[annatar1914]

@annatar1914,

If the ruling ideas are the ideas of the ruling class, then muslims will first have to become part of the ruling class to gain cultural hegemony. Do you agree? Numbers does not per se equal power.

@Reichstraten :

Ruling classes require that some of the lower classes either believe in what the elites want to do, or are co-opted and bribed to follow and obey. Ruling classes also require having enough children to reproduce themselves. If present trends continue, neither of those requirements will happen and Europe will find itself under Islamic elites.

[Reichstraten]

Ruling classes require that some of the lower classes either believe in what the elites want to do, or are co-opted and bribed to follow and obey.

The distinction between power and authority.

Ruling classes also require having enough children to reproduce themselves.

Elites will change in the course of time, it doesn’t really matter that much if they reproduce themselves or not.

If present trends continue, neither of those requirements will happen and Europe will find itself under Islamic elites.

Which trends do you mean? Immigration policies in the west are getting stricter, birth rates among muslims are dropping and muslims lack the talent to organize themselves politically. Them taking over power seems unlikely to me.

[annatar1914]

The distinction between power and authority.



Elites will change in the course of time, it doesn’t really matter that much if they reproduce themselves or not.



Which trends do you mean? Immigration policies in the west are getting stricter, birth rates among muslims are dropping and muslims lack the talent to organize themselves politically. Them taking over power seems unlikely to me.

@Reichstraten :

To your first point (and recall we're in the " spirituality" subforum) authority without power is useless, and sensible people pick up on that.

As to the second point, the tautology of an inevitable " rotation of the elites" rather proves my point, doesn't it? Unless some Praetorian seizes power to maintain the social order in its essentials.

As to the third part, I'd like to see evidence for your assertions.

[Truth To Power]

Apparently Ayaan Hirsi Ali converted to christendom. She says that atheism does not “equip us for civilisational war”.
But I think her apocalypticism is one of the more negative aspects of the christian heritage. Thoughts?

It seems her "conversion" is not the result of any actual religious conviction but rather an instrumentalist resort to some ideology she considers capable of resisting the dark, irrational triple threat of Chinese-Russian fascism, oil-money-fueled Islamism, and post-modernist wokeism, having concluded that atheism is not up to the job. But countering those specific threats seems an awfully temporary, narrow, even ad hoc task on which to base one's view of eternity. While atheism per se is not a standard that people of reason, honesty and good will would be likely to rally round -- as Ayn Rand so tartly observed, "The opponent is too unworthy" -- surely liberty, justice and truth are, and are equally valid in opposition to the ideological evils of any age and place.

[Potemkin]

It seems her "conversion" is not the result of any actual religious conviction but rather an instrumentalist resort to some ideology she considers capable of resisting the dark, irrational triple threat of Chinese-Russian fascism, oil-money-fueled Islamism, and post-modernist wokeism, having concluded that atheism is not up to the job. But countering those specific threats seems an awfully temporary, narrow, even ad hoc task on which to base one's view of eternity. While atheism per se is not a standard that people of reason, honesty and good will would be likely to rally round -- as Ayn Rand so tartly observed, "The opponent is too unworthy" -- surely liberty, justice and truth are, and are equally valid in opposition to the ideological evils of any age and place.

I agree with this, and I would add that Ayaan Hirsi Ali just doesn’t seem to be the believing type. Her ‘conversion’ to Christianity seems to be about as superficial as her ‘conversion’ to radical Islamism in her youth that she describes in her article. She seems to believe in anything for purely instrumental reasons, and when her priorities change, her ‘faith’ changes too. It never seems to penetrate to the depths of her being, to her spiritual core. She should probably have remained an atheist - it seems to come naturally to her.

[Truth To Power]

I agree with this, and I would add that Ayaan Hirsi Ali just doesn’t seem to be the believing type. Her ‘conversion’ to Christianity seems to be about as superficial as her ‘conversion’ to radical Islamism in her youth that she describes in her article. She seems to believe in anything for purely instrumental reasons, and when her priorities change, her ‘faith’ changes too. It never seems to penetrate to the depths of her being, to her spiritual core. She should probably have remained an atheist - it seems to come naturally to her.

Agreed. Her (IMO lucky) husband, the historian Niall Ferguson, is also known to be a lifelong atheist, though he advocates the study of religion and does occasionally take his kids to church.

[Deutschmania]

I would surmise that her supposed conversion is one of convenience . Ayaan Hirsi Ali seems to hold to the same sort of outlook as that of neoconservative founding father Leo Strauss .

Kinneging noted that Strauss preferred the ancient rationalists over believers in divine revelation. Strauss had no anti-religious feelings but was not himself a believer. Despite this, he saw religion as an ally of philosophy in the quest for truth. The pursuit of the truth, according to Strauss, is indirect and depends on the work of great thinkers finding meaning in great works. Strauss humbly considered himself “only a scholar” and not a philosopher (i.e., a great thinker). He was trying to understand great philosophers, largely serving as a commentator rather than giving an account of what he deemed the truth to be. However, as Kinneging pointed out, Strauss did pass judgment in his writing, which shows that he was trying to grasp the truth after all. Lastly, for Strauss, contemporary mass, democratic, egalitarian education meant that great philosophers were no longer possible to produce. Next, Zbigniew Janowski, a former professor at Towson University (Maryland, USA), proceeded with his talk entitled “Is Leo Strauss Still Worth Reading?” Despite claiming that “Straussians are a philosophical sect” and that he was not a Straussian, Janowski made a compelling case for reading Strauss today. Janowski emphasized the ‘noble lie’ of equality in modern democratic societies, a lie that cannot be criticized in the West today without grave repercussions. Democracy veers into anarchy because of a lack of authority, after which there is a dissolution of the social order and a slide into tyranny. Strauss was not convinced of the veracity of religious claims, but he saw that religion could be needed to guarantee social order. According to him, “Philosophers have a moral obligation to lie nobly.” Strauss was an atheist who mourned the demise of the natural law theories that had played such a crucial role in the wider religious ethics of the West, since he saw a genuine need for them in our own age, but essentially, he remained unconvinced by them. [url]://europeanconservative.com/articles/essay/philosophy-as-knowledge-of-the-whole-remembering-leo-strauss/[/url]

To the neoconservative opportunist , the Christian faith is no more than a useful myth , that serves the purpose of the so called noble lie. To quote Napolean Bonaparte , “Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich.” As for me , while some might expect that as an avowed Marxist I would be by extension an atheist , I am actually more aptly termed an agnostic , who validates the arguable merit of both natural law , and natural religion. I do not deem it necessary to favor one particular religious faith tradition over another. However many , if any , gods there are is of no consequence to me. But to Ali , cultural Christianity underpins western civilization , and therefore is integral to her in group identity. I feel that these two videos present a quality critique of the situation , a take that I believe can be appreciated by Christians as well as atheists alike.