I always think it is a little dangerous to project what Whittaker Chambers would have said about the issues we face today, particularly when he did not write on a topic much, but this article by Andrew Bostom positing what Chambers would say about Islam is one that does a very thorough job attempting to do just that. The real version of the article is even longer and more convincing, though a tough slog. In the shorter version, the most interesting quote to me is not from Chambers but from James Freeman Clarke in which he makes the observation in contrasting Judaism and Islam that Judaism calls for conformity to divine character while Islam merely calls for conformity to divine will. This is a profound difference, a difference rooted in freedom, and freedom certainly was a central concern of Chambers, both in its spiritual and political forms (with Chambers believing the two were intimately connected). It reminds me yet again that Christians do a disservice to their faith when they emphasize obedience over choice. Christianity is not about following God because He commands it; it is about following God because of love. I continually marvel in this thought that God could command our obedience but He does not because He wants us to truly love Him. Of course, one of our motivations for obeying God can be simply because He is our Creator and King, but motivation is different than purpose. Our purpose in obedience is not to be a good soldier; it is to be like Christ–who obeyed His Father’s will by dying on the cross, but did so because of His love for us, not because it was commanded of Him.
As I said, I agree with Bostom that striking similarities exist between Communism and Islam, and that Chambers would have warned us about the dangers of Islam. I feel constrained to observe, however, that I think Chambers would have drawn at least one sharp distinction between the two. Chambers repeatedly noted that what is so dangerous about Communism is its appeal to man’s inherent nature. As Bostom notes, Chambers once stated: “Modern man was challenged to choose between the traditions of a 2,000-year-old Christian civilization and the new totalitarian systems which, in the name of social progress, contended for the allegiance of man’s secular mind. The promise of the new ideas was as old as that serpentine whisper heard in the dawn of the Creation: ‘You shall become as gods’ — for the first traitor was the first man.” Communism is antithetical to religion because it places man at the center of all things. I realize that one can argue that all false religions in a way do the same thing, but at the least they do not do it in the same way–even Islam. My point is that Communism is alluring in a way that Islam is not. While we should be mindful of the depth of the determination of Islam’s strongest aherents to destroy all who do not conform to its teachings, it could never hold the same threat level as Communism (or its current counterpart Nihlism) because Islam is not capable of winning people’s minds and hearts the way Communism is capable of doing. To put it another way, I think someone who grows up in this country has a much greater chance of becoming a Communist than becoming an Islamisist. You can read any one of a number of Leftist electronic outlets such as the Daily Kos, the Huffington Post, Salon.com, Mother Jones or even The New York Times to see this. These are people who are absolutely convinced they know what is best for everyone and they are willing to employ the power of government to enforce it. (Obamacare is an easy example). Of course, Islamisists use the power of government as well, but that is only when that religion and the government are one (as in the Middle East). There is no subversion in Islam; it is straightforwardly fascist and obtusely so (how many converts do you make with suicide bombs?) Chambers said over and over again that what makes Communism a legitimate threat to the West is its subversive nature: its adherents possess both the willingness and the capacity to use any means to achieve its goals. Again from the same Chambers quote repeated by Bostom: “Other ages have had their individual traitors — men who from faintheartedness or hope of gain sold out their causes. But in the 20th century, for the first time, men banded together by millions, in movements like fascism and communism, dedicated to the purpose of betraying the institutions they lived under. In the 20th century, treason became a vocation whose modern form was specifically the treason of ideas.” One can cite examples of individual adherents to Islam who have done the same (the Central Park bomber and the shooter at Ft. Hood come to mind), but one will not find groups of Islamisists in the thousands or millions inside this country orchestrating as such the way you will Moveon.org, which is much more subtle and therefore ultimately more dangerous.
I truly believe Chambers would say that Communism is not dead, it simply lives on in a different context now that the Soviet Union is defunct and the Cold War seems like a distant memory. He would urge us to recognize and answer the very real threat that Islam represents, but not for us to do so to the exclusion of defending the West against its tireless and more sinister adversary that constantly seeks to undermine from without and within.
