Cartoon rage (dhimmitude)

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gilliam

Guest
We need to learn a new word: dhimmitude. I’ve written about dhimmitude periodically, lo, these many years since September 11, but it takes time to sink in. Dhimmitude is the coinage of a brilliant historian, Bat Ye’or, whose pioneering studies of the dhimmi, populations of Jews and Christians vanquished by Islamic jihad, have led her to conclude that a common culture has existed through the centuries among the varied dhimmi populations. From Egypt and Palestine to Iraq and Syria, from Morocco and Algeria to Spain, Sicily and Greece, from Armenia and the Balkans to the Caucasus: Wherever Islam conquered, surrendering dhimmi, known to Muslims as “people of the book [the Bible],” were tolerated, allowed to practice their religion, but at a dehumanizing cost.

There were literal taxes (jizya) to be paid; these bought the dhimmi the right to remain non-Muslim, the price not of religious freedom, but of religious identity. Freedom was lost, sorely circumscribed by a body of Islamic law (sharia) designed to subjugate, denigrate and humiliate the dhimmi. The resulting culture of self-abnegation, self-censorship and fear shared by far-flung dhimmi is the basis of dhimmitude. The extremely distressing but highly significant fact is, dhimmitude doesn’t only exist in lands where Islamic law rules.

This is the lesson of Cartoon Rage 2006, a cultural nuke set off by an Islamic chain reaction to those 12 cartoons of Muhammad appearing in a Danish newspaper. We have watched the Muslim meltdown with shocked attention, but there is little recognition that its poisonous fallout is fear. Fear in the State Department, which, like Islam, called the cartoons unacceptable. Fear in Whitehall, which did the same. Fear in the Vatican, which did the same. And fear in the media, which have failed, with few, few exceptions, to reprint or show the images. With only a small roll of brave journals, mainly in Europe, to salute, we have seen the proud Western tradition of a free press bow its head and submit to an Islamic law against depictions of Muhammad. That’s dhimmitude.

Read the rest
 
40.png
gilliam:
Wherever Islam conquered, surrendering dhimmi, known to Muslims as “people of the book [the Bible],” were tolerated, allowed to practice their religion, but at a dehumanizing cost.
In Islamic theology, People of the Book doesn’t refer to the Bible, because Zorastarians and Mandaeans are sometimes counted among the dhimmi (depending on the specific Islamic leadership and political stability in the region). People of the Book are only counted as to at some point in time having been given solid Islamic scripture from previous prophets (none of which is in existence now besides the Qur’an according to Islamic theology). Just thought I would point that out. Other than that I agree wholeheartedly with the article. Hamas has pointed out that they wish to restore the jizyah in the Palestinian territories.
 
This Islamic site explains more about the concept of the dhimmi. Some things in it I would like to point out:
  1. The word of a dhimmi was considered not as valid as the word of a Muslim in court. In court, the word of a dhimmi witness counted less than a Muslim male, putting dhimmi on an equal footing with Muslim women.
  2. Dhimmi were not allowed to build houses taller than Muslim houses.
  3. Dhimmi had to wear different colored turbans than Muslims. Presumably so Muslims whould know who they were.
  4. As Semper Fi pointed out, they could be Zoroastrians. Dhimmi apparently means “people of the pact” not “people of the book”. Strictly speaking, the terms should only refer to the monotheists mentioned in the Qur’an, Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, and a group called the Sabeans, whose identity is unknown. In practice, however, the legal interpretation allowed other religious groups the Muslims encountered, such as Hindus, to be counted as legitimate members of the dhimmi community.
  5. By law, Dhimmi had to show a respectful attitude towards Muslims and to ride on “inferior animals”.
All this reminds me of the situation the Jews were in during Nazi occupation (just before the “final solution” was dreamed up).
 
40.png
gilliam:
All this reminds me of the situation the Jews were in during Nazi occupation (just before the “final solution” was dreamed up).
Hmm, this pre-dates the Shoah by several centuries.

a) At the time of the dhimmi European countries were dealing with heretics and unbelievers by torturing and murdering them. Christians fled Christian Europe because they were safer in Muslim lands than in Christendom. It is misleading and dishonest to compare 10th Century Muslim practice to 21st Century secular practice. The true comparison is 10th Century Christian practice which was barbaric in many ways.

b) Christian Europe murdered the Jews in their millions. Muslim lands at the time of the dhimmi did not. Jews were safer among the Muslims than the Christians. If you want to compare the distant past with the very distant past.
 
40.png
Matt25:
Hmm, this pre-dates the Shoah by several centuries.

a) At the time of the dhimmi European countries were dealing with heretics and unbelievers by torturing and murdering them. Christians fled Christian Europe because they were safer in Muslim lands than in Christendom. It is misleading and dishonest to compare 10th Century Muslim practice to 21st Century secular practice. The true comparison is 10th Century Christian practice which was barbaric in many ways.

b) Christian Europe murdered the Jews in their millions. Muslim lands at the time of the dhimmi did not. Jews were safer among the Muslims than the Christians. If you want to compare the distant past with the very distant past.
So that makes it OK to bring it back? As Hammas said they are thinking about doing in Palestine?
 
40.png
gilliam:
So that makes it OK to bring it back? As Hammas said they are thinking about doing in Palestine?
I don’t think Matt25 said the Dhimmi was a good thing. I think he said it wasn’t as bad as some of the things we Christians have done to Jews in the past.
 
40.png
Reepicheep:
I don’t think Matt25 said the Dhimmi was a good thing. I think he said it wasn’t as bad as some of the things we Christians have done to Jews in the past.
It was an attempt to change the subject. You can’t accept Dhimmi in the future on those grounds.
 
40.png
gilliam:
It was an attempt to change the subject. You can’t accept Dhimmi in the future on those grounds.
Change the subject in what way? You referred to the dhimmi of the past not the future. That is what I responded to. If you want to compare a non-existent modern dhimmi with the real world then maybe a news forum isn’t the best place for you.
 
40.png
Matt25:
Change the subject in what way? You referred to the dhimmi of the past not the future. That is what I responded to. If you want to compare a non-existent modern dhimmi with the real world then maybe a news forum isn’t the best place for you.
The OP is talking about the future. Our future state if we don’t do something about it now.
 
40.png
gilliam:
The OP is talking about the future. Our future state if we don’t do something about it now.
Post number 3, from you was clearly about the past.
 
40.png
Matt25:
Post number 3, from you was clearly about the past.
That’s true, so we can define the term. I think we all know now what it means 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top