Thoughts on G.H. Johnson Jr. – ‘A SCF Journal Entry’

Posted by johnhouk on Dec 23, 2008
 John R. Houk
© December 23, 2008

Gary Johnson, Jr. believes that focusing on what I would the Political Islam nature of Mohammedanism diminishes from understanding the totally of the Theo-political cult. In other words anti-jihadist writers that focus on the Mohammedan dictum of “convert, pay alms or die” does not provide enough understanding of Mohammedanism to demonstrate and/or educate the West of the Islamic Supremacist attitude prevalent among Mohammedans.

Mr. Johnson may be correct in the long run nonetheless I am still convinced that an activism to expose the Theo-political nature of Mohammedanism is the best way to understand the cult’s threat to 21st century Western Civilization that has achieve a high degree of representative democracy, civil rights and human rights. Political Islam would swallow modern Western Civilization into a black hole of Islamic Supremacist repression particularly to those who choose not to convert.

Mr. Johnson uses the wording “convert, pay alms or die.” Paying alms (money or charity for the poor) is not what a non-Muslim is expected to pay in the sense of regarding the poor. Anti-Jihadist would point out the dictum for non-Mohammedans (aka kafir or various similarities) are a repressive tax (jizya) designed to humiliate the kafir for paying for so-called “protection” that their lives are not terminated. A better wording thus would be “convert, pay the jizya-protection tax or die.”

Let me be clear: I am not saying Mr. Johnson is inaccurate. Indeed, a complete understanding of Mohammedanism would provide a greater sense of Western empowerment to overcome the deceptive “political correct” zone the West is determined to maintain. In addition I am hardly an expert on Islam. I am a reader of various experts on Islam. I know the anti-jihadist writers do not agree on everything; however they do agree on one thing – Islam is NOT compatible to the Western way of life.

JRH 12/23/08

**************************************
A SCF Journal Entry

Gary H. Johnson, Jr.
Email Sent: Mon 12/22/2008 3:00 PM
Website: United Against Islamic Supremacism
UAIS Title: A Christmas Message to my Heroes

Any comprehensive strategy which will actively defy and ultimately defeat Islamic Supremacism must account for all aspects of the Koranic injunctions revolving around "Convert, pay alms, or die".

Currently, the anti-jihad and counterterror communities are focusing their efforts on the political ramifications and outcroppings of Jihadism. What must be reckoned with is the fact that History is a study in ethics - that politics is the active and practical application of socio-economic theory by political and non-political players. The expert community, at long last, must come to the conclusion that tactical awareness of the jihad threat leaves it in a position of advocacy rather than a position of activism.

At present, the experts have focused their effort on two-thirds of the problem. A comprehensive strategy will take into account the nature of Paying Alms as a key driving aspect of Islamic Sumpremacism's active advance.

In essence, the War of Ideas, to date, has been one mounted against a "Convert or Die" ideology. This tactical approach leaves U.S. policymakers, U.S. lawmakers, U.S. military heads, the ambassadors of U.S. Diplomacy, and U.S. Financial Market Players completely naked in the onslaught of an activist Islamic Supremacism. By fighting only two-thirds of the battles in the War of Ideas, no actionable value set can be had which will guarantee any level of sustained success or any level of effective political response to the threats posed by contemporary jihadism or islamic supremacism.

The socio-economic picture of the entirety of Islamic supremacism is murky and fuzzy - gray.

One recently translated text, Public Duties in Islam: The Institution of the Hisba, sheds light upon this as of yet uncharted branch of Islamic socio-economic theory. Only through this window can a measured moral response be activated against the totality of the socio-economic dictates of the Office of the Muhtasib. Ibn Taymiya's work provides a new understanding and way forward in our present struggles with IslamoMercantilism and Islamic Supremacism.

In terms of the primacy of moral underpinnings in politics, it is important to recognize the value of Ayn Rand - for many reasons. Primarily among these reasons is that Ayn Rand espoused the reasoned basis for the primacy of individual rights in law. On that note, Islamic Supremacism espouses the rationale for the supremacy of Allah's Rights in law. The entire anti-jihad and counterterror community should understand that the fundamental flaw in attempting to attain human rights when facing the Islamic Culture is that the culture's definition of right and wrong is based on Allah's rights not individual rights.

To that effect, it is necessary to consider Ayn Rand's message on the nature of ideas.

Ayn Rand once said, "Ideas cannot be fought except by means of better ideas. The battle consists not of opposing but of exposing; not of denouncing but of disproving; not of evading, but of boldly proclaiming a full, consistent and radical alternative."

The wisdom of Rand allows us to consider the nature of our current war of ideas and the effectiveness of the players.

More to the point, the lesson begs us to determine the difference between Advocacy and Activism.

Advocacy and Activism are not synonyms. They do not achieve the same thing.

An Advocate and an Activist are not synonyms. They do not seek the same thing.

An Advocate holds a position.

An Activist advances a position.

Holding a position requires a value set.

Advancing a position requires an actionable value set.

Advocacy of an ideal is determined by the value set held by the Advocate.

Activism towards an ideal is determined by the primacy or supremacy of the value set held by the Activist.

In effect, an advocate can be right or wrong.

An activist can succeed or fail.

Advocacy is limited to the realm of opinion - as a passing and passive judgement.

Activism is thrust upon a battle of ideas - as an active and volitional act of reasoned or rationalized will.

When the anti-jihad and counter-terror communities consider the terrain of the battle of ideas, they must determine whether they are advocates of a position or if they are in an active position to succeed.

The problem groups like ACT! for America and Stop Sharia are having in achieving their aims is simple: They are advocating a position against Shariah Law and Jihad. What is necessary is the active defiance and defeat of the socio-economic totality of Allah's Rights as the supreme arbiter of justice. In full, we must - as a community of reason - declare independence from the Tyranny and Totalitarian implications of Shariah Law's source. That declaration will take full account of the importance of evasion and proclamation.

In short, to apply Rand to our present War of Ideas is powerful -
"The battle consists not of opposing Islamic Supremacism, but of exposing the dystopian nature of the terror and tyranny of Allah's Right to Supremacy; the battle consists not of denouncing the cult of the suicide bomber, but of disproving the validity of the moral quest of the act."

In the end, the advocate evades the reality of their striving (whether intentional or not)...An Activist Proclaims a bold, actionable alternative based on the activating force of its value set. And at present, the anti-jihad and counterterror communities have not yet found their activating force. In time, we must determine the activating force of Jihadism and Islamic Supremacism in a complete Map of Supremacist Thought. Only in this way can we, as men and women of reason - declaring the independence of our minds and the inalienable nature of our rights - only in this way can we define the enemy we face, their aims, methods, and ideology...and Proclaim a radical alternative to their striving in an active counter movement.
____________________________________
 Leave a COMMENT.

powered by [ stevencopley.com ]