DREHER AND THE RELIGION OF PIMPS

Dreher outdid himself this week with his deep feeling post on Rotherham. I write "feeling" rather than thinking for obvious reasons.  Perhaps I shouldn't be as disgusted as I am.  But nausea has reasons that the brain knoweth not.

Pakistani immigrants to the town of Rotherham were finally brought to book for "Grooming" and sexually exploiting White English girls.  The practice was well known, both within the populace and in the center right press.  That made the practice all the more off-limits to the authorities,  always anxious to appear politically correct in an anti-causasian sort of way.  

He writes, "My guess is that it is as unfair and as inaccurate to blame the rape by Pakistani Muslim men on Islam as it was (is) to blame the rape of children by priests on Catholicism." 
Dreher then goes on to blame both Paki' Muslim crime and Catholic clerical crime on the cultures of Islam and Catholicism.

You have to be very willing to avoid the obvious to write or think in this manner.  Or, you must be utterly terrified of the truth and where it might lead you.  

I have a friend who is quite brilliant and a holder of a PhD who maintains that the things that offend and frighten us about Islam are mostly artifacts of pre-Islamic culture.  Killing your womenfolk for disgracing your family and or beliefs can be found among pre-Islamic Arabs.  Killing them to just keep them out of the hands of other Arabs was also common before the Prophet came on the scene.  There are many other such examples.

So to the Dreher mind and the Dreher minded, we must not make judgements about the nature of Islam: not even when after more than a thousand years, the religion of peace can't make it's adherents change their tribal, bloody ways. 

He and his silly band of commenters go on to raise all the usual questions to which there must never be conclusions.  The idea that Pakistanis come from a very dysfunctional country  and therefore might not be good citizens of a post industrial society with vulnerabilities, must never be broached.  The Paki's are from a culture that is low trust, tribal and hostile to the culture of foreigners, even when those foreigners are supposedly their fellow countrymen. 

I can't see how Islam softened any of these traits.  I can easily see how Islam solidified these primitive features within a code sanctioned by Allah himself.  Pakistan only exists because Indian Muslims could not abide other Indians.  They had to separate and create a country that is both deeply Islamic and utterly failed.

What needs to be understood is that the concept of citizenship is a Western concept.  It has no place in Muslim thinking.  It's not the only such Western concept that doesn't fit in well with cultures of the desert and mountains.  There is no Agora in Mecca or any other Muslim city.  Islam is an inward looking civilization.  Life in Muslim society is family life.  Fellow citizens are just strangers who live under the same law as oneself.  If the strangers are not Muslims and the law is not Islamic, they don't owe much to wider society beyond paying taxes.  And this applies to vulnerable members of that society.  

By Sharia standards pretty much all Western women are whores.  Married ones are not to be touched but loose ones are fair game.  

The idea that everyone in society is in a kind of extended civic pact, based on adherence to certain binding ethical precepts, is profoundly alien to these people.  They prefer their way of life.  they prefer holding apart as little extended family enclaves where jobs go to sons and cousins, uncles marry nieces and outsiders are to be ignored or taken advantage of.  Such people cannot be expected to correct abuses committed by relatives.  That would  betray the all-important family to foreigners who live around them.  Islam does nothing to stop of soften any of this. 

The attempt to separate culture from religion is a worthwhile project for scholars.  But to behave as though the cultures of Muslims and the religion of Muslims can be teased apart in any useful way is a bootless distraction from what must be done.  Weak simpletons like Dreher cannot or will not discuss this honestly.