Inspired by a comment over at Riehl World View, in response to this unrelated but grin inducing post pointing out that it’s now permissible to investigate Maxine Waters’ corruption:
“[Communism] is a clear danger to the Republic, far more so than Jihad.”
Mohammed and Marx do seem to work well with each other, and it’s been asked before, who’s using whom?
If communism is more dangerous, why? How can we tell?
What are the structural similarities? Why do these two belief systems work so well with each other?
Both require absolute conformity. But Islam was specifically tailored for a nomadic desert culture. Some of its strictures don’t work well elsewhere. Communism doesn’t concern itself with localization.
Islam is founded on the supernatural and the afterlife, an aspect of belief which is (rightly or wrongly) increasingly discredited, or which at the very least requires faith in the invisible. Further, the “afterlife” component only promises future reward for good behavior after one dies in exchange for following a strict regime in the now. Communism aims at the purely mundane concern of social and class injustice, something which omnipresent and nearly tangible, something which can never be entirely eradicated and so can be eternally fought against. Nevertheless, a classless, egalitarian society is said to be almost within our grasp, something we can likely achieve in our lifetimes if only we try a little harder, sacrifice a little more now. Islam works on eternity, while Communism works on five-year plans. However, people have always been willing to accept the reward of the afterlife, exactly because it promises something — anything — on the other side of the veil of death. Communism cannot speak to eternity.
Communism does depend on fallible human beings, and its promises fail within living memory. A sixty year life sees the failure of a dozen five year plans. Its problem is exactly that its short term goals are achievable, the Glorious Revolution can indeed succeed in toppling the existing running dog capitalist regime — and then things immediately start falling apart.
Islam guarantees a life of struggle and war, but it’s upfront about that. The reward is indeed kept carefully behind the mysterious veil. And, hmmm, doesn’t that have a resonance with keeping women veiled? Islam promises the rewards of rape and plunder to its followers, and it delivers to enough of the living that it seems legitimate. Under Islam, the wealthy can flaunt. It’s like a pervasive cultural Lotto: the winners are needed to encourage the rest. The winners of the communist lottery, in contrast, have to keep their wealth hidden for the most part. No ostentatious city palace, only the rural dacha. Being wealthy is in blatant contradiction with the stated goals.
Most importantly, though, and along those lines, Islam keeps its filthy paws more or less off the scales of commerce. Thus, an Islamic society can persist for literally centuries at the level most of the human race has experienced for most of our history. Progress and innovation are averted, but the local market, the one most people have daily contact with, thrives. Communism deliberately obscures pricing, possibly the most crucial signaling system a society needs.
All this is just off the top of my head, and I’m by no means familiar with the details of either Islamic or Communist thought. That in mind, I’m going to give the Top Risk award to Islam. It has demonstrably persisted for more than a thousand years. Communism has failed, spectacularly, everywhere it’s been tried. It is possibly more disruptive in the short term, but Islam has legs.