Islam's New Role in American Politics

Presidential hopeful talk show commentator Herman Cain recently stated that he wouldn’t appoint a Muslim to a cabinet position. This created a minor fire storm of political correctness, and he subsequently recanted his position, effectively placing himself in the back of the pack for 2012. Not so much because of the position, but his lack of resolve demonstrates that he’s capable of being swayed by perceived public opinion.

This is a real problem for a presidential candidate, because once you snatch the brass ring and find yourself in the oval office; you become separated from the people who put you there. There are two types of politicians: Those who operate and lead from core principles (The Leader) and those who are adept at reading the public and reflecting the public’s desire in their actions and words (The Chameleon).

The Leader does well when his principles reflect those of the majority of the people. He will be able to function in times of difficulty by consulting the foundations of his principles and making sound decisions on that basis. If his principles are true, his decisions will be supported by his constituency without having to consult them. These sorts make very good Presidents, but they're rare.

The Chameleon stakes his career on being able to read the mood of the public, and this propels him quickly through politics, until he reaches the Oval office; at which point he’s suddenly cut off from direct contact with the public that provides him his direction, and he becomes one of the most isolated people in the nation. Stripped of his litmus test of crowd reaction, his decision making process develops a fatal lag filter, and he cannot lead effectively, deprived of his primary source of political acumen.

Herman Cain proves by his flip-flop that he’s characteristically a Chameleon. Surely we can do better.

The discussion has introduced a new weapon into the Democrat arsenal of political dirty tricks. The question of the role of Muslims in the American political landscape will have a prominent position from now on. Having smelled blood in the water, the Democrats will continue to hammer this question at all Republican candidates, fully aware that the core republican constituency has a visceral negative reaction to the idea of Muslims in political power. This question will serve only to weaken a Republican candidate, either from their base or from the independent voters, and has no downside for the Democrats.

The Chameleons will stammer and waffle, unsure how to respond because of the political crosswinds pulling them in opposite directions.

Only the Leaders will be able to step forward and use this question to take the offensive, and use their bully pulpit to educate the American public. Allen West is currently the only person I see who seems willing to do this.

The premise behind the Democrat position is that the government should reflect the diversity of the American public. In the name of Diversity the Muslim American population should be represented in American government.

This is a noble sentiment if you don’t understand what it is you’re talking about. If you think this is a morally justified way of selecting our government, then I have to ask this question: In the name of diversity, should the White supremacists of America be properly represented by installing card-carrying Nazis into government positions?

Well, why not? Because Nazis are intolerant? Look at the plight of non-Muslims in Muslims dominated countries around the world. They have second class status in judicial proceedings; they have no chance of winning a legal claim against a Muslim in a Muslim dominated court. They operate at an economic disadvantage, since no contract made with a Muslim is enforceable in a Muslim court for a non-Muslim. They cannot build new places of worship, and frequently cannot repair their existing places of worship. They live in constant fear of a Muslim mob becoming inflamed at some slight and burning their houses and places of worship.

Or maybe it’s because the Nazis are racist, genocidal maniacs? Look at the Muslim sentiment regarding Jews around the world. Anti-Semitism is a hallmark of Islam, and Muslim leaders are not shy about expressing their desire to finish what Hitler started.

Diversity proponents will argue that Muslims in America should not be judged by the actions of radicals overseas. This argument needs to be dispelled. In the first place Intolerance and anti-Semitism are not traits of radical Muslims around the world; this is the normal attitude of the rank and file Muslim population. The average overseas Muslim firmly believes that Israel is a force of evil which should be eradicated, and that Islam is destined to eventually rule the world. The majority of the population in such countries as Egypt, Pakistan, Yemen, Syria, all across North Africa, Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf view Osama Bin Laden as a folk hero and support Jihad against Western Civilization in principle if not in action.

Part of the Muslims faith is that Islam demands more loyalty than does one’s nationality. An American Muslim must consider himself a Muslim first, and an American second. If he does not, then one must question his devotion to Islam.

To be a Nazi essentially means that you endorse the fascist political economic model. This political economic structure has advantages and disadvantages, and is no less a viable economic model for discussion as is communism or capitalism. Evaluating fascism as an economic model is outside the scope of this discussion, the point is that we don’t evaluate Nazism on the basic of its primary economic model; we evaluate it based on the demonstrable record it carries with regard to civil and human rights. We refuse to acknowledge or tolerate Nazis is any position of power in our society, and we only tacitly tolerate their presence as long as they don’t break any laws, and we watch them very, very closely. We do this because we’ve seen what the Nazis have done in the past, and we have solemnly vowed “never again.”

Yet for some reason we tolerate an ideology that at the core has very little difference from Nazi ideology. Because it is self-labeled a “religion,” we give it a pass, even though it openly endorses a fascist hierarchical structure in which the minutest details of individual life are scrutinized to ensure compliance with party (religious) ideology. We look the other way when history and current events repeatedly insist that “never again” has somehow transformed into “right now”. Muslims leaders are openly and brazenly calling for the destruction of Israel and the extermination of the remaining Jews. Christians are being martyred in Muslim countries at a rate never before seen in history, even the darkest early days of Christianity. Muslims Americans do not repudiate these actions; they spend their time instead condemning governments of the West for not being sensitive of the sensibilities of the individual Muslim.

Perhaps if the Germans had declared Hitler a Prophet, and Nazism a religion, they could have sued the USA for violating their right to religious liberty.