February 14, 2007

The Peaceful Majority

The Peaceful Majority
(Author unknown)

I used to know a man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War Two. They owned a number of large industries and estates. I asked him how many German people were true Nazis, and the answer he gave has stuck with me and guided my attitude toward fanaticism ever since.

"Very few people were true Nazis," he said, "but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything, I ended up in a concentration camp, and the Allies destroyed my factories."

We are told again and again by "experts" and "talking heads" that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace.

Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam. The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history.

It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. The hard quantifiable fact is that the "peaceful majority" is the "silent majority" and it is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia comprised Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

The average Japanese individual prior to World War Two was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians, most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet. And, who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery? Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving"?

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points:

Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.

Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awake one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.

Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others, have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.

As for us who watch it all unfold: we must pay attention to the only group that counts, the fanatics who threaten our way of life.

Lastly, I wish to add: At the risk of offending someone, I sincerely think that anyone who rejects this as just another political rant, or doubts the seriousness of this issue, or just deletes it without sending it on, is part of the problem. Lets quit laughing at, and forwarding, the jokes and cartoons which denigrate and ridicule our leaders in this war against terror. They are trying to protect the interests and well being of the US and its citizens. Best we support them.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I think this works both ways. In the U.S. the "peaceful majority" as well as the U.S. media, have, for the last six years, basically ceded the running of our country to the neo-conservatives who have trampled on human rights in the name of fighting terrorism, and presided over an erosion of freedom for the average citizen. We attempted to address this problem in the November 2006 elections, and, yet, as we can see, the Congress can't seem to muster even token resistance.

David Usher said...

You make a valid point, but I do not feel that my personal freedom has been eroded.

Nevertheless, if you believe your liberties have been eroded in some way that affects your life or causes you to live differently than you did 6 years ago, help me understand that effect. As a law-abiding person, you should have nothing to fear from a goverment that continues to be elected by the people. If you think the laws that have been passed since 9/11 do inflict serious constraints on Americans, how are we living differently than before? How are we 'oppressed?'

I think the majority of the media have sounded many alarms about erosion of personal liberties but have not made the case that the average American is negatively affected or cares much. Most of what the NY Times espouses is for 'beltway consumption,' IMHO.

Certainly, you don't believe that neo-conservatives any more than liberals have some hidden agenda to take away our basic freedoms?

The tension between fighting terrorism and restraining American liberties is certainly real, but has been exploited by some for political gain rather than a pure principled stand on our Bill of Rights.

If there's a real, rather than a contrived problem, a Democrat Congress should be fixing it, I agree