Chinese Culture and the Uniqueness of Islamic Jihad

Chinese Culture and the Uniqueness of Islamic Jihad
by Fjordman

In March 2013, the writer Harold Rhode at the website of Gatestone Institute commented on a recent Chinese report that tried to explain what holds the Muslim world back compared to other countries and cultures. Some Chinese observers, in behind-the-scenes discussions, kept saying they were perplexed about the Muslim world’s — and particularly the Arab world’s — inability to deal with the challenges of modern society.

The Chinese and the Muslims, they thought, had both suffered humiliation by foreigners over the past two centuries, but their reactions to these experiences are very different. “We also suffered,” the Chinese said, “but now we control our destiny, and are doing everything we can to learn from these foreigners so that we can benefit from the modern world and ensure that we do not suffer this humiliation again. We Chinese ‘look to the future.’”

The Muslims, on the other hand, seem to have a different approach: Instead of looking to the future they “are mired in the past,” more concerned about taking revenge against foreigners who they believe humiliated them long ago than about dealing rationally with contemporary problems to improve their societies and futures.

These educated and insightful Chinese observers, many of whom had spent considerable time in the Islamic world and had gone to the trouble of becoming fluent in languages such as Arabic, Persian, or Turkish, were puzzled as to why so many Muslims are “obsessed” (their word) with portraying themselves as eternal victims.

If you constantly portray yourself as a blameless “victim” of outside forces, cultivating such a toxic culture of victimhood could for an entire society represent a very serious obstacle to bettering your own situation. If you always blame others for your failures or shortcomings, you will not be the master of your own destiny, but will refuse to do what is necessary to change your mentality or negative pattern of behavior in order to improve your situation. As long as Muslims indulge in self-pity, they will never be able to improve their lot in this world.

The Chinese have their flaws, as does every other culture. They are a proud people, but in addition to this pride there is also a widespread pragmatism and practical outlook to their culture, which is one of the reasons why they are currently making better progress in the modern world than most Muslim countries are doing. To quote the former Prime Minister of Singapore Lee Kwan Yew, himself an ethnic Chinese man, despite “everything we do for our Muslims, they continue to remain at the bottom of society” — poor, backward and uneducated.

I showed this article to an ethnic Chinese friend of mine who is also a Christian and a well-informed critic of Islamic culture and teachings. His reaction was that these observers got it partially right. They do not blame the backwardness of Muslim countries on the Jews or the West. They rightly blame it on the Muslims themselves.

On the other hand, my friend commented that Muslims do in fact focus on the future, yet the future they want is different from that of the Chinese. The Chinese simply want to get rich and are prepared to learn from the West to achieve wealth. The Muslim faith is a warrior religion designed to assist global Islamic imperialism. The future that they struggle for is not a prosperous co-existence with non-Muslims through trade and commerce.

Moreover, the Chinese can repudiate some of Confucius’ teachings and still remain Chinese. After all, while his teachings have had an immense influence over Chinese civilization and thought for well over two thousand years, Confucius was in the end just a philosopher like Socrates or Aristotle in Europe, not an infallible human being. The status of Mohammed in Islam as an example for mankind is radically different. He was believed to be a Prophet of God, the single most important one of all of Allah’s messengers and the “seal of the Prophets.”

The bottom line is this: You can remain a proud Chinese person and repudiate some things that Confucius said, did or taught. You cannot remain a proud Muslim and repudiate some things that Mohammed said, did or taught. You may at best try to reinterpret it in a new way, but you cannot challenge it or ignore it outright.

I share my Asian friend’s opinion on these matters. There are many good and truthful observations in the Chinese assessment quoted above. Nevertheless, t misses the mark when it comes to pinpointing exactly what makes Islamic culture in general and Arabic culture in particular so special.

It is actually a fairly common flaw for many cultures to be excessively backward-looking. However, this often tends to be mainly a problem for them. For instance, the ancient Egyptians after the New Kingdom period became less and less innovative and ultimately lost cultural leadership to the Greeks, partly because they had become too fixated upon copying the perceived glorious past of their ancestors. Yet this did not make ancient Egypt an external threat. On the contrary, it made their nation weak and ripe for being conquered, as they eventually were by the Persians, the Greeks, the Italians (Romans) and other peoples who were by now more dynamic.

It is also possible to venture too far in the opposite direction and think that “history is bunk,” that everything which is old is automatically useless and should be discarded. I sometimes wonder whether modern Western culture has now gone too far in this direction in its relentless quest for “progress,” youth and novelty.

As a conservative and traditionalist, I believe that some traditions may be worth preserving and that some cultural patterns might be of value, since they have withstood the test of time. This does not mean that we should mindlessly copy our ancestors, but we shouldn’t casually dismiss everything they did as stupid or useless, either.

A nation that places no value on the past or traditions will eventually be left adrift and cut off from its roots. A nation that places too much emphasis on the past or traditions will eventually stagnate. A successful, long-lived nation is one that manages to retain some sense of attachment to its roots and is proud of its achievements, yet remains flexible enough to embrace and cultivate positive innovation. Striking this balance is tricky, but necessary.

An additional quality is that a successful nation should also be open-minded enough to recognize and accept good ideas even when they come from the outside. Both Islamic and Chinese culture at times suffered from a superiority complex that made it hard to borrow from the Europeans even when Europeans had, objectively speaking, made some great scientific and technological breakthroughs which no other culture had achieved. Muslims are particularly handicapped in this regard due to the ingrained notion of their superiority over “infidels.”

Being Scandinavian myself, I like reading about the Viking Age. I respect many of the things my ancestors did at that time, but I acknowledge that they also had some practices that I am happy we left behind. For instance, Scandinavians back then practiced blood feuds, or vendettas, between different groups and clans, in order to punish criminals. We no longer do this, and we are better off for it. I watch with great concern as we are now in the process of mass-importing this archaic way of behavior, an unwelcome relic from the past, with mass immigration from clannish Middle Eastern cultures, where such blood feuds are quite common even today.

The crucial difference is that while Scandinavians in pre-state societies practiced blood feuds 1200-1400 years ago, they later managed to evolve and leave such practices behind. Muslims preserved and partly sanctioned such behavior through the development of Islamic sharia law at the same time, which was then fossilized by elevating it to the status of divine law, in principle valid for all times and all places. The concept of blood money for killing people is mentioned in the Koran and is practiced by Arabs in some cases to this day.

The status of Islamic law is one of the most clear-cut cases where Islamic culture is strongly backward-looking in a very negative sense of the word, and sometimes suffers from this today. One Arabic word that could be translated as “innovation” is bidaa, which tends to carry highly negative connotations. Originally, this was probably meant mainly for innovations or novelties in the religious and social sense, but such a mindset can easily spill into the realms of science and technology as well, and stifle progress in these vital fields. The historian Bernard Lewis has written about this in his books, and his analysis constitutes one of the strongest parts of his work.

The Chinese have retained a strong organic sense of connection with the past, which is one of the main reasons why their civilization has endured for several thousand years in recognizable form. This sense of cultural continuity, with a blend of Confucian, Taoist and Buddhist impulses, has been weakened (but not completely destroyed) by generations of Communist rule. The Communists under Mao represented an extreme case of the “history is bunk” attitude, where the past is not merely a mixed bag but constitutes an unqualified evil that must be literally smashed in order to make way for “Progress.” Such a total rejection of everything your ancestors did or thought is clearly excessive and patently harmful. The Cultural Revolution did great damage to China.

At the other extreme, Chinese culture also has a very long and strong tradition of ancestor worship. Although such practices may conflict with Christian doctrines, even many Chinese Christians adhere to these traditions in the modern world, a fact which caused major headaches for the first European Christian missionaries to China.

I am neither Chinese nor Christian. However, I can see the potential that such practices, especially when combined with blind adherence to authority figures, may sometimes constitute an obstacle to freethinking. For instance, I have read of cases in earlier times where a Chinese imperial physician had to literally worship his predecessor. You don’t have to be a bigot to understand that such a mindset could potentially stifle innovation.

Islamic culture looks back to an allegedly glorious past which it wants to replicate today. The dangerous aspect of this line of thinking is that this past was an age of violent conquest and aggressive military expansionism. Indeed, their religious doctrines stipulate that Muslims are preordained by the Creator of the universe to put all nations under their rule. Those who resist them are forces of evil that deserve to be crushed without mercy. There is thus “progress” in Islam, but “progress” is synonymous with Islamic law and Islamic rule.

Even if you are a Chinese person who strongly adheres to the teachings of Confucius, you do not believe that all nations in the world should be permanently converted to the teachings of Confucius, by brute force if necessary. A devout Confucian does not believe that he should systematically copy every mundane thing Confucius did millennia ago, even down to the way he had sex or visited the bathroom. You certainly do not believe that every single person on planet Earth who mocks Confucius with a poem or a cartoon deserves to have his throat cut.

The concept of Jihad, which is unique to Islam among all major world religions, stipulates that Muslims should relentlessly strive to convert the entire world to the teachings of Mohammed, by force if necessary. A pious Muslim believes that his Prophet is worthy of emulation in all things and for all times, even down to the way he had sex or visited the bathroom. A devout follower of Mohammed is willing to risk his life to silence anybody on planet Earth who mocks Mohammed with a poem or a cartoon, if necessary by cutting their throats. It is above all this specific component of its teachings that makes Islam unique and, frankly, uniquely dangerous.

Yes, there are aspects of Islamic culture that are backward-looking and can stifle positive progress. However, Muslims also look back to a past of war and violent conquest which they want to replicate in the future. In this sense, Islamic culture is strongly forward-looking as well. The problem is what it’s looking forward to: A future of global Jihad to establish Islamic rule and supremacy over every nation, culture and creed, by brute force if necessary; a future where all cultures are superseded and supplanted by Arabic-Islamic culture; and a future where the freedom of speech has been abolished worldwide concerning all aspects of Islamic teachings plus the words and deeds of Mohammed. While the backward-looking aspects of Islamic culture are mainly a problem for Muslims themselves by holding them back, the forward-looking desire for global supremacy makes Islamic Jihad a problem for everybody else and a permanent threat to the freedom and security of all of mankind.

In the West, the religion of Islam was in the past sometimes referred to as “Mohammedanism” and its followers called “Mohammedans.” This is now considered bigotry. The fact that the faith of Mohammed is called “Islam” while the belief-system of Confucianism is named after its founder Confucius can leave the impression that Islam is less focused on the personality of Mohammed than Confucianism is on the personality of Confucius.

Yet the simple truth is that a devout Muslim is vastly more preoccupied with the minute details of Mohammed’s supposed life than even the most devout Confucian has ever been with the life of Confucius. Seen from that perspective, labeling this faith “Mohammedanism” or its followers “Mohammedans” is not entirely wrong.

The religion of Christianity is named after Jesus of Nazareth, or Jesus Christ to Christian believers. Muslims claim that although Mohammed received a world-changing divine mission he was not actually divine himself or “the son of God,” as Christians believe that Jesus Christ was. Yet ironically, Islam is far more centered on exalting and emulating the minute details of the supposed life of Mohammed 1400 years ago than Christianity is on emulating every single thing Jesus did 2000 years ago. You might even claim that Islam is far more obsessed with eternally emulating every single aspect of the supposed life and behavior of a particular, allegedly “perfect” person than virtually any other major creed throughout all of human history.

I say “supposed life” because some recent Western scholars have raised serious questions about whether or not Mohammed as he is presented in Islamic texts ever existed. He could be a partially or entirely invented character. If this is correct, this would ironically imply that more than one in every five human beings on Earth spends his life emulating the supposed behavior of a person who may never have existed at all the way he is presented today.

All nations want their people to be strong and at the forefront of human achievement. The Japanese want a strong Japan, the Indians want a strong India, and so on. The Chinese have traditionally viewed their nation as “the Middle Kingdom,” the natural center of the world. Many Chinese nationalists now probably want to restore what they see as China’s economic and political strength as well as cultural glory. This is only natural. What they do not seek, though, is to invade, conquer and colonize all other countries on the planet, to wipe out their cultures and replace them with their own. Devout Muslims do want these things, since their religion commands it.

As a Scandinavian and European, I want my nation to prosper and my continent to be strong. However, if I reluctantly had to live in a world where my civilization was no longer the strongest, I would choose a world in which Chinese civilization was the leader rather than a world dominated by Islam. The Chinese and other non-Muslim Asians such as the Japanese, Koreans and Vietnamese who visit Europe as tourists are often genuinely interested in our artistic artifacts and relics of Europe’s dynamic past. They do not have cultural beliefs banning the existence of our paintings or statues and no desire to destroy these.

European culture and human civilization as a whole could survive a period of Chinese dominion. However, it may not survive Islamic global dominion, which would not only destroy artistic creativity but probably also globally retard science and technology.

For a complete archive of Fjordman’s writings, see the multi-index listing in the Fjordman Files.

15 thoughts on “Chinese Culture and the Uniqueness of Islamic Jihad

  1. Pingback: DYSPEPSIA GENERATION » Blog Archive » Chinese Culture and the Uniqueness of Islamic Jihad

  2. “Many Chinese … do not seek … to invade, conquer and colonize all other countries on the planet, to wipe out their cultures and replace them with their own”. While I recognise a contrast between Islamic doctrine and Chinese culture, I think Fjordman is on shaky ground with the above statement. There’s a lot of nervous countries in South-East Asia and Australia at the moment given China’s aggressive territorial claims over various islands, and boastful talk about inevitable war with the USA. By all means expose Islamic doctrine, but you should understand that down in this hemisphere China is feared far more than Islam. Human nature does not change, and with the decline of the USA in the South China Sea, will China be able to resist the temptation to simply take more land for its overcrowded population? Here in Australia, that thought sure makes any problems with our Muslim population pale into insignifcance. Islam is the main problem for Europe, but not so down here. I too have nice Asians friends, but I don’t doubt for a second that many of them would turn and side with the Chinese when it suits them. Kin preference is as real as Islamic doctrine.

    • The Chinese Communist Party is a very small subset of the Chinese.

      Even though there are valid fears of CCP military expansion, Chinese occupation would almost certainly not involve obliteration of local culture, Tibet TTCN. As a matter of policy, that is. Cultures whose elites submit meekly to repulsive foreign cultures and worthless minority subcultures might, however, welcome a dose of Chinese realism and hegemony.

      Even in the absence of large-scale Chinese tourism, there’s much to fear just from indigenous Western cultural revolutions that ARE a matter of policy. Is there some kind of a Chinese Peace Corps that could come over and instruct us on the fundamentals?

    • Michael R, this is something that most British are kept in the dark about, except I suppose those who have family or friends in Australia who have told them about the fear of the erstwhile yellow peril. I was interested to see in the recent Malaysian elections that there has been a polarisation between the indigenous muslim Malays, 50%, and the ethnic Chinese, 30%. As far as I am aware the latter run the show there; but in the election the majority of ethnic Chinese supported the opposition. The party supported by the Malays obviously won because they are greater in number. Whether this polarisation has occurred because of muslim radicalisation I do not know.

      I was always intrigued at what happened when Hong Kong reverted back to China. You would have thought that the Cantonese would have feared becoming part of communist China. But no, their feeling was that they were returning to the motherland. Blood, as you say, is thicker than water and they saw themselves as being first and foremost Chinese.

      All this goes to underline inevitable failure of civic nationalism, that child of the French Revolution taken to the United States which now threatens to lead to the collapse of both nations. It was fine as long as the majority population was 90% plus European but now as both nations see minority status for whites by the middle of the century the whole thing is beginning to implode. Burke spoken of a nation as being composed of people of a common blood, history and culture. This the Chinese exemplify. Unfortunately, the ideas of the French Revolution morphed into Marxism and ethnic nationalism was deemed to be uncivilised so that civic nationalism had to be imposed on nations which had never ever felt it to be a good idea. The Left had a boost from the insane totalitarian socialist Hitler who took ethnnic nationalism to ludicrous extremes, implying that to be German you had to be blond and blue-eyed even though he and a large number of Germans and especially Austrians are not, like himself. Civic nationalism will not only lead to the collapse of those old allies France and the US but ultimately to most European countries whose political elites have embraced it. The Chinese will do fine as they have not been so stupid.

  3. You miss the point. Chinese smashed the old society completely and built a new, militaristic society in which faithfulness to a new ideology was the best chance of avoiding death, jail, isolation or exile. Traditional Chinese society remains, more or less, but without the degree of formality, among Taiwanese and other Chinese of the diaspora.

    It was only after the old had been entirely dismantled, and the new society fail completely — leading to famine, internal struggle, etc. — and the deaths of the most radical older leaders, were the still very radical, but less so, executive cadres able to institute small changes. They snowballed and life improved as the weaker radicals were proved wrong.

    It was not a conscious choice by most Chinese. Not at all. And nothing substantive has been put in the place, other than the making of fortunes. Now — as the economic challenges in Chinese become severe — we shall see to what extent mainland Chinese have reinvented themselves.

  4. Unlike the Islamic mentality, the Confucian mentality is based on something called: “The Middle Way” or “The Way of the Mean”. This means not going to one extreme or the other, whilst maintaining moral integrity as the key to a wonderful life.

    Because of the “Way of the Mean”, Chinese civilization has been able to survive oppression from foreign invaders, be they Tartars or Mongols or Manchus. Even with Communist oppression, it can survive outside of the mainland in more ways than one.

    Confucius advocated bringing the outsider around to the ways of justice and morality not through force but through maintaining moral integrity. This is a missing element in Islamic societies.

    Furthermore, even when China had tributary kingdoms pay tribute to the Emperor, never once did China interfere with internal affairs of their tributary kingdom, whether it was matters of culture and religion. For example, Korea and Tibet paid tribute to China, yet never once did China interfere with Korean or Tibetan religion or culture, even when bringing Chinese culture to those kingdoms.

    This cannot be said for Islam. Islam from the beginning of time was Arab imperialistic in its outlook and chauvinistic without apology.

    Hopefully, this explains further why traditionalist Chinese can progress in the modern world as opposed to Islam.

    • Tim,

      I think you’re overstating the case, the Chinese attacked and invaded their neighbours on a number of occasions and expanded into NW China at the expense of the indigenous people of the region.

  5. Fjordman: “You cannot remain a proud Muslim and repudiate some things that Mohammed said, did or taught. You may at best try to reinterpret it in a new way, but you cannot challenge it or ignore it outright.”

    The WORST transgression in Islam is hypocrisy which is defined as a Muslim who tries to reinterpret Islam.

    Islam Question and Answer: What is hypocrisy and how dangerous is it for the Muslims?

    “Praise be to Allaah.

    “Hypocrisy is a serious sickness and a great crime. It means making an outward display of Islam whilst inwardly concealing kufr. Hypocrisy is more dangerous than kufr (disbelief) and the punishment for it is more severe, because it is kufr mixed with Islam and its harmful effects are greater. Hence Allaah will put the hypocrites in the lowest level of Hell….”

    “If the kuffaar are obvious enemies from without, then the hypocrites are hidden enemies from within. They are more harmful and more dangerous to the Muslims, because they mix with them and know their situation. Allaah has decreed that the ultimate destiny of the kuffaar and hypocrites will be in Hell….”

    ——————

    Fjordman: “The concept of Jihad, which is unique to Islam among all major world religions, stipulates that Muslims should relentlessly strive to convert the entire world to the teachings of Mohammed, by force if necessary.”

    Muslims do NOT convert non-Muslims. Muslims REVERT non-Muslims to Islam.

    Muslims believe that ALL humans are born Muslim and that non-Muslims merely refuse to practice Islam thus making non-Muslims apostates who may be summarily executed – and that execution does the non-Muslims a favor because it prevents the non-Muslims from continuing to defy the laws of Allah.

    “The Chinese and other non-Muslim Asians such as the Japanese, Koreans and Vietnamese who visit Europe as tourists are often genuinely interested in our artistic artifacts and relics of Europe’s dynamic past.”

    Tourists who may be from the upper classes who have money to travel MAY be nice or may be spies who are paid to be nice, but conquerors are always utterly brutal – no matter whether they are Asian Asians or Muslim Asians.

    To get the true picture of how Asian conquerors act, ask the Chinese how they feel about the Japanese. Fast forward to today, when the combination of the one child policy, forced abortions, and sex selection preferment of men have caused young Chinese men to outnumber young Chinese women by millions. Chinese conquerors would sexually enslave Western women to Chinese men as quickly and surely any Islamic conquerors.

    Comfort Women

    “Comfort women were women and girls forced into a prostitution corps created by the Empire of Japan.[1] The name “comfort women” is a translation of a Japanese name ianfu (慰安婦).[2][3] Ianfu is a euphemism for shōfu (娼婦) whose meaning is “prostitute(s)”.[4] The earliest reporting on the issue in South Korea stated it was not a voluntary force,[5] and since 1989 a number of women have come forward testifying they were kidnapped by Imperial Japanese soldiers.[6]

    “The term is also used for the women and girls engaged by the South Korean government for sexual services for US Military personnel in the 1950s.[7][8]

    “Historians such as Lee Yeong-Hun[9] and Ikuhiko Hata stated the recruitment of comfort women was voluntary.[10] Other historians, using the testimony of ex-comfort women and surviving Japanese soldiers have argued the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy were either directly or indirectly involved in coercing, deceiving, luring, and sometimes kidnapping young women throughout Japan’s occupied territories.[11]

    “Estimates vary as to how many women were involved, with numbers ranging from as low as 20,000 from some Japanese scholars[12] to as high as 410,000 from some Chinese scholars,[13] but the exact numbers are still being researched and debated. A majority of the women were from Korea, China, Japan and the Philippines,[14] although women from Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, Taiwan, Indonesia and other Japanese-occupied territories were used for military “comfort stations”. Stations were located in Japan, China, the Philippines, Indonesia, then Malaya, Thailand, Burma, New Guinea, Hong Kong, Macau, and French Indochina.[15]

    “According to testimony, young women from countries under Japanese Imperial control were abducted from their homes. In many cases, women were also lured with promises of work in factories or restaurants. Once recruited, the women were incarcerated in “comfort stations” in foreign lands.[16] A Dutch government study described how the Japanese military itself recruited women by force in the Dutch East Indies.[17] It revealed that a total of 300 Dutch women had been coerced into Japanese military sex slavery[18]….”

  6. Interesting essay.

    Of course Moslems, in their own eyes (and of their Western apologists) are the eternal victims, to examine any other possibilities would be to admit the concept that the ideology itself is flawed and, unlike another failed religion, Communism, Islam isn’t required to provide paradise on earth. It’s “fail-safe”.

    As to Islam’s days of glory, the early Arab Moslem armies took advantage of the exhausting war between the two superpowers of the time, they were extremely lucky. Islamic culture has been, from its inception, parasitic and destructive and after the Industrial Revolution Western technology was too advanced for Moslems to “reverse engineer” European machines and developments, so their culture was left behind.

    • egghead, you sir in your words said “muslims do not convert non- muslims, muslims REVERT non-muslims to islam.” And according to who who, you. Stop putting islamic text into yours and other peoples minds.

      • There are four main wings of Islamic jurisprudence….

        ALL of them take the view that everyone born is a natural born muslim…

        Hence, egghead is correct.

        That’s how they roll.

        Going even further, Islamic doctrine imputes that anyone born of an openly muslim father is to be legally defined as a muslim, too.

        Should that muslim ‘stray from the path’ then his status is ‘murtard’ — of which Islam demands the life of.

        AQ has a death mark on both Bush and Obama — the latter fatwa being back in the news.

        AQ absolutely considers Buraq to be a murtard — and is not shy about saying so.

        ======

        BTW, AQ can’t keep it’s Internet yap shut.

        A constant stream of missives pours forth.

        If these were ever widely studied in the West — their ideology’s link to Communism, as much as Islam, would become blindingly obvious.

        The Internet buzz is that Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri — Osam bin Laden’s right hand man — and co-founder of AQ — is a KGB/ SVR asset — per the confessions/ opinions of fellow Islamists at Gitmo.

        In which case, he’d have standing right along with Arafat — a pure creature of the KGB — educated in Moscow, no less.

        Ex-KGB high officers from Eastern Europe have openly admitted that the Islamic terror/ anarchist movement was their personal creation earlier in their careers. The idea being to drive a wedge between the Arab OPEC polities and the West — all as an adjunct to the Cold War. Names were named.

        The MSM still fails to comprehend that the KGB didn’t accept the loss of the Cold War. To their minds, the Party and the Red Army blew it… but they, the KGB/ SVR/ FSB are still on the march.

        Putin is ever a KGB man — and has given speeches, ‘on the stump,’ to the active crews — which can be viewed on Youtube!

        In these clips, Putin avers that he’s a KGB man to his last breath, and that the crew should buck-up and carry on the fight, he’s got their back. He gets a rousing applause, of course.

        All of which is to say, we’re still trapped in an Alice-in-Wonderland KGB/ SVR constructed narrative.

        False flag operations are ever a possibility.

        When fighting America, everyone has taken a lesson from Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan: do NOT engage Godzilla head on.

        (Side note: Godzilla — the myth — was created in post-war Tokyo by an uncle to explain to his niece why the destruction happened — and why it wouldn’t happen again. His yarn morphed into a children’s book, then the movie. Godzilla = USAAF bombing campaign — truly an unstoppable force. This is common knowledge in Japan — not so in the West, where most ‘knowledgeable’ citizens think that the monster popped loose, full grown, in a movie theater. It’s a perfect example of the Balkanization of knowledge.)

  7. I henceforth call ‘Islam’ Mohammedanism, and ‘Muslims’ Mohammedans, in accordance with my dictionary.
    If the Chinese had done instead to that culture what they did to Tibetan culture, they would have done the world a service; but they did it to Tibet, and that was unforgivable, though I dare say the Dalai Lama forgives them. I do not think we have to worry greatly over a global [threat] while they do not have a single nuclear carrier group; though carriers are perhaps becoming more vulnerable, e.g. to ‘sizzler’ missiles.

  8. When discussing Chinese society’s attack on Tibet, we are talking of a phenomenon unique to Communist China NOT traditional China in history.

    It is true that China had border disputes with Tibet in history before Communism, but even then, never did the traditional China seek to destroy the whole of Tibetan culture and religion the way that the Communists did.

    In fact, Communism and Islam are both natural allies since once they got the upper hand in a region, they constantly murdered and looted their way as well as raped their way into various parts of the world and continue to do.

Comments are closed.