by G. R. Revelle
One half of a thumb up, one and a half down.
This is a hard review for me to do because it's by a start-up author who I believe self-publishes under his own company, Smultron Publications. Since I myself hope to have some of my writing published one day, I want to support the effort of Mr. Revelle. But there are things within this book that make it impossible for me to give it a two thumbs up.
The book is historical fiction, including bits of 20th century Norwegian and Swedish history, and World War II history. The historical information and several main themes within this book appeal to me. Progressivism, eugenics, and genetic manipulation are exposed and discussed. These are important ideas. Society benefits from conversations about the sins of its past. Too often they are forgotten under the broiling current of contemporary societal conversations, even when those conversations follow lines of reasoning similar to the ideas acknowledged as mistakes of past generations. From the introduction to Stolen Genes, Stolen Children, Mr. Revelle himself appears to have written, at least partially, with a goal of inspiring such conversation.
The plot is compelling. I was drawn in, although it took me several chapters to feel the pull. The characters are well done, although a few are somewhat one-dimensional. Mr. Revelle does a good job describing scenery and sounds in nature and the city.
The story is set in 1965, but also contains many flashbacks to the days before, during, and immediately after World War II. In some ways, the flashbacks are the story, more than the later story line.
While reading the paper one afternoon, Karin sees the name, Arlene Angel, in a list of nurses being tried for their participation in the euthanasia programs practiced under the Third Reich. This name jumped out at Karin, because it was a pseudonym occasionally used long ago by Alena Engela, a good friend from Karin's nursing school days. Reminded of the close friendship they had enjoyed in their early years, Karin sets out to contact this Arlene Angel to determine if it is indeed her friend. And if so, to lend whatever aid and support she can to Alena during the trial.
In the process of digging through old records, hoping to find a way to exonerate her friend, and at the same time experiencing continuing mortification at the extent of the euthanasia program, Karin discovers several unexpected connections.
The flashbacks in the narrative trace the history of Alena; aeronautics engineer, Lorentz Klein; the Norwegian Resistance movement; and Karin, herself; along with a number of less major characters.
The story line is very interesting and contains a few twists and turns that I perhaps ought to have seen coming, but didn't.
The negative aspects of the book begin immediately, in the first paragraphs of the prologue. The author introduces his work with a somewhat hoaky fictional account of how an early farming woman discovered fertilizer when an early herdsman let his water buffalo wander onto the woman's garden. The somewhat silly account seems unrelated to the point for which the author uses it. And it presents a weak beginning to what later in the prologue becomes a very good introduction to the philosophies presented in Stolen Genes, Stolen Children.
Regarding the narrative's exploration of the philosophies or ideals of genetic engineering and eugenics, the connection between the fictional narrative and a deeper analysis of such philosophies is somewhat weak. The author leaves to the reader most of the thinking and exploring . The narrative certainly introduces the the subject and shows it from several angles. But from the build-up in the introduction, I was expecting a richer or somehow different depth of discussion of the subject.
The biggest negative for this story, however, is that it is a prime example of the risks of self-publishing; or put another way, it lends credence to the importance of a professional editorial staff. The book is filled with grammatical errors. Truly filled. To the point of distracting from the story line. There are many points at which a sentence begins one way and ends in a different direction. The reader is left interpreting what the author intended. There are sentences in which the subject or object of a clause is missing, and again the reader must guess. Sentence parts often don't agree in person, number, tense, voice, etc. Commas are used very sloppily, often giving the sentence an entirely different sense than that which the author obviously intends. There are many places the spellcheck or auto-correct was trusted in error.
And let me reiterate. The book is filled with mistakes of this sort. Sometimes there are several examples per page.
The narrative also contains at least one historical error, of the sort which a professional editor is trained to catch. The author includes as historical, the mythology surrounding the song, Edelweiss, that Richard Rogers wrote for the 1959, The Sound of Music. One scene in the book describes a character getting sentimental over the song as an Austrian folk song from his childhood in the early years of the 20th century.
From the prologue, "The novel... is based on facts, figures, and personalities, though the characters and plot themselves are purely fictional." The author is making a claim to the historicity of the information presented within the fictional plot. The somewhat lengthy introductory pages of the prologue seem to be intended to make people consider and evaluate the idea of eugenics and its place in the world today. Besides just being annoying and distracting to a reader, the sloppy presentation of the story distracts from the author's purpose.
A reader is left wondering about the care that went into the historical research and the accuracy with which it is presented. "If the author is so careless with his editing, how can I trust his research?"
Especially when an author is making a claim toward a certain ideal, such an author ought to use care in presenting the material. The carelessness of presentation casts doubt upon the entire issue.
Showing posts with label political theory. Show all posts
Showing posts with label political theory. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
The Day They Came to Arrest the Book
by Nat Hentoff
Thumbs mostly up.
More than telling a story, Mr. Hentoff uses this book as a platform from which to introduce, in a manner interesting to middle through high school aged kids, the idea of censorship and book banning. The setting is a somewhat generic Anywhere, USA, town high school, aptly named, George Mason High School. The cast of characters includes students: Barnaby, the high school newspaper editor of Jewish descent; Gordon, an African American young man; Kate, an aspiring feminist; and several other minor characters: students, teachers, the principle, a past and present librarian, and various townspeople.
The basic story line begins with a history teacher, Mrs. Baines, juxtaposing Huckleberry Finn with readings from Alexis de Tocqueville in order to introduce her 19th century American history class. Gordon, the African American student, is frustrated, seething would be more accurate, over the racial slurs and constant use of the "n-word" in Huckleberry Finn. After his father demands the principle remove this book from the school entirely, Mr. Moore, the smooth talking principle tries to deal with the situation discretely. He encounters resistance, however, from both Mrs. Baines and the new librarian, Miss Fitzgerald. They demand the principle follow official procedure.
This leads to the school board appointing a review committee which will hold community hearings. The committee will then approve a recommendation by vote and present it to the school board for guidance. The school board must then hold its own open meetings and cast a vote. Throughout this process the faculty, student body, and entire community becomes involved. Eventually the situation ends up on national news.
Mr. Hentoff does a fairly good job of trying to portray all the various sides of the issue of censorship within a school setting. He addresses the ideas of students being a captive audience, of schools being houses of learning, and the debate over at what age and in what way students ought to be introduced to analyzing ideas different than their own. He addresses the idea of a restricted book shelf and students opting out of certain class materials. He addresses teachers having autonomy within their classes. He is a little weak, in my opinion, on parental authority and rights.
I think Mr. Hentoff did a pretty good job of spinning a compelling plot out of a civics lesson.
The characters are somewhat unevenly drawn. The adults are developed very well. They are often quite comical in their idiosyncrasies. The kids are not very well developed except to tell us one or two things that might be important to them. The author takes a couple of chapters to introduce the students, but it seemed a bit rushed.
There is one somewhat blaring irony that I can't decide if the author stuck in intentionally. I think I've decided it was an oversight, since it was mentioned, but it's irony never brought out. At one point the kids are trying to think of an example of a book nobody could disapprove. Kate, the budding feminist, who has jumped on the anti-Huck Finn bandwagon for it's portrayal of women's place in society, suggests Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice as a book about which nobody could complain. Since so many of the issues in Pride and Prejudice revolve around what we might consider very restrictive roles for women in society, it somewhat surprised me. It was either done intentionally, in order to show the blunders any strongly opinionated person might sometimes stumble into, or it was sloppy work on the part of the author and editor.
Another interesting point of view is portrayed in a conversation about a new class offering the content of which is aimed at teaching different sides of cultural issues. The stated goal is to pacify parents who might worry that teachers are too liberal on social issues. The list of typical issues with which conservatives might be concerned: flat earth, forced sterilization of the poor, and the use of military might against Russia. (This was written in 1982). I found it interesting that forced sterilization is portrayed as a conservative issue, since in its heyday, it was quite obviously a progressive issue. I also, even as an active Conservative, don't know too may people (read: any) who believe the earth is flat.
All in all this book could be useful for teaching about political activism, the role of community and parental involvement in schools, and the obvious topic of censorship and banning of books. But I would say that a parent would want to read this book along with a child, because of the many shades of opinion portrayed. The book also leads to a conclusion with which all parents may not totally agree.
I myself mostly agree with the solution, but there are things within the book I would have discussed further with a student. I didn't like the way some of the opinions were presented and the slant that was taken toward some viewpoints.
Thumbs mostly up.
More than telling a story, Mr. Hentoff uses this book as a platform from which to introduce, in a manner interesting to middle through high school aged kids, the idea of censorship and book banning. The setting is a somewhat generic Anywhere, USA, town high school, aptly named, George Mason High School. The cast of characters includes students: Barnaby, the high school newspaper editor of Jewish descent; Gordon, an African American young man; Kate, an aspiring feminist; and several other minor characters: students, teachers, the principle, a past and present librarian, and various townspeople.
The basic story line begins with a history teacher, Mrs. Baines, juxtaposing Huckleberry Finn with readings from Alexis de Tocqueville in order to introduce her 19th century American history class. Gordon, the African American student, is frustrated, seething would be more accurate, over the racial slurs and constant use of the "n-word" in Huckleberry Finn. After his father demands the principle remove this book from the school entirely, Mr. Moore, the smooth talking principle tries to deal with the situation discretely. He encounters resistance, however, from both Mrs. Baines and the new librarian, Miss Fitzgerald. They demand the principle follow official procedure.
This leads to the school board appointing a review committee which will hold community hearings. The committee will then approve a recommendation by vote and present it to the school board for guidance. The school board must then hold its own open meetings and cast a vote. Throughout this process the faculty, student body, and entire community becomes involved. Eventually the situation ends up on national news.
Mr. Hentoff does a fairly good job of trying to portray all the various sides of the issue of censorship within a school setting. He addresses the ideas of students being a captive audience, of schools being houses of learning, and the debate over at what age and in what way students ought to be introduced to analyzing ideas different than their own. He addresses the idea of a restricted book shelf and students opting out of certain class materials. He addresses teachers having autonomy within their classes. He is a little weak, in my opinion, on parental authority and rights.
I think Mr. Hentoff did a pretty good job of spinning a compelling plot out of a civics lesson.
The characters are somewhat unevenly drawn. The adults are developed very well. They are often quite comical in their idiosyncrasies. The kids are not very well developed except to tell us one or two things that might be important to them. The author takes a couple of chapters to introduce the students, but it seemed a bit rushed.
There is one somewhat blaring irony that I can't decide if the author stuck in intentionally. I think I've decided it was an oversight, since it was mentioned, but it's irony never brought out. At one point the kids are trying to think of an example of a book nobody could disapprove. Kate, the budding feminist, who has jumped on the anti-Huck Finn bandwagon for it's portrayal of women's place in society, suggests Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice as a book about which nobody could complain. Since so many of the issues in Pride and Prejudice revolve around what we might consider very restrictive roles for women in society, it somewhat surprised me. It was either done intentionally, in order to show the blunders any strongly opinionated person might sometimes stumble into, or it was sloppy work on the part of the author and editor.
Another interesting point of view is portrayed in a conversation about a new class offering the content of which is aimed at teaching different sides of cultural issues. The stated goal is to pacify parents who might worry that teachers are too liberal on social issues. The list of typical issues with which conservatives might be concerned: flat earth, forced sterilization of the poor, and the use of military might against Russia. (This was written in 1982). I found it interesting that forced sterilization is portrayed as a conservative issue, since in its heyday, it was quite obviously a progressive issue. I also, even as an active Conservative, don't know too may people (read: any) who believe the earth is flat.
All in all this book could be useful for teaching about political activism, the role of community and parental involvement in schools, and the obvious topic of censorship and banning of books. But I would say that a parent would want to read this book along with a child, because of the many shades of opinion portrayed. The book also leads to a conclusion with which all parents may not totally agree.
I myself mostly agree with the solution, but there are things within the book I would have discussed further with a student. I didn't like the way some of the opinions were presented and the slant that was taken toward some viewpoints.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Waterman's Boy
by Susan Sharpe
Thumbs mostly down.
Ben Warren and his friend Matt, are growing up along Chesapeake Bay. Ben's dad is a waterman. He does crabbing and clamming and oystering, all according to their season. The harvests are not as big as they used to be. Money is harder to come by and the towns along the bay are transitioning from home-town fishing villages to tourist destinations.
David Watchman is a scientist who is studying the microbiology of the bay to try to determine the causes of the decline in the health of its flora and fauna. Ben's father, Duke, along with others who make their living from the bay, is suspicious of scientists, and the government regulations and programs of which such scientists are harbingers.
This potentially volatile situation comes to a head when Ben and Matt discover an illegal dumping site hidden in the marsh. The site is filled with all kinds of junk including many barrels of what appears to be waste oil.
The story unfolds into a happy ending. Duke Warren comes to respect David Watchman. The town decides to study the effects of expansion before allowing more shopping centers and resorts and attractions to develop. Everyone realizes they want to save the bay and if they all get along and respect each other this will happen smoothly.
Anyone who loves both nature and small government will appreciate the quandary in which these town folks find themselves. My main complaint with the story is that the solution appears simple. The characters are somewhat one-dimensional. Duke Warren is set in his ways and is portrayed as somewhat naive for not wanting government regulations. The bad guy ends up being a newcomer to town (aka capitalist) who is involved in a business catering to the tourist trade. The scientist and Ben are the only multi-dimensional characters. Everyone else is a stereotype.
My second complaint with the story is not so much with the story itself as with the format of the book and what it implies. The book is obviously designed to be used in a classroom, because it has, in the front flap, one of those charts to show which students used it which years. As far as literature goes, the book leaves much to be desired. I can't imagine it being useful to teach about literature and good writing. The best use to which this story could be used in a classroom is to teach about pollution and environmentalism. I have a problem with using such one-dimensional characters to accomplish this. People are not only naive or evil or good or thoughtful. And in real life the solutions to problems such as those portrayed in the book are never simple. People and communities are affected by pollution and expansion and a changing income base on a multitude of levels. It seems somewhat manipulative to portray such a simple solution. I don't blame the author for this. I have no idea of her intentions. But using the book in a classroom to teach some sort of morality based upon such a simple solution seems somewhat dishonest.
Yet a third hurdle to my endorsement of the book is that Ben and Matt break some major rules and behave in a dangerous manner in order to help find the bad guy. The author does have an authority figure point this out to the boys, but then they are celebrated and thanked profusely by the community, which could tend to outweigh the effect of the rebuke in the mind of a young reader who might be drawn to the perceived heroism of the boys.
So to sum up, the plot is not bad. In fact the plot itself is somewhat well done. The yarn is good.
The characters ought to be better. The implications of how the book might be used are frightening. Any moral lessons are questionable and ought to include parental involvement.
Thumbs mostly down.
Ben Warren and his friend Matt, are growing up along Chesapeake Bay. Ben's dad is a waterman. He does crabbing and clamming and oystering, all according to their season. The harvests are not as big as they used to be. Money is harder to come by and the towns along the bay are transitioning from home-town fishing villages to tourist destinations.
David Watchman is a scientist who is studying the microbiology of the bay to try to determine the causes of the decline in the health of its flora and fauna. Ben's father, Duke, along with others who make their living from the bay, is suspicious of scientists, and the government regulations and programs of which such scientists are harbingers.
This potentially volatile situation comes to a head when Ben and Matt discover an illegal dumping site hidden in the marsh. The site is filled with all kinds of junk including many barrels of what appears to be waste oil.
The story unfolds into a happy ending. Duke Warren comes to respect David Watchman. The town decides to study the effects of expansion before allowing more shopping centers and resorts and attractions to develop. Everyone realizes they want to save the bay and if they all get along and respect each other this will happen smoothly.
Anyone who loves both nature and small government will appreciate the quandary in which these town folks find themselves. My main complaint with the story is that the solution appears simple. The characters are somewhat one-dimensional. Duke Warren is set in his ways and is portrayed as somewhat naive for not wanting government regulations. The bad guy ends up being a newcomer to town (aka capitalist) who is involved in a business catering to the tourist trade. The scientist and Ben are the only multi-dimensional characters. Everyone else is a stereotype.
My second complaint with the story is not so much with the story itself as with the format of the book and what it implies. The book is obviously designed to be used in a classroom, because it has, in the front flap, one of those charts to show which students used it which years. As far as literature goes, the book leaves much to be desired. I can't imagine it being useful to teach about literature and good writing. The best use to which this story could be used in a classroom is to teach about pollution and environmentalism. I have a problem with using such one-dimensional characters to accomplish this. People are not only naive or evil or good or thoughtful. And in real life the solutions to problems such as those portrayed in the book are never simple. People and communities are affected by pollution and expansion and a changing income base on a multitude of levels. It seems somewhat manipulative to portray such a simple solution. I don't blame the author for this. I have no idea of her intentions. But using the book in a classroom to teach some sort of morality based upon such a simple solution seems somewhat dishonest.
Yet a third hurdle to my endorsement of the book is that Ben and Matt break some major rules and behave in a dangerous manner in order to help find the bad guy. The author does have an authority figure point this out to the boys, but then they are celebrated and thanked profusely by the community, which could tend to outweigh the effect of the rebuke in the mind of a young reader who might be drawn to the perceived heroism of the boys.
So to sum up, the plot is not bad. In fact the plot itself is somewhat well done. The yarn is good.
The characters ought to be better. The implications of how the book might be used are frightening. Any moral lessons are questionable and ought to include parental involvement.
Friday, April 16, 2010
Do you Hear When They Cry
by Fauziya Kassindja
Thumbs up.
This was a hard book to read. One of those narratives that grabs one, and drags him or her through horrible real life experiences, and doesn't let go until he or she has reached the end.
Ms Kassindja is a Muslim woman from Toga, Africa. In October of 1994, she ran away from home at 17 in order to escape a polygamous marriage to an older man and and the prospect of female circumcision (known legally in America as Female Genital Mutilation or FMG). Unlike the book I reviewed a few weeks ago, Cruel and Usual Punishment, this author has clung to her Muslim faith and the book reflects this adherence throughout. It gives a much more positive picture of the Muslim faith and those who follow it.
The book, however, is about so much more than that. During the first several chapters, Ms Kassindja teaches the reader all about what her life was life in Toga. This is very skillfully done and I learned many things, all the while enjoying the happy narrative of the author's younger life.
When Ms Kassindja eventually had to leave her homeland, she stayed briefly in Germany. From there, at the urging of a friend, she chose to come to America and request political asylum. Ms Kassindja spoke English and wanted to finish her education. With few options available to her, this seemed like a reasonable plan.
This latter part of the book, by far the longest part of the narrative, is much less joyful then the first. The ordeal that the author lived through while awaiting her various hearings is a travesty. And if an accurate depiction of how America treats her refugees it is a true blot on our national conscience.
It would be impossible for me to list everything Ms. Kassinja writes about. But eventually she was put in touch with several advocates who used her case to set precedence in ruling impending FMG as warranting asylum. She was released on parole after spending 16 months in a series of facilities, some of that time in maximum security prisons sharing a cell with women incarcerated for violent crime. Shews eventually granted asylum in June of 1996.
Hopefully all the publicity her case caused also has lead to better, more humane conditions for those who find themselves running to us in fear.
I realize there are many issues, political and social, to consider with regard to US immigration policy. There are no easy answers. But after reading Ms Kassindja's account, I certainly am more aware of some basic human conditions that can in our INS detention facilities. The book puts a human face on an otherwise impersonal definition of a detainee and elicits empathy toward those with nowhere to run.
Thumbs up.
This was a hard book to read. One of those narratives that grabs one, and drags him or her through horrible real life experiences, and doesn't let go until he or she has reached the end.
Ms Kassindja is a Muslim woman from Toga, Africa. In October of 1994, she ran away from home at 17 in order to escape a polygamous marriage to an older man and and the prospect of female circumcision (known legally in America as Female Genital Mutilation or FMG). Unlike the book I reviewed a few weeks ago, Cruel and Usual Punishment, this author has clung to her Muslim faith and the book reflects this adherence throughout. It gives a much more positive picture of the Muslim faith and those who follow it.
The book, however, is about so much more than that. During the first several chapters, Ms Kassindja teaches the reader all about what her life was life in Toga. This is very skillfully done and I learned many things, all the while enjoying the happy narrative of the author's younger life.
When Ms Kassindja eventually had to leave her homeland, she stayed briefly in Germany. From there, at the urging of a friend, she chose to come to America and request political asylum. Ms Kassindja spoke English and wanted to finish her education. With few options available to her, this seemed like a reasonable plan.
This latter part of the book, by far the longest part of the narrative, is much less joyful then the first. The ordeal that the author lived through while awaiting her various hearings is a travesty. And if an accurate depiction of how America treats her refugees it is a true blot on our national conscience.
It would be impossible for me to list everything Ms. Kassinja writes about. But eventually she was put in touch with several advocates who used her case to set precedence in ruling impending FMG as warranting asylum. She was released on parole after spending 16 months in a series of facilities, some of that time in maximum security prisons sharing a cell with women incarcerated for violent crime. Shews eventually granted asylum in June of 1996.
Hopefully all the publicity her case caused also has lead to better, more humane conditions for those who find themselves running to us in fear.
I realize there are many issues, political and social, to consider with regard to US immigration policy. There are no easy answers. But after reading Ms Kassindja's account, I certainly am more aware of some basic human conditions that can in our INS detention facilities. The book puts a human face on an otherwise impersonal definition of a detainee and elicits empathy toward those with nowhere to run.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Cruel and Usual Punishment
by Nonie Darwish
Thumbs Up.
I really hate to give this book a thumbs up. Not because of the book itself however, but because the subject matter is so troubling.
Ms Darwish is an Egyptian born former Muslim. After 9/11 she decided to start a public stand against her former religion. This is her second book. She also is co founder of Former Muslims United and a public speaker and writer on issues of Islamic Sharia and jihad.
In the first part of the book, Ms Darwish leads the reader to a clearer understanding of how Sharia law affects individual Muslims. She shows the extreme violence against and oppression of women and non-Muslims particularly. She also analyzes of how that attitude negatively affects various other demographics like the poor and the sons and grown men and family life in general. She shows the culture of fear that is a necessary part of Islamic society. She shows how Sharia naturally effects the violence that we in the West like to think of as associated only with extreme Islam. Most of us are familiar with the Q'uran as the Muslim holy book. Ms Darwish introduces Western readers to the idea of Hadith, which is the collection of sayings by Muhammad that were collected by followers who were close to him; and also to the origins of Sharia, which was codified in the first hundred years or so after the death of Muhammad.
The result is quite frightening. I cannot summarize well what I felt after reading the first half of this book. Ms Darwish documents not only the many passages from the Q'uran, but also some of the many statements of Hadith that not only support, but also demand violence against particularly Jews; but also those of any religion outside of Islam; those without a religion; and also even those Muslims who don't do Sharia properly. More troubling still, Ms Darwish clearly shows how subjective the idea of following Sharia properly really is. And follow this with the truth that any individual Muslim has permission, by their own religious precepts, to kill anyone within Islam who can be perceived as not following Sharia. Oh, and that same permission extends, of course, to those outside of Islam.
In the second part of the book, Ms Darwish analyzes how Sharia law and its demands on individuals translate into society as a whole and international relations. She teaches about Dar al Islam (society within Islam, or the Islamic state, wherever that may be, geographically) and Dar al Harb (literally the house of war, or society outside of Islam). She shows how this distinction has evolved into the various geographical and political troubles today between Islam and others. These would include the constant violence in SE Asia and Somalia between Muslims and non Muslims, and even among Muslims; the civil war in what was formerly Yugoslavia; the constant acts of individual terror in western countries and elsewhere; and even the demands within western countries for more and more Sharia. By narrating many specific situations and also a chapter tracing the history of Egypt as an example, Ms Darwish successfully argues that the West needs to view Islam less as a religion and more as a political system. She includes a quite scathing reprimand of our media and its failure to report accurately the atrocities inflicted by Muslims around the world.
Ms Darwish uses an example that worked well to highlight the political nature of Islam and how we need to address it. She compared our relationship to the USSR during the cold war, to our relationship with Islam today. If Communism would have successfully sold itself as a religion, would we have allowed Communist temples in our communities or Communist studies departments in our universities? Just so, argues Ms Darwish, Islam is a political system. More specifically, it is a political system that in its purest sense views the West, and those who do not choose to subject themselves to that particular political system, as political enemies. And yet we invite into our communities the mosques that teach hatred of our way of life and even violence toward it. We allow Arab and Middle Eastern studies departments to be promoted and paid for by those who want to obliterate our society from the face of the earth.
Ms Darwish shows very clearly that Islam is not a religion of peace. Islam does call for violence. Through her use of only some of the 35, 213 verses calling for such violence, she shows that any one outside of Islam is at risk. But more troubling still is the second method Islam has used throughout history to spread itself and its violent and oppressive culture. That is the seemingly peaceful migration of Muslims into other geographic areas. These pilgrims, one might call them, are forbidden to assimilate. They are exhorted regularly by their religious leaders to hate those outside of their religion. They are encouraged to find fellow Muslims who are not following Sharia closely enough. And finally they have both encouragement and also the demand from their religion to show violence toward and even kill those with whom they disagree. Even what we might call a moderate religious leader finished up prayers every Friday with the exhortation to kill the infidel. It is part of what we might call the prescribed liturgy.
Ms Darwish shows, these communities of Muslims are spreading and growing like wildfire in western countries. Several European countries are already facing tough decisions with regard to the Muslim community and because of the very nature of Islam. And although there are upright Muslims who we might like to think of as moderate, the religion itself produces such a culture of fear, that we must not expect these people to speak out against the violence promoted by some within Islam. Their life could be forfeit, because of their own religious precepts. Even if perhaps only 10% of Muslims choose to follow the prescribed violence, we can see how risky speaking out is for those who might choose to do so.
When Islam is seen in this light, we in the West, with our relativist attitudes and multi-culturalism are faced with a dilemma. And so far we have not within our culture or political structures clarified a way to deal with this. Ms Darwish gives her list of nine things she thinks could be successfully implemented in the West to stop what she describes as the Islamization of our society.
Finally, Ms Darwish gives her hopes that the religion of Islam itself could experience a reformation. Unfortunately, I can't figure how this would work. Within the Christian church, the Reformation called for the church to return to its origins, the Holy Scriptures. If what Ms Darwish taught us in the whole rest of her book is correct, Islam cannot be reformed without entirely leaving its foundational writings. The entire religion is poisoned from its inception with violence and oppression.
Ms Darwish makes clear that something must be done by those who wish to remain free. Whether we have the strength of will or the moral fortitude to accomplish this is not at all clear.
Thumbs Up.
I really hate to give this book a thumbs up. Not because of the book itself however, but because the subject matter is so troubling.
Ms Darwish is an Egyptian born former Muslim. After 9/11 she decided to start a public stand against her former religion. This is her second book. She also is co founder of Former Muslims United and a public speaker and writer on issues of Islamic Sharia and jihad.
In the first part of the book, Ms Darwish leads the reader to a clearer understanding of how Sharia law affects individual Muslims. She shows the extreme violence against and oppression of women and non-Muslims particularly. She also analyzes of how that attitude negatively affects various other demographics like the poor and the sons and grown men and family life in general. She shows the culture of fear that is a necessary part of Islamic society. She shows how Sharia naturally effects the violence that we in the West like to think of as associated only with extreme Islam. Most of us are familiar with the Q'uran as the Muslim holy book. Ms Darwish introduces Western readers to the idea of Hadith, which is the collection of sayings by Muhammad that were collected by followers who were close to him; and also to the origins of Sharia, which was codified in the first hundred years or so after the death of Muhammad.
The result is quite frightening. I cannot summarize well what I felt after reading the first half of this book. Ms Darwish documents not only the many passages from the Q'uran, but also some of the many statements of Hadith that not only support, but also demand violence against particularly Jews; but also those of any religion outside of Islam; those without a religion; and also even those Muslims who don't do Sharia properly. More troubling still, Ms Darwish clearly shows how subjective the idea of following Sharia properly really is. And follow this with the truth that any individual Muslim has permission, by their own religious precepts, to kill anyone within Islam who can be perceived as not following Sharia. Oh, and that same permission extends, of course, to those outside of Islam.
In the second part of the book, Ms Darwish analyzes how Sharia law and its demands on individuals translate into society as a whole and international relations. She teaches about Dar al Islam (society within Islam, or the Islamic state, wherever that may be, geographically) and Dar al Harb (literally the house of war, or society outside of Islam). She shows how this distinction has evolved into the various geographical and political troubles today between Islam and others. These would include the constant violence in SE Asia and Somalia between Muslims and non Muslims, and even among Muslims; the civil war in what was formerly Yugoslavia; the constant acts of individual terror in western countries and elsewhere; and even the demands within western countries for more and more Sharia. By narrating many specific situations and also a chapter tracing the history of Egypt as an example, Ms Darwish successfully argues that the West needs to view Islam less as a religion and more as a political system. She includes a quite scathing reprimand of our media and its failure to report accurately the atrocities inflicted by Muslims around the world.
Ms Darwish uses an example that worked well to highlight the political nature of Islam and how we need to address it. She compared our relationship to the USSR during the cold war, to our relationship with Islam today. If Communism would have successfully sold itself as a religion, would we have allowed Communist temples in our communities or Communist studies departments in our universities? Just so, argues Ms Darwish, Islam is a political system. More specifically, it is a political system that in its purest sense views the West, and those who do not choose to subject themselves to that particular political system, as political enemies. And yet we invite into our communities the mosques that teach hatred of our way of life and even violence toward it. We allow Arab and Middle Eastern studies departments to be promoted and paid for by those who want to obliterate our society from the face of the earth.
Ms Darwish shows very clearly that Islam is not a religion of peace. Islam does call for violence. Through her use of only some of the 35, 213 verses calling for such violence, she shows that any one outside of Islam is at risk. But more troubling still is the second method Islam has used throughout history to spread itself and its violent and oppressive culture. That is the seemingly peaceful migration of Muslims into other geographic areas. These pilgrims, one might call them, are forbidden to assimilate. They are exhorted regularly by their religious leaders to hate those outside of their religion. They are encouraged to find fellow Muslims who are not following Sharia closely enough. And finally they have both encouragement and also the demand from their religion to show violence toward and even kill those with whom they disagree. Even what we might call a moderate religious leader finished up prayers every Friday with the exhortation to kill the infidel. It is part of what we might call the prescribed liturgy.
Ms Darwish shows, these communities of Muslims are spreading and growing like wildfire in western countries. Several European countries are already facing tough decisions with regard to the Muslim community and because of the very nature of Islam. And although there are upright Muslims who we might like to think of as moderate, the religion itself produces such a culture of fear, that we must not expect these people to speak out against the violence promoted by some within Islam. Their life could be forfeit, because of their own religious precepts. Even if perhaps only 10% of Muslims choose to follow the prescribed violence, we can see how risky speaking out is for those who might choose to do so.
When Islam is seen in this light, we in the West, with our relativist attitudes and multi-culturalism are faced with a dilemma. And so far we have not within our culture or political structures clarified a way to deal with this. Ms Darwish gives her list of nine things she thinks could be successfully implemented in the West to stop what she describes as the Islamization of our society.
Finally, Ms Darwish gives her hopes that the religion of Islam itself could experience a reformation. Unfortunately, I can't figure how this would work. Within the Christian church, the Reformation called for the church to return to its origins, the Holy Scriptures. If what Ms Darwish taught us in the whole rest of her book is correct, Islam cannot be reformed without entirely leaving its foundational writings. The entire religion is poisoned from its inception with violence and oppression.
Ms Darwish makes clear that something must be done by those who wish to remain free. Whether we have the strength of will or the moral fortitude to accomplish this is not at all clear.
Saturday, September 5, 2009
Conscience of a Conservative
by Barry Goldwater
Thumbs Up.
I loved this book. Light political theory and philosophy. A fast read. This was written in 1960, but definitely filled with the same wisdom that is at the foundation of the modern conservative movement.
Thumbs Up.
I loved this book. Light political theory and philosophy. A fast read. This was written in 1960, but definitely filled with the same wisdom that is at the foundation of the modern conservative movement.
The Founders' View of the Right to Bear Arms: A Definitive History of the Second Amendment
by David Young
In Progress
Mr. Young states at the beginning of this book that he started his research thinking he knew the background and purpose of the second amendment and also the errors of those who think otherwise. But that his research brought him to yet a third opinion.
But I haven't read far enough to find out how he would define his starting position and it's opposite.
The book had to go back to the library, but I was interested enough that I will probably re-request it at some point.
In Progress
Mr. Young states at the beginning of this book that he started his research thinking he knew the background and purpose of the second amendment and also the errors of those who think otherwise. But that his research brought him to yet a third opinion.
But I haven't read far enough to find out how he would define his starting position and it's opposite.
The book had to go back to the library, but I was interested enough that I will probably re-request it at some point.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)