Ask Yourselves if YOU are capable of Peace

I just wanted to say something about the Mohammed Hijab Jordan Peterson discussion. I made a community post about it, it, and there's requests that I should convert that content into a video, so I'm gonna do that now. I have a problem with the whole premise of the discussion as it was framed and as is sort of conveyed in the title of that video. What was repeated even by Mohammed Hijab himself in the video, in the course of the conversation that Islam is capable of peace Christians, with whoever. Now that's not something that it is even remotely reasonable to expect Muslims to have to prove to the West or to Christians or to whoever.

That's not something that is reasonable to expect us to have to prove and hasn't been something that we should have to prove for a very long time now. That question, can we get along with the West, needs to be completely flipped. Can the West get along with us? That's really the question. We've seen very little from them to indicate to us that they are capable of getting along with us.

Which Muslim country has invaded a Western country in recent memory? Which Muslim majority states military has conducted airstrikes against western civilians in recent memory or ever. It's absolutely absurd, and it demonstrates epic levels of cognitive dissonance. If you can look around the world today, Palestine, Somalia, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, and unironically ask Muslims to prove to the West that we mean you no harm. First, you have a sickening abundance of examples of western violent aggression against Muslim countries.

That's on the one hand. On the other hand, you have pretty much every single Muslim majority country in the world except maybe Iran, all having good diplomatic, trade, economic, political ties with the EU, with The UK, with America. And among the most closely aligned with the West are Saudi Arabia and The Gulf States, states, which are allegedly the most notoriously fundamentalist countries in the Muslim world. And they're the best allies of The United States, The United Kingdom, and Europe. Europe.

So what we have, if you look at reality, is that there's basically two different sort of avatars, two different images of Muslims vis a vis the West. Either we're your allies or we're your victims. So why on earth is the West not being asked to prove to us whether or not they are capable of peace? Why aren't they being asked whether or not they're capable of getting along with us? Now the other thing I want to comment on as Peterson said, he pondered, How do we reconcile, you know, the concept of turn the other cheek with the concept of a just war or an expansive war?

How do we reconcile that? Well, the answer is you can't. We can. The reason why we can is for the same reason that you, Jordan Peterson, called our prophet a warlord because our religion provides us with regulations on how to deal with peacemaking and how to deal with conflict. Now your religion doesn't have those kinds of regulations.

That hasn't prevented the Christian West from engaging in violence and aggression and war and conquest. That hasn't prevented you from doing all of that. It's just enabled you to pursue those adventures lawlessly. So you could say that the fact that the key figure as you imagine him, the key figure in the Christian religion as you conceive of Jesus, the fact that he was not a warlord presents a problem for you because you have not been taught how to apply morality in conflict situations. We have.

We have been taught, and we do know how. The last thing that I wanted to talk about from the debate is Jordan Peterson kept bringing up the issue of the Shia and the rift between the Shia and the Sunnah. Saying that this means that the house of Islam has not been brought into unified order, paraphrasing him. Why do you think we should do that? That's a pretty totalitarian instinct if you're asking me.

We don't do inquisitions, doctor Peterson. They have their belief, we have our belief. The fact that the Shia have existed and continue to exist as a minority in the Muslim world is proof that the Muslims have no problem coexisting with people who have belief systems that fundamentally offend us. The Shia exist in the Muslim world, Jews exist in the Muslim world, Christians exist in the Muslim world, Buddhists, Hindus, everything. It's all available, and they have their beliefs and we have ours.

No one is compelled. Now the whole discussion that you are supposed to be having with Mohammed Hijab was this idea of getting along with people you don't agree with and building bridges. And then you're acting as if it's a flaw on our part that we haven't eradicated the Shia. Well, we haven't because they we don't agree with them and we're allowed to say what we think about what they believe, But they can exist just like you can. That's the way we operate.

The fact that the Shia continued to exist in the Muslim world and have for centuries shows that coexistence with people disagree with is not a new phenomenon for us. The question remains again, can you do it? We've been doing it. Can you do it? Because we're not seeing a lot of good signs about whether or not you can.

We could say that the fact that Jordan Peterson spoke to Mohammed Hijab is a sign that they're trying, that the West is trying. Of course, the way they framed it is already a bit devious. But what I would just say to all all of my brothers and sisters in Islam who are reacting to this is to remind you of what Allah has told us in the Quran. You are the ones who love them, they do not love you. And we always see this whenever a non Muslim says something or just looks nicely at us, we get all a flutter and we get all happy.

Look, if they incline towards peace, we incline towards peace. That doesn't mean we believe them. And we know that if they incline towards peace, there's a reason why they're inclining towards peace that has nothing to do with them liking us. If they incline towards peace, there's a reason from their own interests as to why they will incline towards peace. We will incline.

No problem. If you'll smile in our face, we know that you're hiding something inside against us, but we'll take the smile. No problem. I'm not gonna critique Mohammed Hijab's performance. Could have been better, could have been worse.

He did fine. But the whole debate, the whole discussion was framed in a devious way to put us on the defensive when actually you have a lot to answer for. We have much less to answer for than you do. And most of the points that you made that are supposedly issues of concern don't even deserve to be addressed, to be honest. So anyway, that's all I wanted to say.

Try to make it quick.