Yet once again, Wretchard’s thesis falls apart with the Muslims. Even if Muslims are (for the moment) particularly at odds with this or that oppressive manifestation of Islam, they are nevertheless committed to the larger impulses which comprise Islam itself: external Jihad to spread Islam Uber Alles, and internal Jihad to be “good Muslims” by purifying their practice of same.

Just because they’re fighting against the current crop of Islamic Nazis in aTehran, those 140 Persian BBC anti-regime activists (no contradictions there…?) are ALL apologists for Islam. Just so, it is axiomatic that ALL Muslims are apologists for Islam. For our purposes, this Iranian insurrection signifies little in the long run. Until Muslims are prepared to reject Islam altogether, they will continue to produce viscious uncivilized social systems such as those we see ubiquitously across the entire swath of Islam.

All the giddy excitement is woefully misplaced.

To be clear, I am pleased to see any subversion by Muslims against other Muslims at all times. Until we are prepared to wreak massive destruction on the aparatus of Islam, fomenting dissention within the House of Islam is a good temporary alternative. But sadly, we have so accepted the “fatal kiss” accusation/pretext that Muslims will eternally hurl at us (being eternal enemies of our civilization, after all) we aren’t playing ths destructive subversive role we should if we were wise in this war. Instead, silly Westerners continue to reinforce the Muslim position that “Regime change” in this or that Islamic shithole will fix their ongoing dilemmas, rather than “religion change”. So I really don’t think much will come of this current kerfuffle in Iran. That will remain impossible in the long run under current circumstances.