Islam Will Dominate The World? Bring it on...

**Male-Rights-Network** · 7th-June-2009

Criticising/scapegoating Muslims and/or Islam is one of the safest, most politically correct things to do today. Recently, MRAs have been co-opted into this, denouncing Islam and portraying it as the ultimate spectre.

One would assume almost that Islam is an even bigger threat than feminism. It seems that Islam is more roundly rejected than feminism. The Feminist State is preferable to the Caliphate. Feminisation is preferable to Islamisation. These are the sort of messages I am getting. Do they sit well with you? They sure don't with me.

I have to ask this. If feminism is by far the biggest most subversive threat, then why even concern ourselves with Islam at all?

But let me add to that: of all the philosophies and schemes that tie into feminism (democracy, liberalism, Englightenmentism, libertarianism, individualism), Islam does not fare at all. It plays no part in the greater philosophical universe that feeds into feminism. Is this not another reason why it should not be our concern?

I believe, like all anti-Islam commentators, anti-Islam MRAs vastly under-estimate the strength of this religion; and they employ logical fallacies to support their end-is-nigh hysteria. For example, they say demographics are destiny.

Their logic goes: as the Muslim population has a higher birth-rate, this will lead to more Muslim children than non-Muslims. Over the course of a few generations, we will have "Islamisation". Islam will take over from the original (feminist) Western culture.

First of all, this does not account for immigration, which is still ploughing ahead and employs Muslim and non-Muslim populations alike. Secondly, the anti-Islam commentators don't consider our feminist culture, State, media, education system, etc. They expect Muslim children to grow up immune to all of this. Simply because Muslim parents conform to Islam, their children automatically will, down through generations.

If this logic actually worked, none of us would be feminist today, because most of us have Christian ancestors. Feminism is a pagan ideology and completely irreconcilable to Christianity.

Also we wouldn't have artists such as Madonna and Nicole Scherzinger of the Pussycat Dolls, who were raised Catholics but live a thoroughly feminist existence. No, the anti-Islam commentators prefer a more simplistic view of things.

Then we have this total fallacy that feminism "appeases" Islam. This is so silly it's almost funny. Newsflash people: feminism opposes all traditional monotheistic Patriarchal religions. Be it Christianity or Islam.

History lesson: five decades ago feminism started a brutal assault on Christianity, identified it as part of the Patriarchal System, sought to destroy it and succeeded in doing so. Sure, Christianity "exists" but it asserts no influence, and this is the way feminists like it. They will take the same approach to Islam.

Right now feminists are fairly quiet about Christianity - we do not have the kind of vitriol poured on it we had in the 1960s. But if for some impossible reason it grew into a potent force, feminists would up the fight right away. And it is the same with Islam. As long as Islam is contained and powerless, they will "tolerate" it, just as they "tolerate" Christianity. However this tolerance is nothing but a facade.

Now as you know, I hate the West and all it represents. Feminism is of the West. Western liberalism, democracy, individualism, etc. gave birth to the powerful beast that feminism is today.

Feminism is like a Super-Weed, and the West is like Miracle-Gro.

Where does this tie in with Islam? Muslims hate the West too. They look at things like so-called "freedom of speech" "tolerance" "multiculturalism" "individualism" and see them as the unrealisable platitudes that they are.

I wish to see the West destroyed. Nothing less than the total destruction of the Western system will remove feminism and improve men's situation. Frankly, I don't care who does this. It could be Muslims, it could be Alaskans. I really don't care who does it.

Now when I say destruction, I simply mean that it "ceases to be". I do not necessarily imply violence. Likewise, I am aware that many Muslims seek revolution via peaceful means. If revolution and destruction of negative systems can be achieved through non-violent means, then I by all means endorse this. It is preferable.

Islam is not entirely positive - it is loose on some areas of women's rights where it ought to be stricter. But what it does offer us, more than anyone else at the moment, is a broad-spectrum criticism and denouncement of the Western regime which harbours feminism and assaults men.

Today, I will take a bold step in the MRA sphere: I will form an alliance with Islamic thinkers. It is something which I believe MRAs and conservatives should have done long ago.

When I say alliance, I do not mean a formal alliance. I mean: I will link to them, count them as friends, and seek to learn from their analyses. I will open a new links section called "Islamic Links".

Paraphrasing from the Islamic Revival blog:

MRAs must have a ‘culturing process’. That is they must have a way of developing newcomers to the group as well as established members. This culturing must be taken seriously and all should need to go through it. This ensures they are built and developed with MRA concepts, purifying their intentions and thoughts, building their concepts and strengthening their resolve. So the initial zeal and enthusiasm is transferred to a sound knowledge and consistent work. It is saddening to see the many who begin to work for the men's movement and then stop this work; this can generally be attributed to a lack of culturing among MRAs.

This group must be clear in its language, and bold in its actions.

The group must study the reality clearly and comprehensively. Reality must be understood. This includes the study of the thoughts and ideas that exist in society as well as the plots and plans of the feminists in our lands. To just have a generalised understanding of the reality would not allow the people to understand the true nature of the problem we face.

Also see the holy Western doctrine of "free choice" taken apart by Islamic thinkers:

Although the attitude of doing as one pleases exists in the West, the reality is that we live in a society, not in isolation. Therefore although some of us may interprete freedom in our lives as just trying to get a good job, have a decent career and start a stable family to make ourselves happy, another person may interprete this freedom in a totally different way. So making oneself happy for a rapist has a lot more of a disasterous consequence, although they have acted upon the same idea that we ourselves hold - the freedom to please ourselves. So if we really believe we all should be allowed to exercise our own freedoms as we live quite a decent and righteous life, then we should not have a problem with a rapist existing in our society too, who also has exercised his freedom.

Are you really free?

This is the question which many of us living in Western societies assume the answer to. However if we really ask ourselves this question we will find the answer to be in the negative. We are not at all really free. Although society promotes sexual freedom to satisfy ones desires, the British law requires that you must be above the age of 16 to do so. Although we believe we are free to dress in whatever way we please, be it a sack even if we chose, the reality is if you decided to walk down the street stark naked, you would be arrested. If you asked a newspaper to report some type of abuse about the Queen you would be told that it was not allowed.

Therefore it is clear we are not at all totally free – We are just free to the extent that society and the Government allow you to be. Therefore the question then begs, that if we are not free, but all live by a set of norms and rules, then what rules should we be following?

Actions by individuals affects society, and this is the idea that must be understood by Western society for it to deal with the current social breakdown that is being witnessed in society.

The idea that we are free to do whatever we want and fulfil are desires in whatever way we want, is a total fallacy. If we have no freedom over the number of times our heart beats, how many electric impulses our brain sends and how much oxygen our lungs intake, how can we possibly believe that we are free to fulfil the needs and desires of our body in other respects, as discussed above?

Post-Script:

I anticipate that some MRAs will "out" me as a "Islam appeaser", whatever that's supposed to mean. Frankly, I don't care for this level of discussion. Come up with an intellectual argument.

Also, I anticipate that some MRAs will say this will only play into the hands into the hands of feminists who want to paint us "Patriarchal extremists". This does not matter. Feminists will hate us (men and MRAs) anyway, it matters not what we say; how "extreme" we are, or how silent we are.

And you may have forgotten what I said in one of my earliest posts: I do not care what feminists think. If I confirm "feminists worst fears", or whatever, I couldn't care less. Their opinion is of no worth to me.

More...

bababob · 8th-June-2009

MRN, please excuse the crudities. Muslims don't take any shit. Like the Mafia, sooner or later they'll get you. We are sick and tired of the shit we have to take by the truckload, each and every day. Muslims are not feminized and hate us in part because we are.

As the thread I put up titled "Women in Islam, Christianity and Judaism" asserted, Islam is the fastest growing religion, and women in the UK and America are outstripping men as converts. Maybe this is feminist infiltration, and maybe these women are selecting an alternative to feminism. One way to find out is by open dialogue with Muslims. I agree with your basic premise.

**Percy** · 8th-June-2009

The 'mind' of the West has been shaped against Arabs and Muslims in general for the past 50 years. Hollywood has been in cahoots with Washington on the matter almost as a clone with 'art' feeding policy and vice versa. Over that time there have been a hundred or more lilms made showing Arabs (and by extension, Islam) as stupid, rapacious, murderous, geedy and wicked. Disney lead the way with cartoons and kiddy stories and has been followed up with a huge array of 'action' movies that cast Arabs as the bad guys.

Yet there are several quite decent muslim countries which, while harbouring small nutcase groups, the equivalent in vitriol of the KKK, are peaceful and coherent and part of the international community. Malaysia and Indonesia are notable for being relatively welcoming of 'westerners' and coexist well with a pluralism of religions amongst their peoples.

The hysterical American response to 9/11 set us on a path of war against Arabs and the Muslim part of the world. This was a convenient follow-through to the one-eyed Israel Policy which completely disregards the basic humanity of the Palestinians. While I may personally see that particular conflict with pro-Israeli eyes, nevertheless the treatment of the vast majority of ordinary Palestinians is a running sore, a blot on the ethical standards of the west. It blots the Arab senses too with the Palestinians being used as a pawn by Arab states.

9/11 was not caused by Muslims anymore than the 40s, 50s and 60s anti-Black movements in America was caused by Christians. Al Q'aida is as Muslim as the KKK is Christian. That is to say, it uses a perversion of the religion as its excuse. Iraq was not supposed to be about 'Arabs' or Muslims, and Afghanistan was supposed to be about the Taleban - the KKK equivalent but on a grander scale. But it is not seen that way by our hysteria-driven politicians and media.

(A Note: One could also say that the twin towers horror was just a ramp up from the Timothy McVeigh bombing in Oklahoma - he was an Irish-American Catholic but there was barely a ripple of anti-Irish or anti-Catholic sentiment or a suggestion that all Americans were friggin' lunatics. It was even assumed that the Okla bombing was done by Arab terrorists such has been the mind-shaping of Hollywood and Washington. lack of evidence didn't stop that and the plethora of evidence afterwards didn't slow the anti-Muslim sentiment).

(Another small note - the 9/11 horror took two buildings and 3000 lives. The city I was born in took far worse damage on the first night of the Blitz and that went on for many days and nights eventually destroying most of the city and a significant proportion of the citizens. We weren't anywhere near as 'shocked' or hysterical. British stiff upper lip perhaps? Enough said about American backbone.)

Back to point: Islamist are neither MRM useful nor antithetical.

Much of what M-R-N puts above is reasonable. I certainly do not see it as 'Islam-appeasing'.

In the west we have an evil phiosophy that marginalises, demonises and villifies men. That is 50% of OUR western population. It also demonises marginalises and villifies Islamic culture, which includes men.

But Muslims are 'over there' and hardly a serious threat to us other than what we goad them into and annoy them into with false accusation, while feminism is in our living rooms, our Courts, our Governments, our media, and making the culture here.

It is an issue of priorities and clarity.

**Male-Rights-Network** · 8th-June-2009

Yet there are several quite decent muslim countries which, while harbouring small nutcase groups, the equivalent in vitriol of the KKK, are peaceful and coherent and part of the international community. Malaysia and Indonesia are notable for being relatively welcoming of 'westerners' and coexist well with a pluralism of religions amongst their peoples.

Yeah they are basically feminist aswell.

Which is to say non-Muslim and Western.

The hysterical American response to 9/11 set us on a path of war against Arabs and the Muslim part of the world.

Okay so you are introducing that Muslims did 9/11, which has never been proven in any comprehensive manner.

I never introduced that point, and I would suggest it be kept out of the discussion. The fact of the matter is none of us here can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Muslims did 9/11. And I think it is best to leave it at that.

Al Q'aida is as Muslim and the KKK is Christian.

I don't see that the comparison is all that accurate, or relevant. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that indeed, Al Qu'aeda is not Muslim; rather it is an operation controlled by Western forces.

The organisation first cropped up in the late 1980s when the US were fighting a proxy war with the USSR in Afghanistan.

Former UK Foreign Secretary Robin Cook alleged that Al-Qu'aeda was called "The Base" because it was a database of Muslim militants the CIA could incite and deploy against the Russians. It wasn't long before he was ejected from politics and died in mysterious circumstances.

"Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians."

It blots the Arab senses too with the Palestinians being used as a pawn by Arab states.

Now this is a can of worms. Suffice it to say, I think the Palestianians are entitled to their own fully independent State. The Muslim and Arab world is entitled to show solidary with them towards this end (incidently the Western-controlled Arab nations such as Egypt do not show any solidarity, they abandon Palestine; only the general Muslim public offer support).

Also I do not believe that Muslim Nation-Palestian relations are built solely on Palestine being used "as a pawn". It is more complicated than that.

Iraq was not supposed to be about 'Arabs' or Muslims

Iraq, fundamentally, is about nothing other than US/Western supremacy. And also, about securing the realm for Israel. Which seem to be largely the same thing, funnily enough.

In addition to the fact that the war was a Israeli foreign policy objective, ensuring the growth of feminist culture throughout Muslim and Middle Eastern nations is crucial to the conflict. Be it through MTV and Viacom, or through F16s, the US spreads feminist culture far and wide.

Really I would prefer to discuss Islam and Muslims in more general terms, rather than jump in instantly to the sundry claims of terrorism, which do not come with any verification other than "it's what the media say".

It's possible to discuss Muslims/Islam without invoking alleged terrorism. I know the media does so very rarely, but it is possible.

**Male-Rights-Network** · 8th-June-2009

Islamist are neither MRM useful nor antithetical.

I disagree. Islam opposes feminism and the West, quite fundamentally I might add. Their analyses in these areas can hardly be said to be anything other than useful. To me at least.

**ACE** · 8th-June-2009

Of the 3 monotheistic religions, isn't Islam the most resistant to secularization? I often say the God of The Bible is most apt to favor
those who must pray to Him at least five times a day, as opposed to those who pay Him a visit once a week. Religion permeates their daily life.
Ideologies like feminism do not stand much of a chance to compete in the first place.

**shaazam** · 8th-June-2009

the Asian and Arab money lenders own America so I guess the USA will abide until these creditors call in their debts - which will be any time of their choosing

the truth that the USA is bankrupt is manifest - families in Las Vegas camped out on the grass verge of the footpath and GM one of the industrial icons tottering

how about the US failed financial institutions propped up by foreign money and money garnered form the accounts of thrifty US citizens

the US financial system is a credit it bubble burst - a balloon that has popped - the Humpty Dumpty syndrome

the US that has existed for the last 250 years has reached an inevitable crisis point and I beleive it will fail and fragment as did the USSR in the early nineties

the rise of the unproductive parasitic feminits is merely a sign of the endemic decadence of the West

I say maybe the Islamist do have a look in !!! their culture is not ordered to suit slack and idle rip off feminits

**Zuberi** · 9th-June-2009

Islam won't save anybody from the NWO!

I'll keep my faith until the day I die!!

**Male-Rights-Network** · 9th-June-2009

I didn't suggest that Islam would save the world. Nor did I suggest that you convert to the religion and give up your faith.

However and ever, someone has to step up to the plate and take down the West. At least try to. At least declare that the West is the problem.

The Muslim analysis of the current Western geo-cultural-political order is about the best going at the moment.

**haahoo** · 9th-June-2009

You gotta admit, those guys know how to put their women in their rightful place!!

For that alone, I doth my cap to them!!

**julie** · 9th-June-2009

Yeah, I agree with the guys here who want to screw women over.

We have to get passed all radicals before we can have peace.

I just can't see men preferring freedom above dominating women.

**Zuberi** · 9th-June-2009

Quote from Male-Rights-Network

I didn't suggest that Islam would save the world. Nor did I suggest that you convert to the religion and give up your faith.

However and ever, someone has to step up to the plate and take down the West. At least try to. At least declare that the West is the problem.

The Muslim analysis of the current Western geo-cultural-political order is about the best going at the moment.

No body going to take down the west simply because we are protected by Rome.
America is the spitting image of Rome and the lamb like beast of revelation.

bababob · 9th-June-2009

Quote from julie

Yeah, I agree with the guys here who want to screw women over.

[This is not a remark that a sincere supporter of men's rights would make!]

We have to get passed all radicals before we can have peace.

[Peace on whose terms? Islam is an obstacle to feminist world domination. Why is that radical to you?]

I just can't see men preferring freedom above dominating women.

[Written like a true feminist ... a true feminist.]

**haahoo** · 9th-June-2009

Quote from julie

Yeah, I agree with the guys here who want to screw women over.

We have to get passed all radicals before we can have peace.

I just can't see men preferring freedom above dominating women.

Men dominate women, and women dominate men.. such is the nature of homo-sapiens!

**Male-Rights-Network** · 9th-June-2009

Quote from julie

Yeah, I agree with the guys here who want to screw women over.

We have to get passed all radicals before we can have peace.

I just can't see men preferring freedom above dominating women.

Ah yes, the "radicals", indeed. If only we could get by the "radical" feminists.

There's so much wrong with that proposition; ultimately it just keeps men in the dark.

Going after this mythical "radical" feminist species.

Feminism is all the same.