Day By Day© by Chris Muir.

Monday, February 13, 2006

I said "two years." Correct answer: "two days" to more Dhimmitude

[Please scroll down, or click here, to vote in the Conservative Slogan Contest. Your votes matter.] Ever since Cartoonistan began its ugly reign, I've been saying to anyone who will listen that this is just part of getting the West used to living under Sharia rules. It falls in line with the attacks on Piglet, the British flag, hot cross buns, ice cream containers, etc. I always end my little tirade, whenever I make it, by saying that in two years, the Islamists will be insisting that all women cover their heads, since they are offensive to Islamic men. Turns out that I was wrong by a couple of years. I just learned from this John Leo column that Islamic men in Linz, Austria, are already demanding that their sons' teachers, whether the women are Muslims or not, wear headscarves. Diana West calls this Dhimmitude:

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.
She also points out that Dhimmitude is not hypothetical; we're already well into it:
How far does it go? Worth noting, for example, is that on the BBC Web site, a religion page about Islam presents the angels and revelations of Islamic belief as historical fact, rather than spiritual conjecture (as is the case with its Christianity Web page); plus, it follows every mention of Mohammed with "(pbuh)," which means "peace be upon him" -- "as if," writes Will Wyatt, former BBC chief executive, in a letter to the Times of London, "the corporation itself were Muslim." Is it? Are we? These questions may not seem so outlandish if we assess the extent to which encroaching sharia has already changed the Western way. Calling these cartoons "unacceptable," and censoring ourselves "in respect" to Islam brings the West into compliance with a central statute of sharia. As Jyllands Posten's Flemming Rose has noted, that's not respect, that's submission. And if that's not dhimmitude, what is?
The list keeps growing: Piglet, ice cream containers, the British flag, headscarves, hot crossed buns, cartoons. I'm preparing myself by amassing a bit of money to get ready to pay my special Jew tax, 'cause that day is going to be here sooner than I expected. Talking to Technorati: , , , , ,