Your friend Jim George thinks you'd be a great addition to Ricochet, so we'd like to offer you a special deal: You can become a member for no initial charge for one month!
Ricochet is a community of like-minded people who enjoy writing about and discussing politics (usually of the center-right nature), culture, sports, history, and just about every other topic under the sun in a fully moderated environment. We’re so sure you’ll like Ricochet, we’ll let you join and get your first month for free. Kick the tires: read the always eclectic member feed, write some posts, join discussions, participate in a live chat or two, and listen to a few of our over 50 (free) podcasts on every conceivable topic, hosted by some of the biggest names on the right, for 30 days on us. We’re confident you’re gonna love it.
these past few weeks has been horrific. Most of us have either seen, or heard descriptions of, the pictures of the massacres. If for some reason you haven’t, consider yourself lucky: I was prepared for the blood, but it’s the boyish smiles I can’t un-remember.
Well, yes, but we build clocks and golf clubs and they have the time and religious fervor.
We also build tanks.
Yes it is true they don’t make much but these nihilistic regimes always manage to find enough creativity to make their killing tools and keep their swords sharp. Their people will go naked and hungry, but you can be sure their soldiers will not lack for bullets.
Your thinking is far too long range. The history of religious nihilists is one of successfully destroying with no desire to eventuate beyond the destruction. In the case of Islam, the religious fervor is itself the thing they will build. Spend time in any Islamic country and you will be impressed by the filth and decay that surrounds you. A few Westernized Muslims build, but for most the religious fervor is it’s own reward.
Ryan M said he wanted to go to St. Andrew’s, where my wife and I studied theology, and the old ecclesiastical and political capital of Scotland. He said he wanted to see some of the history of Presbyterianism. Other than a slightly odd miracle (the somewhat vague image of a martyr’s face mystically transferred to a church wall), which I didn’t think Ryan would be into, I couldn’t think of anything, so I asked my wife. She suggested he went to see the ruins of the Cathedral.
It’s not true everywhere that the architectural history of the first century of Presbyterianism can be found in the destruction of what came before them, but it’s pretty true. Nonetheless, those Scots built , with a little help, the greatest empire the world has known, and some nice building followed the prosperity that accompanied that.
Thanks for the post Tom! Allow me to add a bit of info. When Muhammad conquered Mecca, he destroyed the idols in the Kaaba. I’m no expert on Islam, but I if I recall correctly, it’s one of the most significant stories in Islam. It teaches about the cleansing of conquered lands and holy places. Of course most Muslims today don’t wish to destroy non-Muslim sacred objects, and such razing is not unique to Islam, but it’s not a big leap to see how the jihadist terrorizing the middle east these days would view themselves as following in the footsteps of their prophet with such destruction. (Picture: Muhammad destroying the idols of the Kaaba)
I feel this is the wrong approach, as it is mere victor’s justice:
Now picture the current wave of savagery in the context of the global caliphate being admired centuries and millennia down the road by a grateful ummah. Carthginians didn’t think much of the subsequent developments, and the current long-standing situation in the Middle East may owe a lot to the Roman expansion and collapse.
History is large, and a lot of things happen (hey, somebody has to expand and collapse), but using construction to justify genocide and cultural obliteration seems wrong.
I don’t mean to justify the genocides, though I am justifying Roman civilization whose armies committed the genocides. The Romans built far more than they destroyed.
I think the real problem is one of scope. You make it clear that Islam, like Rome, has destroyed stuff and built impressive stuff. You note, though, that some Muslims (perhaps like some Romans) are more focused on the destructive side of things. I think you might be right about IS (although part of what makes IS interesting is the degree to which it is far more professional in its use of western media and merchandising, and far more interested in genuine state building than its predecessors were), but IS is still far too small to be called a civilization.