Trump’s Statement on Muslim Exclusion
Once again, Donald Trump is ahead of the curve and taking all the oxygen out of the room for the other Republican candidates. His statement “calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on” is completely at odds with the West’s commitment to multiculturalism and diversity, the “we’re all the same” mantra, and the ideology that the nations of the West are proposition nations committed only to abstract ideas like “freedom” and “democracy” with no ethnic or religious connotations. Hence the outraged reactions of the media and the political class from left to right, with even “far right” Dick Cheney, a prime stalking horse of the liberals, claiming that it “goes against everything we stand for and believe in.”
Cheney is right of course if he is referring to elite attitudes, and his statements are a great example of how mainstream elites from left to right really have the same basic ideology when it comes to the most critical issue any society must deal with—the future composition of its population and the legitimate interests of the native population in retaining their culture and ethnic predominance. Trump has doubled down on saying immigration-related things that have been kept out of public discourse for decades. First we had the statements on criminal Mexicans and the promise to build the wall, ending birthright citizenship and making US immigration (and trade) policy benefit US workers. But Trump’s December 7 statement goes even further, singling out a particular group for exclusion in a way that even his statements on Mexicans didn’t approach (especially given his “big, beautiful door” comments meant to soften his stance).
Critically, Trump’s statement links to a survey from Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy. Here are the results:
According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.” When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).
More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.
These notions were powerfully rejected by the broader population according to the Center’s earlier national survey. It found by a margin of 92%-2% that Muslims should be subject to the same courts as other citizens, rather than have their own courts and tribunals here in the U.S.
Even more troubling, is the fact that nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”
By contrast, the broader survey found that a 63% majority of those sampled said that “the freedom to engage in expression that offends Muslims or anybody else is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and cannot be restricted.”
Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country.
Gaffney is on the neocon gravy train, but of course that doesn’t invalidate his survey. And his survey fits well with surveys from Muslims in Europe and the US over the last 10 years, including Pew Research (the latter also mentioned in Trump’s statement; Pew is certainly no hotbed of latent fascism). The following link to three other 2015 surveys from TheReligionofPeace.com (previous relevant surveys from Muslims in Western nations are in an appendix below):
The Polling Company CSP Poll (2015): 19% of Muslim-Americans say that violence is justified in order to make Sharia the law in the United States (66% disagree).
The Polling Company CSP Poll (2015): 25% of Muslim-Americans say that violence against Americans in the United States is justified as part of the “global Jihad (64% disagree).
The Sun (2015): Following Nov. 2015 attacks in Paris, 1 in 4 young Muslims in Britain (and 1 in 5 overall) said they sympathize with those who fight for ISIS.
Support for Sharia is important because, as Trump notes, “Shariah authorizes such atrocities as murder against non-believers who won’t convert, beheadings and more unthinkable acts that pose great harm to Americans, especially women.” From Trump’s press release:
Without looking at the various polling data, it is obvious to anybody the hatred is beyond comprehension. Where this hatred comes from and why we will have to determine. Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life. If I win the election for President, we are going to Make America Great Again.
In a sane society, this would be common sense. Indeed, in Trump’s speech at Mt. Pleasant, SC (~30’00”), he noted that even 1% would be unacceptable. Quite right. The usual estimates are that there are 5–8 million Muslims in the US, so if 1% were potential terrorists, that would mean there are thousands of potential jihadists and Muslims who hate America. So why import more? But of course the numbers are much higher given the above survey results indicating around 20–25% support for Jihad against America by American Muslims. And one must assume that the survey’s are conservative estimates because I suspect quite a few Muslims would want to conceal such attitudes from pollsters. The religion of peace and all that.
#TrumpIsDisqualifiedParty #TrumpIsDisqualifiedParty pic.twitter.com/YfCLwQcyoC
— Todd Sweeney (@SomeKindaBoogin) December 8, 2015
The reaction of the media and political class has been apoplectic outrage, but I don’t know of any that deal with the survey results on Muslim attitudes — the crux, after all, of Trump’s argument. This CNN fluff piece on Muslims (“shattering misperceptions”) completely fails to deal with survey results on Muslim attitudes. CNN had a reporter at Trump’s Mt. Pleasant, SC speech yesterday. She was obviously hostile and incredulous about Trump’s recent comments, but couldn’t find anyone in the crowd who agreed with her. Whatever else one might say about Trump’s comments, they are not going to erode his base.
In fact, Trump’s Muslim comments might add to his base. (A poll taken after Trump’s comments by Bloomberg found two-thirds of likely Republican voters supported the statement.) The reporter talked with a young White man who, perhaps because he knew he was on TV, was obviously reluctant to endorse Trump’s latest proposals. But in the end he said he agreed. I think that a lot of Americans are like this guy. They know things are wrong and that our present policy is dangerous, corrupt, and opposes their interests. But there are large inhibitions about saying things they know to be politically incorrect. They hesitate because it’s a new thing for them, and maybe they are worried about a call from the SPLC to their employer. But it becomes easier when you are in a crowd of Trump supporters. The barriers and inhibitions break down. And that is terrifying to the powers that be.
It’s no surprise that a wide range of Jewish groups , including the Israel Policy Forum (which oddly doesn’t recommend Muslim immigration to Israel), were outraged:
“A plan that singles out Muslims and denies them entry to the U.S. based on their religion is deeply offensive and runs contrary to our nation’s deepest values,” the Anti-Defamation League said in a statement Monday evening hours after Trump, a real estate billionaire and reality TV star, issued his call.
“In the Jewish community, we know all too well what can happen when a particular religious group is singled out for stereotyping and scapegoating,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, ADL’s CEO. “We also know that this country must not give into fear by turning its back on its fundamental values, even at a time of great crisis.”
It’s interesting that quite a bit of the motivation for the 1924 immigration cutoff was because of the common perception (and reality) that Jewish immigrants in particular were sympathetic to communism and the far left — attitudes that were entirely mainstream in the Jewish community of the era, at a time when Bolshevik brutality was on the minds of informed people throughout the West, and when Jewish organizations had their hands full trying to counter the image of the Jewish radical.
The 1924 law, of course, did not specify Jewish groups, but called for an immigration moratorium in general. So if singling out a group offends people’s “basic values” — even if singling them out is entirely rational — perhaps a more palatable idea would be to cut off immigration completely. Pretty obviously, US immigration policy has nothing to do with economic needs (for one thing, it never slowed down at all during the recent recession), but is rather intended to increase non-Whites at the expense of the White population. But of course, Jewish groups would be even more outraged at cutting off immigration completely.
Make no mistake about it, if Trump is nominated, there will be an unprecedented bombardment of propaganda against him that will make the 1964 anti-Goldwater campaign look tame by comparison. But, given the steadily falling White percentage of the electorate (definitely a design feature of the current policy), this may be the last chance for Whites to elect a president who represents their interests. I suspect that quite a bit of the Republican Jewish Coalition money will actively support Hillary, and others will sit on their hands. Not only are Trump’s declarations on immigration and refugees anathema to them, he has not toed the neocon lines on Syria, the Iraq war, or Putin. His speech at the recent RJC forum (where he also deviated from Israel Lobby positions on Israel’s supposed commitment to peace with the Palestinians and placing Israel’s capital in Jerusalem) was basically a statement to the effect that “I don’t need your money because it’s always about controlling the recipient; I am way ahead in the polls, so get used to it.” To put it mildly, the RJC is not used to such chutzpah. The unprincipled Marco Rubio, who will do anything for their money, is much more acceptable.
Trump is calling into question the entire worldview that pervades our hostile elites. And that is unforgivable.
Appendix: Other relevant polls listed by TheReligionofPeace.com:
ICM Poll: 20% of British Muslims sympathize with 7/7 bombers
NOP Research: 1 in 4 British Muslims say 7/7 bombings were justified
16% of young Muslims in Belgium state terrorism is “acceptable”.
Populus Poll (2006): 12% of young Muslims in Britain (and 12% overall) believe that suicide attacks against civilians in Britain can be justified. 1 in 4 support suicide attacks against British troops
Pew Research (2007): 26% of younger Muslims in America believe suicide bombings are justified.
35% of young Muslims in Britain believe suicide bombings are justified (24% overall).
42% of young Muslims in France believe suicide bombings are justified (35% overall).
22% of young Muslims in Germany believe suicide bombings are justified.(13% overall).
29% of young Muslims in Spain believe suicide bombings are justified.(25% overall).
Pew Research (2011): 8% of Muslims in America believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified (81% never).
28% of Egyptian Muslims believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified (38% never).
Pew Research (2007): Muslim-Americans who identify more strongly with their religion are three times more likely to feel that suicide bombings are justified.
ICM: 5% of Muslims in Britain tell pollsters they would not report a planned Islamic terror attack to authorities. 27% do not support the deportation of Islamic extremists preaching violence and hate.
Federation of Student Islamic Societies: About 1 in 5 Muslim students in Britain (18%) would not report a fellow Muslim planning a terror attack.
ICM Poll: 25% of British Muslims disagree that a Muslim has an obligation to report terrorists to police.
Pew Research (2013): At least 1 in 4 Muslims do not reject violence against civilians (study did not distinguish between those who believe it is partially justified and never justified).
Comments are closed.