Thomas P.M. Barnett :: Weblog

I'm not buying it. While there are certain tenets of faith that admittedly are challenged by exposure to globalization, it is an incredible stretch to lump all religions together with Islam's stated jihad against the infidels and desire to remain a disconnected dark age society.

Excellent article until he gets to "The Trenches" where he sort of falls apart. If you had written the article it would have concluded more lucidly.

I like how the "old maxim" is really from a WWII Hollywood movie, but Nietzsche is pawned off as "that bit of nonsense from a frivolous yesteryear." I am suspicious of someone whose history is flawed, for their interpretations may be flawed as well.

Mr. Peters can't seem to connect the dots from things like "worship a merciful, loving god", reducing the "list of things forbidden", and supporting "equal rights to women" directly and obviously to a necessarily more secular world. The religious must repress to avoid oppression. The more pressing question is: what do we do if they won't?

Some how the equation between "Christians seek to legislate the behavior of fellow citizens" and Islamic terrrorists seems extreme and over wrought. This is comparing apples to artichokes. All democracies legislate what society allows and disallows. That is an ever moving target and there are always people who feel like their freedoms are being infringed. In a free country, if you feel like you are being infringed on, you protest, campaign and if you convince enough people, you get the legislate.

Mark- Hindu radicals have torn down a mosque in India on religious grounds (as mentioned in the article) and murdered christian missionaries. Jewish radicals assassinated Prime Minister Rabin after he started negotiating with Palestinians. And lets not forget that there's a reason why the muslims shudder at the word 'crusade'.

Dan- remember, there are many people who call themselves 'christian' who are anything but spiritual; Fred Phelps comes to mind. Remember, also, that mandating works isn't the same as forbidding actions.

Michael -

You can pull a radical rabbit out of any religious hat.

People (and nations) throughout history have used religion to justify bad behavior against others. You referenced the crusades - that along with the inquisiton were good examples of the dark age mentality that the Christian church grew out of. Some monks with a printing press and a salty German started a little movement called the reformation, and the resulting freedoms set forth the basis for our free society today.

The issue on the table here is the difference between open free societies and closed disconnected ones. My argument against the premise of this article is that Islam is the avowed enemy of open, free society. You cannot make the same claim for Christianity.

The hardcore disconnected nations rely on totalitarian regimes keeping their population in the dark and walling out external influences. Gap nations trying to stay in the dark oppress Christianity and promote Islam. That ought to tell you something.

Remember, also, there are groups here in the US which use Christian teachings to excuse cutting themselves off from the rest of society. And Kenya has a group called the Mungiki which isn't muslim, but otherwise sounds a lot like the Taliban. So is the Middle East's problem with Islam itself, or with people who find Islam (as the dominant religion) the most convenient tool for encouraging disconnectedness, just as Christianity is the most convenient tool here, and ethnicity is the most convenient tool for the Mungiki?