "freedom of religion" and "minority rights" and a bunch of other fake liberal slogans that really mean 'I value your life less than my own.' We are all people, we should all be held to the same standards...anything less is usually just racism disguised as political correctness.

Dmitry Orlov said...

Good point, Makeda! Israel is a good source of cautionery examples on just about any subject: militancy, irredentism, apartheid, you name it. Most sane federations enforce a uniform criminal code. (Israel, as a "Jewish state", doesn't qualify in any case.) But when it comes to civil matters one size fits all leads to rampant illegality and conflict. We need to look at what works, not at what doesn't.

DeVaul said...

Wow! You really went out on a limb here. You asked all the right questions and more. I really respect that. I hope it does not lead to death threats from our own homegrown radicals.

I too had never heard of this newspaper, and I asked myself many of the same questions you did. Did they satirize all forms of Jewish religion? Did they satirize the involvement of France and its allies in all the horrible wars inflicted on the people of the Middle East? Did they satirize the bankers and their involvement in the destruction of Libya? And so on.

I would like to think so as well, but deep down I suspect they did not, because if they had done so, they would probably already be out of business, and therefore not available for execution at the office water cooler.

Maybe somebody can show us the opposite is true, or point to one of their cartoons mocking Jesus or Jehova or whomever. (Not holding my breath.)

John Doyle said...

I keep remembering what General Pershing did in about 1900 when he ran the Army in the Philippines and had to contend with a muslim insurgency.
50 men were sent to the firing squad, and the soldiers dipped their bullets in pigs blood. 49 were shot in that way and the last one was let go, so he could say what happened. It was 50 years before there was any more trouble.
So what has to happen with such martyrs today? They have to know their martyrdom will fail because they will be rendered unclean and know it before they die.
If they truly believe then they will have to think twice, knowing martyrdom will be denied by the survivors.

Nathan said...

Dmitry, you said:
" If, by the standards of one of the world's greatest religions, poking fun at prophet Mohammed is a sin, and if the perpetrators of the Charlie Hebdo can be said to have died for that sin, then that, by a rather simple calculus, does qualify them as martyrs, even in the Christian tradition. "
Sorry but you are incorrect here. For a start, a Christian martyr is an ordinary human being who is murdered because they will not renounce their faith in Jesus.
Jesus Christ was not a martyr. Rather because He is fully God and fully man, his life was offered as a perfect sacrifice to pay the price for the sins of His chosen people. Jesus didn't physically attack with intent to kill anyone who disagreed with him. Jesus stated that His kingdom is not of this world and those who live by the sword will die by the sword.

The perpetrators of the Charlie Hedbo carnage died because they assaulted other people, creating a situation in which they hoped to be killed.

Dmitry Orlov said...

Nathan -

What you say only makes sense to those who believe that Christ is some sort of god. I use martyr as a purely functional category.

John -

Wow, what a disgusting image! I think you are equating ethics with efficacy. Raping all the women would have worked too; are you in favor of that as well?

Anonymous said...

Charbonnier said in an interview: "In twenty years of Charlie Hebdo we have had 14 lawsuits with the Catholics and 1 lawsuits with the Moslems.“ And then went on to ask rhetorically which religion was intolerant. He now knows the rhetorical answer.

Edward said...

I think the solution is for the U.S. and Europe to reject imperialism and stop intervening in the Middle East and everywhere else.

Whyawannaknow said...

Maybe sometimes a banana really IS just a banana.


When an act of terrorism occurs that will cause a perfectly opposite effect to that overtly espoused by the alleged perpetrators- (A surprisingly common occurrence over the last 4 decades or so, has anyone noticed?)

I tune out the mainstream media's quickly assembled consensus on who did this!/why they did it!/what that means WE must now DO!

And just look at what happened.

Some creative, highly intelligent, and very independent minded guys who habitually irritated EVERYONE in power, and quite effectively ridiculed a lot of pompous, self important, powerful and rich beneficiaries of status quo just got killed. No one IMPORTANT really misses those guys.

Some OTHER people (of a group are lately in need of a bit of tamping down by those rich, powerful, etc. targets of past lampooning?) Got blamed, chased down and dead. REALLY fast... Such a professional hit, but such an unprofessional hiding out. Because, Jihad! Jihad! 70 virgins! Alahu Snackbar! More media exposure! Of course.

I wasn't there. I'm not in any position to collect my own intelligence from primary sources. All I can do is look at who wins, who loses- And wonder if some of Charley's previous targets are chuckling about what a nice "two for the price of one" they just had.

Or maybe it's just another banana and I have a sick mind.

Unknown said...

@Edward, It's a economic suicide to "come home". This colonialist machine has no plan B, because the final defeat is not programmed there.

Edward said...


It will be economic suicide anyway. These kooks in Washington have done almost nothing to avoid another bubble and economic collapse. It is easier for them to continue receiving their campaign contributions from Wall Street and letting the banking industry write whatever legislation they have the shamelessness to demand. None of this is in the interest of the average American, and the sooner this country gets out of the empire business the better, I say. This phony pyramid scheme of an economy is going to collapse sooner or later anyway.

forrest said...

Perhaps the odds of getting shot in the head by furious Moslems have been seriously overrated, most places? Whereas the odds of getting called anti-Semite, for saying that Israel should never have tried to 'be like other nations', that this was a bad idea & a betrayal of what being 'Israel' was Intended to mean -- are actually pretty good. And most people are more afraid of being embarrassed than of getting shot, most places -- again, partly because it's far more likely & we've got much more experience of it.

US forces doing things that can only disgrace us and harm whatever cause they claim to support -- is a pretty familiar outcome. So it shouldn't be that peculiar for enraged Moslems to do things that disgrace them & impede any good result they may have wanted... except that I normally expect individual people, with their own personal lives at risk, to have more sense & to be less subject to episodes of self-sustaining organized stupidity. Clearly the enemies of Islam score far more points in this business than its supporters, so that 'false flag' model does seem plausible, especially given the weirdness of the police response. (But from the standpoint of the police, hey! If they shoot a plausible perp, they can claim a victory; while the only people who knew better would be the actual perps -- and would they rush to hold a press conference?)

Unknown said...

@Edward, totally agree. Of course the ultimate catastrofe is just a matter of time.

But the problem is this machine is not going stop until all the gas that can be used to reach machine's goal - final dominance and victory - has been used. The type of people that - I think - are working on tactics and manoeuvres upon that machine are the very last ones to admit the evidential final loss. So their only way is to run the machine on the edge and right over on very high speed.

That sort of lunatism of people in power has possible nice benefits to average people. Because high speed wreckage is much to mean the elite has no more even feel of control over things, at least partially average people can gain of that. But that means you still much better to prepare yourself and your social environment for that.It is surely be a hell of a chaos especially in modern western cities.

Mister Roboto said...

WRT the use of depleted uranium ammunition in Iraq: I really do believe there is such a thing as Karma, and what we did to Iraq with that stuff has me convinced that the USA has some serious hurt coming its way in the near future. And when you factor in that DU in Iraq is merely the tip of the proverbial iceberg...ugh. Just ugh. The utterly repugnant family of the deceased Reverend Fred Phelps just may be right in claiming that God is America's real terrorist.

Unknown said...

False flag. So obvious it's boring. And extremely lousy executed. As usual. That is their kind of humor. They are telling us: "It's ugly, it stinks, but you have to swallow it anyway…"

What's even more depressing? The aggressive, militant, mind-numbing "Je-Suis-Charlie" campaign of the unified western main-street media. Almost surpassing the orchestrated, brainless flag waving after 9/11. Or the collective, infantile euphoria after Obama's first election. An utter disgrace for human decency & intelligence. Just goes to show how desperate the stormtroopers of King Dollar have become.

Expect escalations on all levels for the rest of this year and beyond. Until King Dollar dies …


Edward said...

@ Miikka,

Washington does seem intent on running "the machine on the edge and right over on very high speed." Some people benefit from this system but most Americans are not doing that well. The big question I guess is what happens when the dollar ceases to be the world's reserve currency and Washington can no longer invent money by pressing a key on a keyboard.

Unknown said...

@Erward: "what happens when the dollar ceases to be the world's reserve currency."

(That's (the fall of dollar, euro etc. as currencies) mainly to be caused in the first place by the acute "too big" lack of constant oil flowing. It's the fact that makes all the real permanent damage.)

With current settings it's very obvious that centrums (as governments and all the big authorities) will fail and quite rapidly disappear or at least diminish to be just a single quite small fighting units amongst the other units inside the one state. Of course all the support and "guarantee" of safety and order now maintained by those authorities will fade away suddenly.

As Dimitry has been pointing out, and it makes much, much sense to me, the most harmful thing in such a upcoming situation for a person is the lack of social cohesion. In western culture that lack is immense. For example what this "Je suis Charlie" campaigne has been really stating out is that there is a massive new religion out there. Religion that is base on almost complete lack of sense of proportion. It's part of the picture.

It's mentally interesting to own such a privilege to get access to inform oneself in all the history of things and all the present of things. And most of the people not owning any need to even start to think for themselves and their fellows. The whole western education as a unit looks like a harsh waste of time and capacity, while it's based on knowing facts and at the same time not making any reasonable conclusion out of it. It's a fucking joke.

And there has been also a massive momentum for the shutdown of christian doctrines and some of the moral codes also for a long time. Even that not causing almost any effective or logic thinking instead. And now there is this new and overwhelming religion of democracy, human rights etc. And as always mainly maintained with total lack of logic individual-communal thinking, what is required to use the brain in correct way.

So, what is exactly coming? Nobody knows, but I can guarantee it will hit huge amount of the western people so hard they will come able to just moan: "Why is this happening to ME/us?"

So here we come to the point: why this amount of education (e.g. in Finland for 7-18 aged round about thousand hours per year) is not causing any more sanity?

No answer, but for a while now I have found it a good question for myself and sometimes also for my fellows.

Raziel Abulafia said...,29553/

Anonymous said...

@ Cyzyk: "We know Arabs. We also know Moslems. The latter, after all, are what drove my relatives out of Damascus where they had lived for thousands of years."

So your ancestors lived next to them for thousands of years, without being driven out.

You need to ask a question: what, in the last century, changed to alter that?

I'm guessing, and it can only be a guess, that the thousand year coexistence between Muslims and non-Muslims was disrupted by an external force. Could it be....





you get the idea.

M Miller said...

Missing from much of the discussion in the MSM is the role France has played and continues to play in the ongoing ME carnage. I'm not excusing anybody, but one has to look at this stuff in context. France is part and party of a military alliance that has pushed the ME to the brink of collapse in many countries, and right over the edge in others with massive collateral loss of life. To then publish inflammatory cartoons ridiculing those who are living in these regions is madness. To cry "freedom of expression!" and call someone a fool is one thing, to slap their face and then call them a fool is an entirely different affair.

How many cartoons ridiculing the Pope or Catholics in general do you think were published in Britain at the height of the "Troubles"? Would anyone have been amazed if the editorial offices of such a publication were subsequently bombed or individual cartoonists abducted and killed? Would world leaders have joined hands in a teary-eyed parade in support of...what? Non-violence? Support for killing civilians only under certain approved conditions? Perhaps when preceded by some lies printed in a newspaper, repeated on TV? Certainly not by radicals, so barbaric they might cut one's head off and prefer to die fighting to the last instead of surrendering when the cause was lost like a decent human being who values life. How many cartoonists or would be cartoonists have been blown to pieces by French munitions in N Africa or the ME?

There's a tremendous amount of ethnic/societal double standards on display here.

Another unspoken factor is that the sophistication of modern Western war machines makes it all but impossible to confront them openly in a decisive manner. However, since they are the hand of violence wielded by the citizens of democratic, participative governments, why should there be a distinction between civilians and military targets that a sincere enemy need respect? At least those living under despots can claim to be powerless, there are no such excuses for citizens living in democracies when their governments engage in war crimes - at least none that the victims of those crimes need respect.

Again, I'm not condoning anything, but it takes very little to play Devils advocate in situations like this.

Just a Believer said...

The Takfiri ideology espoused by the attackers in France is virtually identical with the Wahhabi ideology of Saudi Arabia and many of the Gulf States.
They have funded and otherwise facilitated the bloodshed of these Islamic extremists. In cooperation with their Western allies, including France, millions in the Muslim countries have been subjected to their pathological violence.
It was always to be expected that sooner or later the crazies that have been encouraged to slaughter, crucify, behead, enslave and otherwise terrorize in places like Syria and Libya would do the same in their countries of origin.
As Lebanon's Nasrallah says, their actions do much more harm to Islam and Muslims than any cartoon.
In order to facilitate friendly relations between Jews and Christians, Jews do not publicize that the Talmud says that Blessed Mary, the mother of Jesus, was a harlot and Jesus (peace be on him) a bastard and a sinner.
Inciting inter-religious hatred is unwise.
Reacting as the Paris attackers did is the result of their nihilistic ideology.
Muslims need to take their religion back from the Wahhabi/Takfiri usurpers who are intent on plunging the world into an abyss of hatred and bloodshed.

Edward said...

@ Miikka,

I don't know exactly how the U.S. empire will decline. In a way the fact that it is so incredibly badly managed means that there are potentials untapped. The U.S. may now be in a pre-revolutionary state.

It is true the U.S. lacks social cohesion but this seems to me like something that isn't hard to create if there is a compelling need. Occupy Wallstreet put together a better relief effort then the Red Cross after Superstorm Sandy and there were private efforts to help out after Katrina.

On education, Chomsky has argued that the more educated a person is the more indoctrinated they are. A willingness to question does not necessarily follow from "education". It is also true that this country is saturated in propaganda. According to Chomsky again, a trillion dollars is spent every year in the U.S. on propaganda. In any case, I think Marx was right that a persons social status and wealth has a huge influence on their politics.

Anonymous said...

Silence of EU has puzzled me for a long time- US destroys countries, makes 'humanitarian disasters', millions of refugees ...They flowed Europe. ..
Not US..And sure, crisis creates all sort of animosities, religious being most easier to spot...
Will it EVER happen that Europe finally says NO long overdue...

Mister Roboto said...

@Unknown/ Samir: Being the healthiest horse in the glue-factory's corral, I suspect it will be a long time before the US$ finally croaks. Which means an awful lot of {UGH!} until then.

nyatnagarl said...

Tatarstan ... where Orthodox Christianity and (majority) Islam coexist peacefully, and mixed marriages can offer a choice of religions to the children they produce.

sane federations enforce a uniform criminal code

So if we have Tatarstan as an example where Muslims and Christians live with the same, uniform criminal code that would mean Muslims do not insist on Sharia criminal code.
If mixed marriages offer a choice of religion to children this would mean Muslims do not demand the application of Sharia apostasy law and the Sharia regulation that only Muslim men may marry women of other religion but all the children must be Muslim.

Basically practicing Islam while giving up Sharia is a "domesticated" Islam which is only possible if the Muslims are immune to the Wahhabi ideology which has become dominant in the West (and many other places).

It also means the Muslims must have given up the idea that they are a people destined to be conquerors.

With reference to Tatars, was there not a time when they indeed considered themselves as conquerors and lords?

If they are satisfied today with being coexisters instead of conquerors the most interesting question might be how the transformation from conqueror to coexistence occurred.

The conflict in the West is not one with "Muslims" as such - for instance practically none of the first generation of Muslim immigrants to Germany had Wahhabi ideology and they never produced a jihadist.
Jihadism comes from later waves of immigrants wo already adopted Wahhabism in their homelands before immigrating, and from mostly third-generation immigrant descendants who have adopted Wahhabism/Salafism as an "empowering" ideology.

It would seem to me that in Chechnya Wahhabism was fought, if not to defeat, then to exhaustion.

In Tatarstan, perhaps Wahhabism has never caught on in modern times - maybe because Tatar Muslim Russians found this identity, as Russians with a Muslim/Tatar cultural and ethnic background satisfying enough, so that they did not need the false promise of "empowerment" by becoming the Jihad Übermensch promised by Wahhabism.

But the most pertinent question would seem to be how the Russians succeeded into turning the Tatars to peaceful subjects of Empire or citizens of the Union or the Federation, instead of conquering overlords. That might be the behaviour to emulate.

Unknown said...

"It is true the U.S. lacks social cohesion but this seems to me like something that isn't hard to create if there is a compelling need. Occupy Wallstreet put together a better relief effort then the Red Cross after Superstorm Sandy and there were private efforts to help out after Katrina."

Lack of social cohesion is not really result of citizenship. Of course.

But the problem is that these local cataclysms you are speaking (writing!) about are not really quite near to the challenge that is going to be faced in the upcoming collapse, because it's obvious not to take place just locally. We have a premise, in our heads, that there will always be some external support to help us. But when facing the collapse globally at almost the same time in huge scale, where is to be those supporting units when everybody is facing a real enormous danger and most of the all starting to fight for their existance?
- But still I think you have a good view (I don't) on that Occupy movement, and it can really cause major things amongst people to disorientate from the route that is heading towards total loss and insanity. Insanity, the insanity of the average thinking, still looks for me the most dangerous and devastating thing.

Social cohesion, together with some true skills to maintain in zero-input-energy economy, needed there is to be some extraordinary. It has absolutely nothing to do with this emotion oriented western sense of community well represented in the average Facebook-accounts timeline. That community looks like a harmful and wildly confusing thing when all the safety nets built up by huge extra energy-input in our civilization have disappeared.

Here in Finland I don't see much of the Occupy movement. Maybe in Helsinki, the capital town, but it's a tiny thing. - What I see is a hugely mislead vast middle class thinking everything is just to be ok forever. Just little bumps and humps, but that's normal. So, it's going to face a disaster. The most dangerous thing we have done due to our infantile relationship to EU is that we have been kidding and still continue to be mocking at Russia. And it's total stupid madness, while we import 50 % of our energy, including all the oil and gas, from Russia. It's just a huge violent bites on the feeding hand. And that's the acute thing (and all the responsibility on our own policy and government!) that has a big possibility to crush our economy and society in to small pathetic peaces. Small pieces are mainly to be left when we are in state of current stupefied apathy and total lack of sense of self-protection.

Jacob Gittes said...

Hei! Olen iloinen nähdessäni suomi täällä.

Sorry, I don't really speak Finnish, though I am going to (re)start to learn it.
We were just in your wonderful country last year, visiting relatives, etc.

Your view is so close to mine it is frightening.
The sense of "community" created by social media is completely false.
What percentage of people you "know" via social media would actually help you if you needed help?
What percentage of your physical neighbors would help you?
My sense that things are similar in Finland.. there is almost no sense of genuine community.

When you go to rural America, the community is much more real... but people in rural areas have a much smaller sense of how serious our situation is. They don't feel the tensions we feel in the cities.

I was surprised at how few people in Finland, Norway and Denmark grow their own food, or take steps to become more self-reliant.
On the other hand, the culture there is far less ugly and self-centered.

Regarding Finland, I have to admit that I really really do not like your current Prime Minister, Alexander Stubb. His anti-Russiah, pro-NATO rhetoric is pathetic.
He seems like the standard, simpering, repugnant, subservient educated elite. He just wants to be liked by the other EU bureaucrats. He doesn't seem to care about sovereignty.
Regarding education, you are right on!
I have only started to un-brainwash msyself from my public education, and I am in my 40's! I am very angry that it has taken me so long.
I guess I should be happy that I have started the process at all.
It would be great to meet on our next family trip to your country!

Unknown said...


Stubborn adds nothing that special novelty in tremendous series of incapable leaders and legislators in our politics. It has been now quite long certain and glorious the new pope is in Brussels. Our priests are just to give us wine and bread and to repeat new divine doctrines. And if we are to act like we - of course - have it in our post-christian DNA, we are likely to also repeat those doctrines, without understanding what those to mean, and be nice and easy. We know we can trust the good shepherd and be nice little sheep, as we like it.

What about rural people here? - I have to say I don't know. What bothers me most is a again quite childish enthusiasm over all the newest technology and all the naive toys we are put to play with. Mainly causing a vast territory of modern socialism conducted by these devices. Sometimes it looks like kindergarten. In otherwise it can also look like a museum or rest house, the common living. Also in rural areas. It's very pathetic and surprisingly choiceless.

Finland has gone through enormous procession in which it has ended up trying to become one of the most technological societies in the world. For me it looks naive and pathetic. It has caused increased dullness and robotism in humans here. And we have been very keen to adopt most of the new ideas and areas of modern western culture, including many odd anti-traditional dietary notes, almost paranoid eager to different approaches to physical exercising and centralizing and automizing most of the all production, commerce etc. etc. - All that leading to increasing incompetence, ignorance, lack of creativity and false sense of the superiority of narrow professional specialty.

Finnish culture looks to be in it's origins very interesting, original, creative and strong, truly. But I wonder if there is any more left? - It's stupid to have wasted that originality. It's stupid to have given in to the not that old habit of getting kinky pleasure of bowing in front of the pope. But that's what have happened.

I don't know if 2015 is still going to be a good year to travel distant countries? We'll see. - But if yes, there is a possibility of a meet. Of course.

Anonymous said...

But 9/11 has taught nothing to you? This is one of the most poorly executed inside job ever seen....

janeflurry said...

this article very nearly expresses my own views:

Unknown said...

The false flag theory occurred to me within 30 seconds of hearing the news, but a month later there is a tremendous amount of very convincing support for it. Among the top facts are the too-convenient placement, pointing and readiness of cameras, the sharpshooting skill of the shooters, the very same police response Bruno complains about, and the ready-made PR campaign of the "Je Suis Charlie" hypocrisy. Bla bla bla, like Boston, it's all getting a bit tedious for me. Just Google it.

One thing is still true at face value: The perpetrators were extremists. Now whether they were CIA extremists or Mossad extremists or what, we don't know...