What to do about Islam: a collection

This entry contains my key articles and blog entries on various ways of meeting the Islam threat, including proposals for removing jihad and sharia supporters from America, restricting or prohibiting the practice of Islam in America, and containing and isolating Islam from the rest of the world, the policy I call Separationism. The collection includes exchanges with people who think that such ideas are impossible, and also includes articles contemplating the possibility that the liberal West is so far gone that Westerners will not recognize the Islam threat and begin to resist it until after Islam has taken it over. The entry will be permanently linked on the main page sidebar under “Key VFR Articles.”

What to do about Islam in the West

A Real Islam Policy for a Real America [My speech at the Febuary 2009 conference on Preserving Western Civilization. Culminates in an imaginary speech by a future U.S. president laying out the steps for the removal of Muslims from America and for a constitutional amendment banning the practice of Islam in America.]

How to Defeat Jihad in America [A step by step plan to force or encourage the departure of most Muslims from America. FrontPage Magazine, May 2004.]

Laying out the Civilizationist Strategy [The strategy consists of speaking the truth about Islam, stopping and reversing the immigration of Islam, isolating Islam, and destroying dangerous Islamic regimes and groups. It is concluding web page of The Search for Moderate Islam, Part II: If it doesn’t exist, then what?, FrontPage Magazine, January 2005.]

Draft manifesto: Together facing the new Islamic jihad [My alternative manifesto to the secularist manifesto. March 2006.]

Separationism [December 2006. Briefly summarizing the separationist position and quoting various writers with similar positions.]

What is to be done about Islam [Draft statement, Feb. 2007, focuses on sharia, rather than jihad. Breaks down the various types of “moderate” Muslims depending on their relation to sharia, and shows how all moderate Muslims as well as radical Muslims are part of the problem. Says what is to be done about various categories of Muslims, defined by their adherence to sharia, and their legal status in the U.S. Thus it strips citizenship of naturalized citizens who adhere to sharia, while it strips citizenship of natural born citizens who actively advocate sharia. It says that this is not about Muslims being morally bad people, but about Muslims being Muslims ]

The Islamic plan to take over America, and a Constitutional amendment to stop it [September 2007. A constitutional amendment that, paralleling the language of the 13th amendment, prohibits the practice of Islam in the United State. The approach is the opposite and complement of “What is to be done about Islam.” Instead of focusing on precise categories of Muslims defined by their relation to sharia and stating which categories shall be stripped of citizenship and/or deported, this amendment doesn’t deal with individuals at all but outlaws the religion.]

The “Islamist” penetration of America that we are doing nothing to prevent

Another Modest Proposal: Impose America’s Decadent Culture on the Muslims

Jihadist says the West can kick out the Muslims any time it wants [The reform of Islam is impossible, but the removal of Islam from the West is not.]

Islamization in Reverse! [Italian city bulldozes Islamic center, replaces by square named after Oriana Fallaci.]

How to tell Muslims that we don’t want them around [Paragraph from “What is to be done about Islam” where I say the problem with Muslims is not that they are bad people, but that they are good Muslims.]

Is my hard line on Islam unrealistic? [“I suppose there are instances in which a “noble lie,” an approximate truth, can help lead toward the good. I don’t think that the Islam issue is such an instance. When it comes to Islam, only the plain truth can save us. Anything short of the plain truth about Islam leads to Muslims taking us over…. For the same price we could tell the truth. Since we will be rejected and excluded for speaking the noble lie that only radical Islamism is the problem and that Islam per se is not the problem, why not be rejected and excluded for speaking the truth that Islam per se is the problem?… It’s tough enough to wear yourself to skin and bone for the sake of the truth. Could anything be more ridiculous and absurd than to wear yourself to skin and bone for the sake of a lie?” May 2007]

Separationism and Civilizationism

Separationism (December 2006. I define Separationism as a doctrine and quote several writers with similar positions.]

If we can’t democratize Islam, and we can’t destroy it, then what? [August 2006. My most concise statement of Separationism.]

Separationism, restated [Nov. 2008. Following the Bombay attack, I quote several key jihadist verses in Koran, and conclude that it’s the Koran’s sacred call to kill unbelievers that is the source of terrorism, not any secondary social or economic factors. “[T]he only way the non-Muslim countries can make themselves safe from jihadism is by excluding Muslims and quarantining them in their own lands. If non-Muslim humanity is to be safe and free, Muslim humanity must be permanently separated from the rest of mankind and be deprived of any means of having any effect on the rest of us. There is no other way.”]

Proposing disengagement from Muslim world, September 2001 [My first statement of Separationism, before it was called that..]

The Search for Moderate Islam, Part I Does it exist? [FrontPage Magazine, January 2005]

The Search for Moderate Islam, Part II: If it doesn’t exist, then what?

Concluding page of Part II [This is where I lay out the civilizationist/separationist strategy]

Better Living Through Separationism

Kemalization and other strategies [Considering Hugh Fitzgerald’s idea of forcing Islam to change by isolating it.]

Dreher on Separationism

All we really need to do [Reversing Bob Dylan’s “All I really want to do,” I get at the logical and obvious solution to the Islam problem—far simpler and more effective than British columnist Minette Marrin’s incredibly involved action plan that involves the constant surveillance, evaluation, and control of almost every activity of virtually every Muslim in Britain for all future time.]

Google results on Separationism

Australia urges sharia believers to leave

Separationism: as good an idea in Dutch as in English

The costs of failing to adopt Separationism

The unchanging reality of Muslim terror—so long as Muslims remain among us

The wages of diversity: full body scans, FOREVER

Here is our future—forever—unless we renounce liberalism

We have already surrendered to Islam [Powerful article by Diana West.]

Explaining and debating Separationism

How do we defeat militant Islam? [By early September 2003 I was doubting the viability of the entire U.S. policy in Iraq, and asking, what would “success” in this “war” actually mean? This entry features an exchange I had at Lucianne.com in which I tried to raise these questions and advocated the “mutual separation between Islam and the West.” The exchange shows how little success I had in getting Bush supporters to think logically about our policy. The ensuing VFR discussion includes a long exchange with some of the usual mindless bigots of the anti-war right who were still allowed to post at VFR at that time.]

Is Separationism practically feasible? [I answer Fjordman’s questions.]

Objections to the contain and isolate idea

Separationism does not mean withdrawal

As Muhammad created Islam, will Muhammad destroy Islam? [Pros and cons of the separationist strategy] [“We must not base Western defense on the hope of discrediting or destroying Islam as such, or of getting all Muslims to abandon their religion, as those outcomes are highly uncertain. Rather, we must base Western defense on the insight, on the incontrovertible fact, that Islam is mortally dangerous to us and our civilization.”

Defining an indispensable condition of Western defense as “lunacy” [Jeff in England says VFR is “lunatic fringe” for wanting to remove Muslims from West. I and other readers have it out with him.]

What happens to Israel under Separationism

Western surrender to Islam and possible restoration

The only way the West can be saved [Summarizing theme, that only when Islam has defeated us, is there any hope that Westerners will turn against liberalism]

Wake up, people! Muslims by definition cannot assimilate [On Muslim foot-washing]

More on Muslim foot-washing

The mystery is explained: Why, with the enemy inside the gates, acting as the enemy, Britain still doesn’t react [Prophecy of Western liberals eagerly surrendering to European caliphate.]

Can the principles of Separationism be applied to liberalism? [Laying out scenarios of possible ruin or salvation.]

Posted by Lawrence Auster at September 22, 2008 07:10 AM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):