A general observation: It is very important to understand that…

A general observation: It is very important to understand that not all peoples obtain their identities from the nation-state period. That is, many (Muslims, but also Chinese, Indian Hindus, etc.) get their core identities, customs, and core thoughts from their previous civilizational period. Even if now they are indeed nation-states, yet their polities and citizens see themselves very differently from what one would consider normal in Western Euro-American norms.

One sees the paradox of the fully active citizen in a number of…

One sees the paradox of the fully active citizen in a number of ways: For example, the person on the Left may vote for his opposition views, but the Right wins the election and controls the government. The Leftist may be so very convinced and passionate in his views that he tries to block the Right’s government from carrying out its policies.

Paradox: Voting and civil debate are supposed to be means to discuss matters, once decided all should work towards a common goal, yet there is a huge chance that the leftist party members would rather try to move their agenda even if it was by means of blocking the government and shutting everything down. This example is just one, of course the party and ideological roles can very much be reversed.

An observation: Reform normally does not happen, but once…

An observation: Reform normally does not happen, but once it is achieved, some are too revolutionary for the ‘mere’ reform, so their ‘plight’ and their energy goes elsewhere.

The Verse in Surah Al-Hajj about the permission to fight…

The Verse in Surah Al-Hajj about the permission to fight (Verse 22:39) is not only for a defensive Jihaad; nay, the Prophet (ﷺ) also sent expeditions and excursions, beyond and before Badr, so we must understand this fact. Otherwise the Muslims will be confused about the early history of Islam, the totality of Islamic rules, and lots of damage may be done to many Muslims’ faith.

Many things which are “secular-only” are totally wrong…

Many things which are “secular-only” are totally wrong or at least incompletely done: Like seat-time grade schooling, why is this not instead by mastery of a subject? This is in fact closer to the Islamic system, you must learn the subject before moving on, not just because you sat for 9 months with other classmates, then it is said: “OK, memorize things for a test, then go on to the next stage”.

The capitalistic (current credit intensive) economic system is…

The capitalistic (current credit intensive) economic system is basically tailored to suck people in, countries in, etc. This happened a lot with the 3rd world and their resources, then with the 1st world and millions were affected there as well (an example is the housing crisis, it is a type of abuse to fool people into thinking they can afford a house they really can’t afford, then destroy their lives once it is obvious they cannot repay. It is predatory but the big people are happy, the rest are oppressed to no end). In such cases the distinctions between the first and third worlds disappear totally.

Consider that even Iceland became bankrupt, a place which was supposed to be developed, post-religion, all those things. But evils do happen even within their own paradigms, and they take a very real toll.

We must consider that a lot of what goes on as teaching in…

We must consider that a lot of what goes on as teaching in schools as “freedom” or “opening horizons” is in fact a type of child abuse (i.e., drag queens reading queer stories to children, reading books like My Two Mommies to them, etc.)

Consider carefully that, in the secular ethos, the religious…

Consider carefully that, in the secular ethos, the religious or Deeni institutions of Islam as normative Deen are in fact not a partner for negotiation, compromise, deals, etc. Rather, the disembodied Muslims as individuals are what can be negotiated with. Of course, this is to the secularists’ huge benefit, the body of Muslims divided up infinitesimally so there is no threat whatsoever and no chance for proper organization of the normative Muslim Ummah.

A general observation: People say that in free societies…

A general observation: People say that in free societies if there is army or police brutality, the laws will change in order for this to become illegal in the future. Perhaps not, I say, because it is known that the “free” populace may simply not have the long-term impact and concentration in its various components to solidify such sorts of changes and keep them as changes for multiple generations until they become deeply ingrained in the fabric of society. Thus, there may be some laws criminalizing these acts of brutality, but then there comes up a law to throw this ‘progress’ back, and on and on it moves back and forth, while police and army brutality become ever more entrenched and much more difficult to remove from the fabric of society.

People say that Hey, the secularists don’t do offensive…

People say that Hey, the secularists don’t do offensive Jihad (the equivalent thereof) why do you crazy Muslims have this concept? We say, they don’t do offensive Jihad since most of the world has been conquered by them already, so they now mostly concentrate on Jihad of Difaa’ (defensive Jihad). Even communist nations are basically finished conquering, so they protect what they have, but offense is done perhaps by other means, though military showoffs and prowess are also there with these secular nations from time to time. However, even here we are seeing this principle break down in the past few years, countries might repackage offensive operations as absolutely necessary defensive ones, not as wars but as special operations, or redressing wrongs of the past, even as all outsiders can see that what is really happening is offensive warfare.