What cause do we believe in?
What cause do we believe in? What cause that is our cause is strong enough to defeat Islam? All that I can tell you is what my cause is -and is all about. Needless to say it begins and ends with religious faith. However, within that faith, as an organizing principle -not in all things but in all things where it is appropriate- is the philosophy of Radical Centrism. This philosophy assumes a number of otherwise Christian teachings, plus some that have their roots in Jewish tradition, and, I would argue, in Buddhist, Zoroastrian, Hindu, Taoist, Confucian, and other religious traditions. The point being that, unlike purely secular political philosophies, RC has the potential to bring people of different faiths together in a common cause that is NOT some form of wishy-washy ecumenism, but an ecumenism of affirmed differences along with affirmed common morality -exactly what is not shared by Islam. The message at the heart of Radical Centrism is this: * Believe with all your heart, mind, and soul in the truths of your faith. Be willing to live and die for these truths, all the way, even unto death. * There is no interest in compromising your faith for the sake of interfaith dialogue or anything similar even if, yes, such discussions may have value. Rather, RC says that we must agree to disagree, even strongly disagree. However, we also need to agree -strongly- about our shared morality and be willing to live and die for that, as well. * We are in a war. This means mobilizing for war, and willingness, even eagerness, to fight. This does not mean "kumbaya before all else." It does not mean peace before all else. It means, instead, peace when we can have it, which is far less than anyone would like. But this is the reality of war. * In a war, you may fight along-side others who have no interest in your faith. If you are a Christian this means fighting along side Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, and still others. Many Christians will perish in the fight -but so will many Jews and Buddhists and Hindus and others. But we all need to fight because Islam is the enemy of us all. * The war under discussion is a war of ideas, a crusade for truth and rightness. This war requires us to be truthful about exactly what it is we believe and believe in. Therefore it means total opposition -enmity- toward all those who do not believe in truth or shared moral principles we regard as essential to civilized life. That is, the enemy is Islam in all of its orthodox forms, and total rejection of the Koran. As Sam Harris has said, "Islam is the mother of all bad ideas," and it is time we said so, loudly and clearly, for all the world to hear. * Beyond this we need a vision of the future that the eventual winners in this war can share and live for. This is exactly what Radical Centrism is all about. Yes, RC is a method, a means to an end, a system for asking tough questions and setting priorities. However, it is also the ends toward which we strive, And that is a world where we discuss our real life differences and seek the objectively best solutions to our problems. It is a world where democracy is assumed because it is understood to mean far more than elections, but a system whereby differences as adjudicated in fairness because we are honest about our differences and regard actual free speech as essential to everything else -unlike the utterly phoney pretense of free speech that is our current system in America, whereby elites tell us what is "true" and "false" according to their political and economic calculations. * For this is a war in which we must also recognize the fact that the enemy isn't only Islam, it also is an unfair and corrupt political system that we must fight -with our best ideas- to overthrow. I hate to break the news, but Radical Centrism has the word "radical" in it for good reason. RC is anything but a side show, a nice way to say "let's settle our differences through discussion and all be friends." Radical Centrism is about fighting with all you've got for the sake of truth and what is right. Radical Centrists are Radical Crusaders. Billy R. ============================= CatholicCulture.org Islamic militants have a cause they believe in. Do we? By Phil Lawler | Jan 15, 2015 Newt Gingrich, of all people, should be familiar with the lesson that I was taught as the First Law of Politics: You can’t beat somebody with nobody. So I’m surprised that in _a column appearing in today’s Wall Street Journal_ (http://www.wsj.com/articles/newt-gingrich-why-were-losing-toradical-islam-1421280774?mod=hp_opinion) , on why we’re losing the battle against radical Islam, the former Speaker of the House doesn’t acknowledge the corollary: You can’t beat ideas without ideas. Gingrich begins with the observation that we—that is, the West—are at war with radical Islam. However, he notes, the West “doesn’t have a strategy for victory in this war.” Correct. He adds an important insight here: “It is extraordinary that the political correctness of Western elites has discouraged the study of what inspires those who dream of slaughtering us.” So far, so good. Gingrich goes on to say that Congress should hold hearings to explore the plans, the history, and the motivations that have given rise to the jihadist menace. Then, once we understand our enemies, we gather the smartest policy experts we can find, and “charge them with designing a national strategy for winning the global war against radical Islamists.” Although he sees the problem, then, Gingrich does not offer a solution. He recognizes that we need a strategy, but he is not ready to offer one. Since he suggests forming a blue-ribbon commission for the task, it would appear that he doesn’t think anyone else has a plausible strategic plan ready to put into place. Well, I’m sorry to say that I don’t have a plan for defeating the Islamic militants, either. But I do think that I know what crucial ingredient is missing from our plans. The jihadists believe in something. The West believes in nothing. And that’s where the First Law of Politics comes into play: You can’t beat something with nothing. You may say that the jihadists’ beliefs are dangerous, backward, toxic, benighted. So they are. Yet the followers of radical Islam believe in them, and that shared belief gives them a cause, a sense of mission. They sneer at the West because as they see it, we have no cause, no faith, and therefore do not have the moral strength to resist them. Respectable Muslim leaders say that the jihadists are wrong. “Islam is a religion of peace,” they insist. But the militants sneer at them, too. The imams who speak of peace appear to them as pawns of the West, whose faith has been watered down by contact with a decadent consumer society. They, the militants, are the ones who take Islam seriously and live out their faith with the same militant spirit that Mohammed showed. Do you think Muslim militants would be worried by the creation of a blue-ribbon committee to devise a strategy for the West? Not likely. They know that the West has money and influence and technical expertise. They still believe that they can defeat us, because they have something more powerful: a cause. Do we? Gingrich suggests that we need a much better understanding of the forces we are fighting against. I think we need a better understanding of what we are fighting for. -- -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
