| January 2009 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
July 2007 Stats for The Big Picture.
I recently posted:
As I've noted in the post The Memento Syndrome: Humanity's Short-Term Memory, we tend to think that anything that's relatively new in our lifetime, has never happened before.
I quoted John Quincy Adams' views on radical Islam, which are identical to what has been discussed here.
Commenter Mike Z. has posted quotes from the work of the famous French political thinker, Montesquieu:
From Montesquieu, about 1748, "Spirit of the Laws", Book XXIV, Chapter III:
That a moderate Government is most agreeable to the Christian Religion, and a despotic Government to the Mahometan.
THE Christian religion is a stranger to mere despotic power. The mildness so frequently recommended in the gospel, is incompatible with the despotic rage with which a prince punishes his subjects, and exercises himself in cruelty.
From Chapter IV:
It is a misfortune to human nature, when religion is given by a conqueror. The Mahometan religion, which speaks only by the sword, acts still upon men with that destructive spirit with which it was founded.
We're still trying to wrap our heads around the notion that fundamentalist Islam is not a "love-thy-neighbor" religion like the religions we are familiar with. We feel like no one's ever suggested such a thing. In fact, this has all happened before. People have had to figure this out hundreds of years ago. More from Montesquieu:
While the Mahometan princes incessantly give or receive death, the religion of the Christians renders their princes less timid, and consequently less cruel. The prince confides in his subjects, and the subjects in the prince. How admirable the religion which, while it only seems to have in view the felicity of the other life, continues the happiness of this!
It is the Christian religion that, in spite of the extent of the empire and the influence of the climate, has hindered despotic power from being established in Ethiopia, and has carried into the heart of Africa the manners and laws of Europe.
The heir to the empire of Ethiopia enjoys a principality and gives to other subjects an example of love and obedience. Not far thence may we see the Mahometan shutting up the children of the King of Sennar, at whose death the council sends to murder them, in favour of the prince who mounts the throne.
And quoting a bit more from Chapter 4, part of which is included in Mike Z.'s comment:
4. Consequences from the Character of the Christian Religion, and that of the Mahometan.
From the characters of the Christian and Mahometan religions, we ought, without any further examination, to embrace the one and reject the other: for it is much easier to prove that religion ought to humanise the manners of men than that any particular religion is true.
It is a misfortune to human nature when religion is given by a conqueror. The Mahometan religion, which speaks only by the sword, acts still upon men with that destructive spirit with which it was founded.
Edmund Burke was exactly right. An iTunes link to a dance song to go with this is here.
"The Spirit of the Laws" is available here.
#2Thanks very much for these great excerpts, Courouve. I’ve gotten a very rough translation to English via Babelfish, which I’ll post here for those who do not read French:
In French, Montesquieu and some others:
Baron de Montesquieu:
Chap. III, That the moderate government agrees better with the Christian religion and the despotic government with the mahométane: “While the princes mahométans give unceasingly death or receive it, the religion, to the Christians, makes the princes less timid, and consequently less cruel [… ] On the character of the Christian religion and that of the mahométane, one must, without another examination, to embrace one and reject the other: because it is much more obvious to us than a religion must soften the m?urs men, than it is it that a religion is true. It is a misfortune for the human nature, when the religion is given by a conqueror. The religion mahométane, which speaks only about sword, still acts on the men with this destroying spirit which founded it “
Spirit of the laws, XXIV, chap. 3 and 4.
Alfred de Vigny:
“Believe in a God and his prophet who can neither read nor to write (in Coran). “ Newspaper of a poet, be-autumn 1829.
“If one prefers the life with dead one must prefer civilization with cruelty. Islamism is the most motionless worship and more been obstinated, it is necessary well that the people which profess it perish if they do not change a worship “
Newspaper of a poet, year 1831.
Arthur Schopenhauer: “Coran [… ] let us find there we saddest and the poorest form of theism”
The World like Wanting and Representation, Supplements, XVII.
Ernest Renan: “Islamism can exist only like official religion; when one reduces it to the state of free or individual religion, it will perish. Islamism is not only one religion of State, like was to it Catholicism in France, under Louis XIV, as it is it still in Spain; it is the religion excluding the State, it is an organization whose Papal States only in Europe offered the type [… ] Islam is the most complete negation of Europe; Islam is fanaticism [… ] the scorn of science, the removal of the civil company; it is the terrible simplicity of the Semitic spirit, narrowing the human brain, closing it with any delicate idea, any fine feeling, with any rational research, to put it opposite an eternal tautology: God is God “
On behalf of the Semitic people in the history of civilization, 1862.
Claude Lévi-Strauss: “Moslem intolerance adopts an unconscious form at those which are made guilty from there, bus if they always do not seek, in a brutal way, to lead others to share their truth, they are however (and it is more serious) unable to support the existence of others like others”
Sad Tropics, 9th part, xxxix.
Michel Houellebecq: “I said myself that the fact of believing in only one God was the fact of a cretin, I did not find an other word. And the religion more idiot, it is nevertheless Islam. When one reads Coran, one is ploughed up… ploughed up! The Bible, at least, it is very beautiful, because the Jews crowned one literary talent… what can excuse much things [… ] Islam is a dangerous religion, and this since its appearance. Fortunately, it is condemned. On the one hand, because God does not exist, and that even if one is idiot, one ends up realizing it. In the long run, the truth triumphs. In addition Islam is undermined interior by capitalism. All that one can wish, it is that it triumphs quickly. The materialism is a less evil. Its values are méprisables, but nevertheless less destroying, less cruel than those of Islam “(To read, September 2001, pp. 31-32)
Robert Redeker: “No ideology is retrograde than Islam, and, compared to the capitalism whose Twin Towers, in their majestic beauty appeared the symbol, the Islamic religion is a regression barbarisante. [.. ] the stoical ones bequeathed us, among their benefits, a logic of the preferable ones. Is preferable, according to Zénon [ of Citium ] and Chrysippe, which brings the most good, of beauty and progress [… ] capitalism, because it allows without requiring it a fuller development of freedom, because it also created richness and beauty, is preferable with Islam, just like the symbolic system of Twin Towers is preferable with the speeches uttered in the mosques “
“the speech of voluntary blindness”, the World, November 22, 2001.
Many thanks for on-lining the translation ; just a few corrections :
The names of French periodicals, Lire and Le Monde don’t want a translation (To Read, the World).
Alfred de Vigny wrote “Diary of a poet”.
Arthur Schopenhauer “The World as Will and Representation.”
Also relevant is the 3rd scene of act III of “Le Mariage de Figaro” by Beaumarchais.
#4> Hello,
We present our site
http://www.islam-documents.org
(which is the improvment of the other islam-documents.com, based in Tunisia).
There is thousands of texts (around 15 000) about the origins of islam, with a critical, humanist, and scientist view (and even ironical). It is now the bigger “sourcebook” on that subject, with often unpublished documents: Muhammad biographies (SIRA), the main books of traditions (HADITH) , muslim chronicles (TABARI...), companions biographies (TABAQAT), quranic verses, quranic commentaries (TAFSIR).
A new version is now available, improved and corrected: around 2700 pages. We are working for a new version published every year.
All is in french. so sorry.
Bye. Take care.
PS: just dare to do the same in english!!!
In French, Montesquieu and some others :
Baron de Montesquieu :
Chap. III, Que le gouvernement modéré convient mieux à la religion chrétienne et le gouvernement despotique à la mahométane : « Pendant que les princes mahométans donnent sans cesse la mort ou la reçoivent, la religion, chez les chrétiens, rend les princes moins timides, et par conséquent moins cruels. […] Sur le caractère de la religion chrétienne et celui de la mahométane, on doit, sans autre examen, embrasser l’une et rejeter l’autre : car il nous est bien plus évident qu’une religion doit adoucir les mœurs des hommes, qu’il ne l’est qu’une religion soit vraie. C’est un malheur pour la nature humaine, lorsque la religion est donnée par un conquérant. La religion mahométane, qui ne parle que de glaive, agit encore sur les hommes avec cet esprit destructeur qui l’a fondée. »
De l’Esprit des lois, XXIV, chap. 3 et 4.
Alfred de Vigny :
« Croyez en Dieu et en son prophète qui ne sait ni lire ni écrire (dans le Coran). » Journal d’un poète, été-automne 1829.
« Si l’on préfère la vie à la mort on doit préférer la civilisation à la barbarie. L’Islamisme est le culte le plus immobile et le plus obstiné, il faut bien que les peuples qui le professent périssent s’ils ne changent de culte. »
Journal d’un poète, année 1831.
Arthur Schopenhauer : « Le Coran […] nous y trouvons la plus triste et la plus pauvre forme du théisme. »
Le Monde comme Vouloir et comme Représentation, Suppléments, XVII.
Ernest Renan : « L’islamisme ne peut exister que comme religion officielle ; quand on le réduira à l’état de religion libre ou individuelle, il périra. L’islamisme n’est pas seulement une religion d’État, comme l’a été le catholicisme en France, sous Louis XIV, comme il l’est encore en Espagne ; c’est la religion excluant l’État, c’est une organisation dont les États pontificaux seuls en Europe offraient le type. […] L’islam est la plus complète négation de l’Europe ; l’islam est le fanatisme […] le dédain de la science, la suppression de la société civile ; c’est l’épouvantable simplicité de l’esprit sémitique, rétrécissant le cerveau humain, le fermant à toute idée délicate, à tout sentiment fin, à toute recherche rationnelle, pour le mettre en face d’une éternelle tautologie : Dieu est Dieu. »
De la part des peuples sémitiques dans l’histoire de la civilisation, 1862.
Claude Lévi-Strauss : « L’intolérance musulmane adopte une forme inconsciente chez ceux qui s’en rendent coupables, car s’ils ne cherchent pas toujours, de façon brutale, à amener autrui à partager leur vérité, ils sont pourtant (et c’est plus grave) incapables de supporter l’existence d’autrui comme autrui. »
Tristes Tropiques, 9e partie, xxxix.
Michel Houellebecq : « Je me suis dit que le fait de croire à un seul Dieu était le fait d’un crétin, je ne trouvais pas d’autre mot. Et la religion la plus con, c’est quand même l’islam. Quand on lit le Coran, on est effondré … effondré ! La Bible, au moins, c’est très beau, parce que les juifs ont un sacré talent littéraire … ce qui peut excuser beaucoup de choses. […] L’islam est une religion dangereuse, et ce depuis son apparition. Heureusement, il est condamné. D’une part, parce que Dieu n’existe pas, et que même si on est con, on finit par s’en rendre compte. À long terme, la vérité triomphe. D’autre part l’islam est miné de l’intérieur par le capitalisme. Tout ce qu’on peut souhaiter, c’est qu’il triomphe rapidement. Le matérialisme est un moindre mal. Ses valeurs sont méprisables, mais quand même moins destructrices, moins cruelles que celles de l’islam. » (Lire, septembre 2001, pp. 31-32)
Robert Redeker : « Aucune idéologie n’est plus rétrograde que l’islam, et, par rapport au capitalisme dont les Twin Towers, dans leur majestueuse beauté figuraient le symbole, la religion musulmane est une régression barbarisante. [..] Les stoïciens nous ont légué, parmi leurs bienfaits, une logique des préférables. Est préférable, selon Zénon [de Citium] et Chrysippe, ce qui apporte le plus de bien, de beauté et de progrès. […] Le capitalisme, parce qu’il permet sans le nécessiter un plus ample développement de la liberté, parce qu’il a créé aussi de la richesse et de la beauté, est préférable à l’islam, tout comme la symbolique des Twin Towers est préférable aux discours proférés dans les mosquées. »
« Le discours de la cécité volontaire », Le Monde, 22 novembre 2001.