Islam's imperialist nature – never discussed, never revealed.
Mohammed, 632 A.D.: “I was ordered to fight all men until they say, 'There is no God but Allah'.”
by Ferdinand III
For the relativists, the chattering spitting marxist and the eco-lover, Islam is just another 'religion' giving comfort to those in need. There is nothing inherently violent, supremacist or racist in Islamic doctrine according to this point of view. Islam is really kind and nice and most Muslims are peaceful. This is the public view of George Bush, the US political leadership class, and of course the Useless Nations and the EUnuchs in EUropia. A more truthful and compelling view maintains that Islam is naturally expansionist and is in fact the most successful imperialist ideology in history.
The expansionist concept of Islam is of course politically incorrect. Portraying Islam as anything other than a wondrous spiritual exercise is sure to get the author sued, harassed by Human Rights Councils and vilified by mainstream socialists and relativists. But covering up reality with abstractions and lies does not make the truth, nor reality, disappear. Arab and Islamic imperialism is without question one of the most decisive factors in human history. And one that is almost never discussed.
Scorn and historical opprobrium is heaped upon white 'imperialists' and colonialists and the supposed destruction they wrought whilst raping the world, wondrous ancient and far superior pagan-neolithic civilisations; and enslaving blacks, yellows and browns. Reality was of course a lot different and far more positive. Would the world be better off today if North American 'Indians' were still in control of America? Only a constrained narrow and deranged mind would think so.
There is plenty of good along with the bad with so-called white imperialism. Romans, Greeks, British, French and Russians brought many goods, ideas, spiritual innovations, and technologies to improve the lives and worldviews, not to mention the wealth, of their subjects. One reason why 'white' Rome was able to dominate the mediterranean world for 700 years was that society, the economy and the standard of living markedly improved.
Moralists will highlight that Christianity as an imperial project is stained with blood, corruption and misuse of 'native' cultures. In some cases this is true. But Christianity also brought ideas about humanism, the worth of individuals, equality, justice and the power of mental awareness to the world. Christian thought is imbued with principles of zen meditation, rights, freedom and the division of church from state, not to mention the golden rule. These catalysts of civilisation are entirely positive and it was the Christians who opposed slavery [La Casas in the 16th century defended American Indian rights to land ownership and equality]; slave trading; the misuse of women and children; and vices which lead to societal breakdown such as excessive drinking, sex, violence and a lack of education.
It is hard to make the case that Christian imperialism was an odious epoch.
Compare the rights and programs of Christianity with that of Islam. Islamic imperialism carried no higher good than the enrichment of the founders of Islam – Bedouin pagan Arabs. Mohammed was a warrior and a political leader and a far different figure than Christ. For Mohammed church and state were under his command, and he answered only to Ali-ilah or Allah, the Meccan moon cult deity. For Mohammed and his followers whatever advanced Islam was allowed. Whatever got in the way of Islamic imperialism was to be crushed.
This is how Islamic Jew and Christian hatred started. Mohammed tried to win over the rich Jewish tribes who resided in Arabia during the 7th century AD and who controlled rich trade routes and caravans. When the Jews and Christians rejected Mohammed the massacres of these 'kaffirs' began. One famous Jewish tribe – the Khaibars – were annihilated by Mohammed and his men giving rise the Muslim name of the famous pass in Afghanistan [the Khyber pass] as a reminder of what happens to those who disobey Islamic demands. Another Jewish group the Quraiza were similarly liquidated with women and children sold into slavery or sex concubinage and all 700 men and boys beheaded and their bodies kicked into a trench which they had dug.
Islamic universalism and the melding of church and state into one entity was codified by Mohammed in the Meccan Constitution – the formal document of Muslim ideology. By uniting Arab tribes into one loose federation obeying the Arabian male moon cult or Allah, Mohammed had one serious problem to overcome. How to stop intra-tribal raiding and thieving and the usual Bedouin practice of stealing? The answer lay in expansion and imperialism.
Mohammed the warrior said it best himself, 'the survival of my community rests on the hoofs of its horses and the points of its lances; as long as they keep from tilling the fields; once they begin to do that they will become as other men.' Pagan Arabs were largely nomadic and not prone to the creation of civilisation along Judeo-Christian lines, nor were most much interested in urbanisation and the effeminisation which settled culture entails. These primitive peoples were thereby hard to control and prone to violence. By amalgamting the Arab tribes into one federation Mohammed had created a powerful force but what was he to do with it?
The Arabs of Mohammed's era lived near the spice trade routes which linked Yemen to Israel and they bordered two larger and far wealthier civilisations- the Sassanids or Persians to the east and the Byzantines to the north and north west. Under Mohammed's control the Arabs began to raid and dominate the north-south trade caravans and appropriate all non-Muslim money and property within the Arabian peninsula. Jews and Christians were especially loathsome targets being recently condemned by Mohammed as savages and idolators.
Before Mohammed died in 632 he sent raiding parties against both empires and finding them feeble ordered his successors to spread Islam by the sword by dismantling these two tottering and over-extended states. Thus was born the Arab explosion onto the world scene and the carrying of Islam by force, war, and the extraction of tribute to lands from India to Spain. For Mohammed and his immediate successors jihad was a duty to Allah to bring his message to all people's on earth and to subject them to the chosen tribe – the Arabs – in the name of universal destiny.
And so Islamic imperialism began. The history of Islamic expansionism is of course complex. Through forced and voluntarily conversion various groups such as the Turks, Persians, Sudanese, Indians, Afghanis, Mongols, Berbers and Maghrebis have established Islamic empires of various sizes, duration and power. There is no monolithic version of Islamic empire, much as there is no monolithic implementation of Islamic ideology. Even within the Sunni [the practice] group or the Shias [the faction of Ali]; there are many different interpretations as to what Islam means.
One might argue that Islamic imperialism was really a pre-modern event and that one cannot form linkages between Islam's rise and spread, and the modern world today. This is certainly open to debate. Many of us would argue that Islam, the Koran the Hadiths, the sayings and practices [Sunna] of Mohammed are directly responsible and are concretely linked to an expansionist version of Islam which is real, dangerous and anti-civilsational. Given the historical rise of Islam and its continuing expansion this seems a far more reliable opinion based on fact, than dismissing Islam as a misunderstood 'faith'. Islam in its scriptures, its practices and its history is a universalist ideology.
Arab and Islamic imperialism is unfortunately a rarely discussed topic. It is just assumed in today's dumbed-down world that Muslims and Arabs have always existed in the areas of the globe where we now find them resident. This is of course preposterous. Egypt in the 7th century was Greek, Christian, Jewish and Berber and its Hamitic people were not in anyway Arabic. Iraq before the Arab-Muslim conquest had huge populations of Jews, Greeks, Christians and Persians – and very few Arabs. From Spain to Indonesia the same lesson applies.
Historically Islam was spread by force, by tributary status, by conversions to avoid taxation and by political power. It is still a potent force and one which does give rise to a clash of cultures. To ignore this fact is dangerous and to make excuses for it criminal. Islam is not monolithic nor are all Muslims brain-washed cult members. But Islam is an ideology which does nto respect civilisation and has little in common with Christian and Western civilisation. A cursory reading of Islamic imperialist history makes that rather obvious.