We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Samizdata quote of the day

Freedom, secularism, and rationality are not only Western values. Much of East Asia, eastern Europe, and Latin America are at various stages of embracing them. An alliance against jihadism could be very broad indeed. The Islamists themselves say that “all unbelievers are one people”. Might as well take them up on it.

– ‘Infidel’ commenting on Classical Values

7 comments to Samizdata quote of the day

  • Nick M

    Way to go Infidel,

    I think the problem for the Koranimals is the more they push the closer everyone else becomes. And y’all know what happens when a spring is compressed…

    Why d’ya think they haven’t yet attacked Beijing or Shanghai? They know that would seal the ring of steel around them.

    And they know the Chinese don’t hold any truck with any of that human rights nonsense…

    All we need is for this united phalanx to hold the line.

    Just hold the line.

    It worked for Charles Martel at Poiters.

  • Alfred

    Actually China has had some trouble with muslims (and vice-versa). I direct you to the Uyghur people living in the Xinjiang region of China. Wikipedia describes this area as “It is a large, sparsely populated area which takes up about one sixth of the country’s territory. Xinjiang borders the Tibet Autonomous Region to the south and Qinghai and Gansu provinces to the southeast, Mongolia to the east, Russia to the north, and Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, and the Pakistan- and India-controlled parts of Kashmir to the west. It includes most of Aksai Chin, a region claimed by India as part of Jammu and Kashmir.”

    You are right of course about how China doesn’t really care about “human rights.” The Uyghur’s political dissent is quashed in the usual and effective communist style. Yet the Uyghurs too were violent at times. Recently though, even with the political freedoms repressed, there has been a drastic drop in Uyghur related violence. The cause? Most commentators point to the newfound economic wealth enjoyed by many in the region (and many of the Uyghurs). Greater economic freedom and prosperity contributing to the ease of tensions? Strange!

    Just thought I would add that to illustrate that China does indeed have some experience with muslims. Though as far as I know it is mostly a “this is our land” kind of thing than a “kill the infidel” thing. Yet anyone who has heard the claims by Hezzbollah and al Qaeda know how quickly such disparate movements can be absorbed by militant Islam. Much in the same way the Soviet Union gave a marxist-leninist flair to any “indigenous struggle.”

  • Thanks, Nick.

    That’s true — I’ve heard of a couple of cases of suicide bombings in Beijing, carried out by Uyghur Muslims, but I don’t think these have resulted in much loss of life or any damage to prestigious or economically-important targets. One of the few good points about a strong totalitarian state is that its strict control over people and materials, and the known serious consequences of anti-state activity, really do make terrorism less likely.

    Xinjiang represents the same kind of phenomenon as Palestine in the last century — the Muslim population is being reduced to a minority by an influx of non-Muslims. Yet international Jihadism seems to have little interest in taking up this cause, perhaps because it’s not relevant to their traditional anti-Semitism.

    (For the record, I think Xinjiang, Israel, and the earlier cases of Spain, Sicily, southern Russia, and the Balkans, could be considered examples of decolonization, rolling back the Islamic expansion which swept over those places centuries before.)

    Then, too, the Uyghurs are Turkish-speakers, generally more secular than other Muslims. If they are becoming less violent, perhaps it’s because they, unlike the Palestinians, know a lost cause when they see one.

    It has been speculated that as China’s need for oil increases, and the West moves on to other energy sources, the Persian Gulf will gradually become more China’s zone of interest than ours. It will be fascinating to see how they handle the jihadists.

  • It will be fascinating to see how they handle the jihadists.

    Maybe like they handle the Christians. Only permit Imams from a tame sheep pen.

  • Pa Annoyed

    “One of the few good points about a strong totalitarian state is that its strict control over people and materials, and the known serious consequences of anti-state activity, really do make terrorism less likely.”

    Maybe, but I’m inclined to doubt it. Human ingenuity can find all sorts of ways to do damage, and it’s hard to imagine ‘serious consequences’ worrying a suicide bomber. I suspect the main reason is that the Chinese won’t give in to it and everybody knows it.

    After the Great Leap Forward, who’s going to be terrorised by a few little pop-bombs?

    And I’m not entirely convinced that the Government being scarier ruthless bastards than the terrorists really counts as an ‘good point’, either… 🙂

  • Jim

    “and it’s hard to imagine ‘serious consequences’ worrying a suicide bomber.”

    If you mean that it’s hard to threaten a suicide bomber with execution or whatever, you are right. But Chinese punishments hardly stop at the overt perpetrator. His whole family and circle of associates would all be held complicit in some degree. The doctrine is called “baojia”. And if the situation is serious enough to warrant making a real statement, the government can get quite nasty with all these accomplices. The intent is to let everyone know just what the stakes are. It’s called “sha yi jing bai”. Kill one to startle (warn) a hundred. People have been used to it for centuries.

  • The Wobbly Guy

    China’s problem with the Uighurs stems back centuries. It seems only in recent decades that they stumbled upon the tactic of counter-colonisation, with regards to the Xinjiang province and Tibet.

    And yeah, the Chinese government is brutal. Also, keep in mind that some of the attacks could have been hushed up by the state, especially if they were minor ones. I can’t quite remember, but I distinctly recall several explosive incidents in Chinese cities that went unexplained by the authorities…

    Of course, that doesn’t fit into the modus operandi of the terror groups, since they almost always brag about it afterwards. No point firing off a few bombs if nobody got scared after that. Then again, perhaps the Chinese government explicitly denies them this satisfaction by controlling the media.