Or would it? Is it possible that with the collapse of the Soviet Union signaled, not the downfall of Communism, but rather the rise of Communism in a form so completely unlike its former manifestation that would be almost unrecognizable?
The most basic definition of a Communist government is a society in which the leaders have absolute control over the people. In school, the children of Communist nations were taught that freedom was evil and would Capitalism would eventually collapse. Those who tried to escape Communist governments were often killed and if someone was not supportive of the government that someone might easily disappear in the middle of the night. Those who plotted against the government, or simply wanted to get away, could not even trust their own children.
In Shadow of the Giant, Orson Scott Card refers to conversion to Islam as a door through which people only go in one direction because any Muslim that converts to some other religion is in mortal danger from the radical Muslims of his nation. He writes that "once a nation chooses Islam it is never allowed to choose anything else." Does that sound familiar? The leaders of radical Islam have complete control over every aspect of the lives of their followers and have the power to kill those who criticize them in Muslim nations.
Just as important as their control over their followers, is the ability of radical, Islamic teachers to lead their people to war. Radical Islam has denounced freedom and the nation that became its champion in the Cold War era. Suicide bombers, car bombs, and other insurgent and terrorist activities are not random acts of violence by unconnected individuals, but rather the tactics of a dangerous, worldwide organization bent on the abolition of democracy. Although not all terrorists take their orders directly from such organizations as the Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, they are nonetheless inspired and driven to action by the influence of radical, Islamic teachers. Even before 9/11, Osama bin-Laden broadcasted numerous speeches with the intention of rallying Muslims all throughout the world against nations and individuals that he considered to be enemies of Islam. The terrorist activities that splatter the pages of our most recent history books and the newspapers of the present have authority, organization, and action. There can be no denying that radical Islam is at war.
The greatest weakness of the Soviet Union was that no matter how it tried to brainwash the public, there was no hiding the fact that it was an oppressive, tyrannous force enslaving free and powerful countries. Unlike the Soviet Union, radical Islam is not an official government, and therefore does not deal with such governmental issues as taxes and borders. Instead, it defends Islamic law by punishing anyone who violates it. Such punishments are bloody and often disproportionate to the crimes committed in the first place. However, the people under the rule of radical Islam are taught to believe in the laws by which they live. Since the leaders of radical are often looked to by the common people as teachers of right and wrong, they have a level of power over their people that the Soviet Union never had.
The greatest weakness of radical Islam is also that it has no specific leader. Its highest class is composed of different, competing factions. The most obvious division is the conflict between Shiites and Sunnis, which results in open bloodshed. A somewhat less well-known division is racial prejudice that is most rampant in places like Afghanistan, where the tribes are in constant competition.
It is quite telling that radical Islam murders over such a pathetically small and pointless argument such as the one between Shiites and Sunnis. The original split between Sunnis and Shiites was a dispute over who was the legitimate successor of Mohammed. While this may seem like an important issue, it is absurd for any true theist to give it any value. To say that it is of spiritual importance who it is that holds an earthly position of power is to suggest that that man has more authority than God Himself. It suggests that God-the almighty creator of the universe-cannot reach into the mortal world that He created without just the right person in power.
Islamic law states that Muslims are to bow to no one but God Himself. Yet isn't bowing just a symbol of submission. Is it really any better to give one's absolute loyalty to men like Osama bin-Laden without the symbol?
One of the many goals of the Al-Qaeda is the re-establishment of the Caliphate. Anyone who has not been hiding under a rock for the last decade will know that any Caliph appointed by the Al-Qaeda will be completely undeserving of the title. Any Muslim that submits to the rule of such a Caliph would automatically be at war with the US. His status would be an insult not only to all peaceable Muslims, but also to everyone that believes in an all-loving God and would signify radical Islam's absolute conversion to Communism. If such a day ever comes, Muslims everywhere will be forced to choose between peace and tolerance, and the perversion of faith that is Communist Islam.
Published by Brett Davison
My name is Brett and I was born on October 12, 1991. I'm a Christian, a history geek, a philosopher, an otaku, and a writer. View profile
- Why Osama Bin Laden Should Be Deemed the Most Influential Person of 2006Good, bad or indifferent, Osama Bin Laden has had a most profound effects on world history. His reach crosses borders and oceans and has traveled to remote parts of the world. He defines the world influential.
- Breaking News: Pres. Bush Learns that Osama Bin Laden is Still AroundAfter ignoring since learning he was responsible for 9/11, Pres. Bush returns to the subject of Osama Bin Laden...just in time for the fearlections.
How the American People Are Giving Osama Bin Laden What He WantedOsama bin-Laden didn't want much out of his explosive life before he seemingly died of typhoid in 2006 - he just wanted America to completely abandon its moral authority and lea...- The Fringe Benefits of Finding Osama Bin LadenThe search for Osama Bin Laden has become a cause celebre for America. But when, and if, Osama is found what would it really mean to Americans.
- American Aid to Osama Bin LadenDid the United States create Osama bin Laden when they supported the Afghans in their fight against the Russians?
- Background of Islam, Extremists, and How to Overcome
- CAIR Launches Major Campaign to Educate American Media About Islam
- Global Terrorism
- China: Beyond the Headlines Helps us Understand Contemporary China
- Has Osama Bin Laden Visited Chicago?
- Nancy Pelosi and Osama Bin Laden: Is There a Connection?
- Thoughts from a US Senate Staffer: Why Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, and Islamic Terr...

3 Comments
Post a CommentHave you ever read the Communist Manifesto? Or the Koran for that matter. If applying these "threats" to the texts on which they were based, one will discover that neither Radical Islam or the Soviet Union are anything like the ideals that inspired them. Terrorism is not created by the Koran, it is created by men, and I think that the Islamic faith is beautiful, when practised correctly. As for the Soviet Union, Stalin was no communist. Anyone who's done the slightest bit of research can tell you that... Communism isn't giving the government power--it's about giving the people the vote. I agree with Jeff, read Marx, then read Trotsky.
And in case, you do indeed, as Jeff stated, try to tell me I'm supporting terrorism by telling you how very wrong you are, then I'll make it easy on you.
Personally, I stand with Palestine.
Did I ever even once say that I thought the Crusades were a good idea? I think that the Crusades were the greatest insult God ever suffered, how could it not be when the so-called Christians murdered God's chosen people (Jews)? No true interpretation of the Bible can lead to the belief that an offensive Holy War is Biblically justifiable. After all, the Jews were expecting the Messiah to be some sort of Jewish Napoleon who would bring with him the destruction of Israel's enemies. What they got was Jesus Christ, who brought with Him the love of mercy of God. I actually agree with you that religion is dangerous, but I do not view Christianity in its pure form as a religion but as a personal relationship with God.
Also..you say "it is quite telling that radical Islam murders over such a pathetically small and pointless arguement as the one between Shiites and Sunnis." Any less pathetic then the differences in Christianity that racked Europe for centuries and caused millions of deaths? Even as recently as what happened in Northern Ireland? I think not. The point is, all religion, especially monotheism, is dangerous when zealots lead.