Obama administration admits the truth about the inevitable result of “democracy” in Islamic countries

For the last several weeks, while the entire establishment of the West has been cheerleading the rise of “freedom” and “democracy” in Egypt, a small minority of Islamo-realists, resisting the general joy, have been warning incessantly that “democracy”—meaning free elections—in Muslim countries will bring, not liberal democracy, but the rule of Islamic law.

And now guess what? Today’s Washington Post reports that according to a “senior administration official,”

The Obama administration is preparing for the prospect that Islamist governments will take hold in North Africa and the Middle East, acknowledging that the popular revolutions there will bring a more religious cast to the region’s politics.

Whoops! Looks like those mean, unsympathetic, no-milk-of-human-kindness Islamo-realists have been right all along.

The Post continues:

The administration is already taking steps to distinguish between various movements in the region that promote Islamic law in government. An internal assessment, ordered by the White House last month, identified large ideological differences between such movements as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and al-Qaeda that will guide the U.S. approach to the region.

About which, Israeli Mideast specialist Barry Rubin comments at his blog

Get it? Al-Qaeda is bad because it wants to attack U.S. embassies, the World Trade Center, and the Pentagon.

But the Muslim Brotherhood is good! Because it merely wants to seize state power, transform Egypt into an Islamist state, rule 90 million people, back Hamas in trying to destroy Israel, overthrow the Palestinian Authority, help Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood overthrow the monarchy, and sponsor terrorism against Americans in the Middle East.

Meanwhile the neocons evidently haven’t yet heard the White House’s new message. Charles Krauthammer victoriously boasts in the Washington Post:

Now that revolutions are sweeping the Middle East and everyone is a convert to George W. Bush’s freedom agenda …

Whoops! Not if “everyone” includes the White House. According to its own statement to the Post , the White House no longer believes in the freedom agenda; it believes in the Islamic law agenda.

And David Brooks daintily cogitates in the New York Times:

[I]t seems clear that many people in Arab nations do share a universal hunger for liberty. They feel the presence of universal human rights and feel insulted when they are not accorded them.

Culture is important, but underneath cultural differences there are these universal aspirations for dignity, for political systems that listen to, respond to and respect the will of the people.

How can one respond to such idiocy? The fact that Muslims want to be free of the hand of some dictator doesn’t mean that they believe in universal human rights! They just want to have freedom for themselves, they want Islamic-style freedom, which denies freedom to all others.

- end of initial entry -

Paul M. writes:

Here is a clip from an old documentary about the First World War.

Go to about 7:15 and listen to how England and America at first cheered the Russian Revolution as a victory of “Democracy over Absolutism and the Forces of Reaction.”

Posted by Lawrence Auster at March 04, 2011 06:04 PM | Send