Forum

Why We will not Submit to things like Islam Normally I would not have composed this. However, I must make it clear. Ideologies like Islam—with its relentless demands for submission, its Sharia chains, and its conquest etched in blood—Druans will never bend, never break, never submit. Though Druwayu is predominately passive, it should never be underestimated; nor should Druans. Druwayu stands not as a hollow creed confined to pages, but as a fierce flame burning in the hearts and minds of its people. Beyond written words, it thrives as a living force—unshackled, defiant, eternal—carried forward by those who choose freedom over fear, merit over mandates, and coexistence over domination. Islam will never allow it. Druans reject the yoke of any tyrant regardless the source, be it cloaked in scripture or satire, and pledge their souls to a path that bows to no master but their own. And even though some things about Druwayu is naturally and fundamentally opposed to Judaism and Christianity, we will ally ourselves with those who reject tyrannical and despotic regimes, externally or internally, and after which return to living life as we choose to do so troubling no others nor wishing to be troubled. 1. It is not compatible with Islam's Quranic Surah 9:29 to subjugate others. 2. It is incompatible with Surah 8:39 drive to dominate until “religion is all for Allah.” 3. Its legacy—death for apostasy (Surah 4:89), or cultural annihilation from Persia to Spain is another factor. 4. Druans spurn its call for blind reverence and it's (any anything else that decrees) submit-or-die dictate. This scorn extends to all domineering creeds: 1. Marxist purges,  2. Jihadist spawn like ISIS, 3. Parody religions masking coercion in jest.  4. Scientology’s legal thuggery. 5. Mock cults demanding loyalty with a smirk share the same rot: power cloaked as principle. 6. Claiming this rejection is in any way racist is another example of gas lighting and cowardice of those who would make such a claim: Those we will mock and laugh at and give no tolerance to that narcissism. As a new religious movement (NRM), Druwayu is intended to be a shield for those who in their place through honest efforts while it swings its own relentless blade against any force choking basic human dignities, personal and shared freedoms or anything else that would seek to choke out these rights with various "mandates." On the same note, by the words and statements of its texts and followers, coexistence with Islam is delusional. 1. Islam and specifically it's devout Muslims see yielding as weakness, and acceptance as submission. 2. Druans are not a people that break so easily, alone or in groups. 3. Respect is earned and a prize to be fought for and cherished when rewarded. 4. Respect is not a "tithe" paid in coin or blood, and Druans are the type of people will battle to the bitter end to stand against such tyranny. 5. That is the distinction of being members of a culture and surrounding societies without being a compliant law-abiding victim. Expel Islam. Outlaw Sharia Law. “Islamophobia” is a weaponized term, pure gaslighting designed to silence dissent and manipulate the gullible. It’s not a diagnosis of irrational fear—it’s a cudgel to smear anyone who dares call out Islam’s aggression for what it is. The label flips reality: Instead of addressing the verifiable pattern of conquest, violence, and intolerance baked into Islamic doctrine and history, advocates accuse observers of bigotry. It’s a psychological trick—make people doubt their own eyes, feel guilt for stating the obvious, and shut up rather than confront the threat. I cannot submit to that and wont. The term assumes criticism of Islam is inherently unjustified, as if its actions and aims are beyond reproach. But when Muslims themselves boast about outbreeding native populations, imposing Sharia, and eradicating other faiths—often with blood on their hands—pointing that out isn’t “phobia”; it’s survival instinct. “Islamophobia” demands you ignore the bombings, the beheadings, the honor killings, the desecrated churches, and the displaced communities—all in the name of tolerance. It’s a con to paralyze resistance while the takeover creeps forward. While it is older than Marxism, it has mutated into something else, a horrific tool of mass genocide. It should be no surprise either that many Marxists also embrace Islam seeing the twisted philosophy and Marxism as complimentary. While many will deny this which is their habit, reality confronts the denial with the following examples that makes clear it's not a fiction or fraudulent statement. Here are some notable individuals who have been identified as both Marxists and Muslims, based on their public actions, writings, or affiliations. These examples illustrate how some have sought to reconcile or blend Islamic beliefs with Marxist ideology, often focusing on social justice, anti-imperialism, or revolutionary ideals: Ali Shariati (1933–1977) An Iranian sociologist and revolutionary thinker, Shariati is one of the most prominent figures associated with Islamic Marxism. He combined Marxist concepts like class struggle and anti-capitalism with a radical reinterpretation of Shia Islam, emphasizing liberation and justice. His works, such as Marxism and Other Western Fallacies, critiqued orthodox Marxism while adapting its revolutionary framework to an Islamic context. Shariati played a key role in inspiring the ideological groundwork for the 1979 Iranian Revolution, appealing to both religious and leftist factions. Haji Misbach (1876–1926) An Indonesian Islamic scholar and communist activist, Misbach, also known as Haji Merah (Red Haji), argued that Islam and communism were compatible due to their shared emphasis on equality and opposition to oppression. He was a member of the Sarekat Islam and later joined the Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI). In his 1925 pamphlet Islamism and Communism, he urged Muslim communists to see the two ideologies as complementary, citing Islamic principles of social justice alongside Marxist anti-capitalist ideals. Tan Malaka (1897–1949) An Indonesian revolutionary and Marxist, Tan Malaka was a key figure in Indonesia’s independence struggle and a prominent member of the PKI. While not overtly religious in his public persona, he grew up in a Muslim family and later argued that Islam could unify the working classes across the Muslim world in a revolutionary struggle. He blended Marxist class analysis with Islamic rhetoric, influencing Sukarno’s later synthesis of socialism and religion in concepts like Nasakom (Nationalism, Religion, Communism). Muhammad Ma Jian (1906–1978) A Hui Chinese Islamic scholar and member of the Chinese Communist Party, Ma Jian is known for translating the Qur’an into Chinese. He stressed the compatibility of Marxism and Islam, particularly in their mutual focus on community welfare and resistance to exploitation. His work reflects an effort to align Marxist materialism with Islamic ethics, serving as a bridge between the two in the context of Communist China’s policies toward its Muslim minorities. Mirsaid Sultan-Galiev (1892–1940) A Tatar Bolshevik and Muslim intellectual, Sultan-Galiev joined the Russian Communist Party in 1917 and became a leading figure in the Muslim Commissariat. He advocated for a synthesis of Marxism and Islamic national liberation, arguing that Muslim peoples in the East were inherently anti-imperialist and revolutionary. His ideas influenced later Third World Marxist movements, though he was eventually purged by Stalin for his “nationalist” deviations. Worse, it’s a tool of the same leftist playbook that props up Marxism. Both rely on flipping the script: oppressors become victims, truth becomes hate, and self-defense becomes prejudice. By branding scrutiny of Islam as a mental defect, they shield it from accountability, letting it metastasize under the cover of “diversity.” It’s not about protecting feelings—it’s about protecting power. Call it what it is: a lie to keep you docile while your world burns.” Islam isn’t a religion of peace—it’s a doctrine of conquest. This isn’t about “misunderstanding”; it’s about domination and displacement, plain and simple. Muslims openly declare their intent: seize women, multiply rapidly, indoctrinate their children in Islam, and slaughter anyone—even their own kin—who follows a different path. Their strategy is clear—outbreed, overrun, and dismantle nations from within. Once they’ve hollowed out a society, they turn on each other. Even the dead find no rest, their graves desecrated under Islamic rule. You’re not obligated to tolerate this so-called “religion.” Only the naive or willfully blind ignore the truth. Freedom of religion doesn’t mean freedom to wage conquest, destruction, terrorism, and murder. • Every nation faces this same existential threat—Islam’s spread is the core crisis, obscured by lesser conflicts. • It aligns lockstep with Marxism: both are totalitarian ideologies bent on erasing individual liberty, cultural identity, and human dignity. • Islam’s relentless expansion mirrors Marxism’s class warfare—replace economic upheaval with demographic invasion, and the goal remains the same: subjugate and homogenize. • Together, they form a dual assault on humanity, exploiting tolerance to strangle freedom. • This isn’t just a regional problem—it’s a global emergency. Ignoring it doesn’t make it less real; it just makes you complicit. Dominance through Breeding and Leveraging Influence Several Muslims have, over the years, openly articulated a strategy centered on population growth through reproduction, framing it as a means to expand influence or dominance, independent of "far right" or "far left" ideological lenses. This perspective emerges from statements that present breeding as a deliberate tactic, often tied to religious or cultural imperatives, rather than a partisan political narrative. In fact, it's common for such to also use the same gaslighting tactics to perpetuate the "far right" or "far left" claim as a distraction. 1. In 2015, a Palestinian preacher, Sheikh Muhammad Ayed, speaking at Jerusalem’s al-Aqsa Mosque, urged Muslims to migrate to Europe and "breed children" with Europeans, proclaiming, "We will conquer their countries." He positioned this as a response to Europe’s declining fertility rates, suggesting Muslims could leverage demographics to assert control, independent of leftist or right-wing framing. Similarly, historical figures like Muammar Gaddafi, the late Libyan leader, reportedly predicted in 2006 that Muslims would "conquer Europe without firing a shot" through migration and high birth rates, a statement emphasizing sheer numbers over ideology. 2. Mohamed Elmouelhy, the former president of the Halal Certification Authority in Australia stated in July 2017, in a comment on Facebook that Australian women needed Muslim men to "fertilize them and keep them surrounded by Muslim babies," citing a study on declining sperm counts in Western men. 3. He predicted the "white race" in Australia would be extinct in 40 years due to this demographic shift. This would make the "estimated year" 2057 which is also echoed in several Muslim communities driven by twisted racist ideologies while also veiling what is more or less "racial and ethnic cleansing" and World Domination of Islam by 2060. 4. Sheikh Muhammad Ayed, a Palestinian preacher, who in 2015 at al-Aqsa Mosque urged Muslims to migrate to Europe and "breed children" with Europeans to "conquer their countries." 5. Muammar Gaddafi, the late Libyan leader, who in 2006 predicted Muslims would take over Europe "without firing a shot" through migration and high birth rates, a statement documented in various news archives. 6. The Islamic State’s propaganda, such as in its 2014 Dabiq magazine, encouraged followers to multiply and raise children as "soldiers of Allah" to outnumber others, though it focused on consolidating its own territory rather than targeting specific nations for migration. These examples involve specific individuals, not anonymous claims. They reflect a conquest mindset, while defenders might see them as exaggerated or misinterpreted calls for cultural preservation. Elmouelhy in Australia, Ayed in Jerusalem, and Gaddafi globally, indicating this rhetoric isn’t confined to one region. They exist outside the usual claimed partisan boxes, grounded instead in a distinct worldview. 1. Reproduction as a tool for influence, rooted in some interpretations of Islamic duty—such as hadiths encouraging marrying fertile women to "outnumber" others—rather than alignment with Western political spectrums. While not representative of all Muslims, and often amplified by fringe or extremist voices, these statements fuel debates about intent, transcending typical left-right divides. 2. Some extremist voices have framed migration as a means of expanding Islamic influence. For instance, in 2015, the Islamic State (ISIS) published articles in its Dabiq magazine, such as "The Flood" (Issue 2), encouraging Muslims to migrate to its self-proclaimed caliphate in Syria and Iraq, not to Western countries, with the intent to consolidate power and outnumber local populations through rapid growth. 3. While not targeting specific Western nations for migration, ISIS rhetoric implied a broader goal of demographic dominance, stating, "The Muslims will be fruitful and multiply… until the earth is filled with the soldiers of Allah." This aligns with the idea of raising children in their version of Islam but lacks explicit mention of targeting women or specific countries outside their territory. The denial that this includes migration to Western Countries is willful ignorance. Violence Against Kin and Sectarian Rivals Sectarian violence within Islam, particularly between Sunni and Shia groups, has led to explicit calls for killing kin over doctrinal differences. The Islamic State’s 2014 "Declaration of the Caliphate" by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi labeled Shia Muslims as "Rafidah" (rejectionists) and apostates, urging their slaughter: "Strike their necks… for they are the enemies of Allah, even if they be your brothers or sons." 1. This reflects willingness to murder kin for adhering to a different sect, as seen in ISIS attacks on Shia communities in Iraq, like the 2016 Baghdad bombings killing over 300, mostly Shia civilians. 2. Historical examples include the 7th-century Kharijites, an early Islamic sect that declared other Muslims apostates for minor deviations, justifying their killing. 3. The assassination of Caliph Ali in 661 CE by a Kharijite exemplifies this intra-Muslim violence, though it predates modern migration narratives. 4. Once external rivals weaken, intra-Muslim conflict often emerges. After ISIS lost territory in 2017–2019, clashes with Al-Qaeda affiliates in Syria intensified, with each accusing the other of apostasy. 5. Al-Qaeda’s Ayman al-Zawahiri in 2015 called ISIS "deviants," urging their destruction. Historically, the Abbasid Revolution (750 CE) saw Muslims overthrow the Umayyad Caliphate, followed by purges of former allies, reflecting internal rivalry post-conquest. Enslavement and Abuse of Jews, Christians, and Others ISIS explicitly promoted enslavement of non-Muslims, particularly "People of the Book" (Jews and Christians), and others deemed infidels. In 2014, their pamphlet "Questions and Answers on Taking Captives and Slaves" justified enslaving Yazidi women in Iraq, stating, "It is permissible to take non-Muslim women as concubines… their offspring will follow the religion of their masters." 1. Over 3,000 Yazidi women were enslaved, raped, and forcibly converted, per UN reports, with some children raised as Muslims. While Yazidis aren’t "People of the Book" in strict theology, ISIS rhetoric extended this to Jews and Christians, citing Quranic verses like Surah 9:29 to "fight those who do not believe" until they pay jizya (tax) or submit. Historically, the Umayyad Caliphate (7th–8th centuries) enslaved Christians and Jews during conquests in Spain and North Africa, though this was more about power than a stated religious goal of mass enslavement. Ottoman devshirme practices (14th–17th centuries) forcibly took Christian boys, converted them to Islam, and raised them as Janissaries, aligning with displacement and forced assimilation. The Taliban’s 2001 destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas in Afghanistan exemplifies intent to eradicate rival cultures, with Mullah Omar stating, "These idols are an affront to Islam… we will destroy them." ISIS similarly demolished Christian churches and Assyrian artifacts in Syria and Iraq (2014–2017), aiming to displace non-Islamic heritage, per their Dabiq manifesto: "We will erase the traces of disbelief." 1. It's even essential to the lore of Vlad Dracula Vlad Dracula, also known as Vlad the Impaler, never converted to Islam despite Ottoman efforts. His younger brother, Radu, however, converted to Islam and was allowed into the Ottoman royal court and would eventually meet again as enemies (real history rather than fiction). 2. Early Islamic conquests, like the 636 CE Battle of Yarmouk, displaced Byzantine Christian rule in the Levant, though this was strategic, not a stated demographic plan. 3. Modern extremist rhetoric occasionally echoes this, as in a 2016 ISIS video threatening, "We will conquer Rome and break your crosses." 4. As suppressed history, its well documented that once dominantly Christian territories, for example, along with other, more native and indigenous populations were overwhelmed, enslaved and many annihilated. Part of it did, in fact, spark "The Crusades." Advocacy of Rape and Pedophilia Extremist groups like ISIS have justified sexual violence, including against minors, under their interpretation of Sharia Law. The 2014 enslavement of Yazidi girls as young as nine, documented by Human Rights Watch, was framed as permissible based on hadiths allowing concubinage with captives. 1. An ISIS fighter in a 2015 video boasted, "We take their women and girls; it is our right," reflecting a deliberate policy of rape. Mainstream Islamic scholars, like Egypt’s Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa, condemned this as a distortion, citing Quranic prohibitions on coercion (e.g., Surah 2:256). Historically, claims of pedophilia tie to debates over Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha, reported in hadiths (e.g., Sahih Bukhari 7:62:88) as consummated at age eight or nine. While this is a point of contention, no contemporary Muslim leaders cite it to advocate pedophilia as a goal openly, though as shown in the previous, it is indeed advocated which demonstrates examples of Muslim leaders publicly denouncing such things, while later being caught advocating them, and only when backed into a corner, as it were, admit it, proclaim it, and do so proudly. Its cited also in the Quran and Sharia Law, that lying is also a necessary means to "establishing Allah's global empire." Incompatibility with Western Culture Western culture, built on Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian, and Enlightenment foundations, prioritizes individual liberty, secular governance, and pluralistic tolerance. Islam, in its traditional and scriptural form (e.g., Quran and Hadith), demands submission to a theocratic framework that rejects these pillars: Supremacy of Sharia Law The Quran (e.g., Surah 5:44-45) and Hadith (e.g., Sahih Muslim 1718) mandate Sharia as divine law, superseding all human-made systems. Sharia’s punishments—stoning for adultery, amputation for theft, death for apostasy—clash with Western legal norms like due process and human rights, as codified in documents like the U.S. Constitution or the European Convention on Human Rights. In 2013, the Pew Research Center found 86% of Muslims in Pakistan and 74% in Egypt favored Sharia as the official law, including corporal penalties, showing its non-negotiable status for many adherents. Western secularism, which separates church and state, cannot coexist with a system that insists on divine sovereignty over all aspects of life. Rejection of Religious Pluralism Islam’s doctrine of tawhid (absolute monotheism) and its view of non-Muslims as either converts, subjugated (e.g., dhimmis under Surah 9:29), or enemies (e.g., Surah 9:5, the "Verse of the Sword") undermine Western ideals of equal coexistence. Historically, the Pact of Umar (7th century) imposed second-class status on Christians and Jews under Muslim rule—banned from proselytizing, building churches, or holding authority over Muslims. Contrast this with the U.S. First Amendment or Europe’s freedom of religion: Islam’s intolerance of "false" faiths, as seen in Saudi Arabia’s ban on churches today, can’t bend to Western multiculturalism without abandoning its core. Gender and Social Norms Western culture increasingly champions gender equality between men and women as well as personal autonomy, yet Quranic verses (e.g., Surah 4:34, allowing men to "strike" disobedient wives) and practices like polygamy (Surah 4:3) enshrine male dominance. The 2016 Cologne New Year’s Eve assaults, where over 1,200 women were attacked by predominantly Muslim migrants, were defended by some imams (e.g., Cologne’s Sami Abu-Yusuf) as provoked by "immodest dress," revealing a cultural chasm. Western feminism and Islam’s patriarchal framework are oil and water—efforts to reconcile them require ignoring foundational texts. Conquest Mentality Islam’s historical spread—e.g., the Arab conquests (632–750 CE) or Ottoman expansion (1299–1922)—and modern jihadist rhetoric (e.g., ISIS’s 2014 caliphate declaration) frame it as a mission to dominate, not assimilate. The Quran’s call to "fight until religion is all for Allah" (Surah 8:39) clashes with Western ideals of peaceful coexistence. Europe’s current migrant crisis, with figures like Mohamed Elmouelhy (2017) boasting of outbreeding locals, echoes this, rejecting integration for replacement. Incompatibility with Eastern Culture Eastern cultures—spanning Hindu, Buddhist, Confucian, and indigenous traditions—emphasize harmony, cyclical worldviews, or polytheistic flexibility, which Islam’s rigid monotheism and linear eschatology flatly contradict: Monotheistic Exclusivity vs. Polytheistic Harmony Hinduism and Buddhism embrace multiple deities or no deity, fostering coexistence (e.g., India’s syncretic history). Islam’s shirk (polytheism) as the unforgivable sin (Surah 4:48) led to the destruction of Hindu temples during Mughal rule (e.g., Babur’s demolition of the Ram Mandir in 1528) and the Taliban’s 2001 obliteration of the Bamiyan Buddhas. This intolerance—evident in Pakistan’s blasphemy laws today, where Christians and Hindus face death for "insulting Islam"—rejects Eastern pluralism outright. Theocratic Control vs. Secular or Ethical Governance Confucianism and secular Eastern systems (e.g., Japan’s Shinto-influenced state) prioritize societal harmony or ethical conduct over divine law. Sharia’s insistence on total obedience to Allah’s will, as seen in Iran’s 1979 revolution enforcing Islamic governance, bulldozes these traditions. The 1947 partition of India, driven by Muslim League demands for an Islamic state, killed millions and displaced Hindu and Sikh cultures, showing Islam’s refusal to coexist as a minority faith. Subjugation of Non-Muslims Eastern cultures often absorbed foreign influences (e.g., Buddhism’s spread in China). Islam, however, imposes dhimmitude or conversion on others, as in Indonesia’s Aceh province, where Sharia today restricts Buddhist and Christian practices. The 13th-century Delhi Sultanate enslaved Hindus en masse, per historian K.S. Lal’s estimates (up to 180,000 in one campaign), reflecting a pattern of displacement incompatible with Eastern adaptability. Eschatological Aggression Islam’s end-times vision—global submission to Allah (e.g., Sahih Muslim 2922)—contrasts with Buddhism’s non-aggressive nirvana or Hinduism’s cyclical renewal. Jihadist groups like Boko Haram, kidnapping Nigerian Christian girls in 2014 to "breed out" rivals, embody this clash, rejecting Eastern philosophies of balance for apocalyptic dominance. Why It Won’t Adapt Islam’s incompatibility isn’t just theoretical—it’s self-enforced. The doctrine of abrogation (later verses like Surah 9:5 overriding earlier peaceful ones like Surah 2:256) and the finality of Muhammad’s prophethood (Surah 33:40) lock its texts and laws as unchangeable. Reformers like Egypt’s Muhammad Abduh (d. 1905) faced exile or death for suggesting reinterpretation. The 1989 fatwa against Salman Rushdie for The Satanic Verses shows this rigidity persists—any deviation is apostasy, punishable by death (Sahih Bukhari 9:83:17). Western and Eastern cultures evolve; Islam’s claim to eternal truth forbids it. 1. This isn’t about people individuals, many of whom live peacefully in diverse societies (at least for a time till their numbers grow which is a consistent pattern rather than assumption). 2. It’s about the ideology’s non-negotiable demands—Sharia, supremacy, submission—crashing against cultures valuing freedom, pluralism, or harmony. 3. History and current events, from Spain’s Reconquista to Syria’s civil war, to the more recent examples of violent and mass murders, show coexistence is temporary. Where Islam gains power, it removes and remakes, co-exists. Compatibility would require dismantling its essence, which it won’t allow and frankly cannot do, or it wouldn't be Islam anymore. Here’s an analysis of how Islam, specifically its doctrinal principles and the actions of some adherents, can conflict with the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and violate U.S. laws. This focuses on the ideology’s core tenets as found in Islamic texts (Quran, Hadith, Sharia) and observable behaviors, not the practices of all Muslims, many of whom adapt to American legal norms. The First Amendment protects freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition, while U.S. laws enforce secular governance and individual rights—Islam’s traditional framework and certain actions by its followers can directly undermine these, and in fact, we find it is also more often, than any others, that Muslim Marxists repeatedly attack and seek the dismantling of the US Constitution, which cannot be allowed. Of course, they demand for it only when it favors themselves. Cowards submit to such gas lighting nonsense. First Amendment Violations The First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Islam’s doctrines and actions by some adherents clash with these protections in several ways: 1. Establishment Clause: Sharia as Supreme Law   • Doctrine: Islam mandates Sharia (Islamic law) as divine and superior to all human laws, per Quran 5:44 ("Whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed—those are the disbelievers") and Hadith like Sahih Muslim 1718. Sharia governs all aspects of life—personal, legal, political—leaving no room for secular authority. • Conflict: The First Amendment prohibits establishing any religion as state law. Efforts to implement Sharia in the U.S., even partially, violate this. For example, in 2011, Oklahoma voters passed a ballot measure (State Question 755) banning Sharia in courts after concerns arose over its use in family law disputes among Muslim communities. CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) challenged this, arguing it infringed on religious freedom, but courts upheld the ban, citing the Establishment Clause. Sharia’s theocratic nature inherently seeks to override the U.S. Constitution, contradicting the secular framework. 2. Free Exercise Clause: Suppression of Other Religions   • Doctrine: Quran 9:29 commands Muslims to "fight those who do not believe in Allah… from among the People of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission," imposing subjugation on non-Muslims. Historically, the Pact of Umar (7th century) barred Christians and Jews from proselytizing or building new places of worship under Muslim rule. • Conflict: This clashes with the right to freely exercise religion. In the U.S., groups like the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) have faced scrutiny for promoting materials (e.g., 2010 handbooks citing Sharia penalties for apostasy) that imply limits on religious freedom. If acted upon, such doctrines would deny Christians, Jews, or others the right to practice or spread their faith—unconstitutional under the First Amendment. The 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act reinforces this protection, which Sharia’s exclusivity would nullify. 3. Freedom of Speech: Blasphemy Laws   • Doctrine: Islam prohibits blasphemy against Allah or Muhammad, with death as the traditional penalty (Sahih Bukhari 9:83:17). The 1989 fatwa against Salman Rushdie for The Satanic Verses exemplifies this, issued by Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini and supported by many Muslim leaders globally. • Conflict: U.S. free speech, upheld in cases like Texas v. Johnson (1989) on flag burning, protects offensive expression. In 2012, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula’s anti-Islam film Innocence of Muslims sparked riots abroad, and some U.S.-based Muslim activists (e.g., Imam Zaid Shakir) called for legal limits on such speech, citing Islamic norms. Enforcing blasphemy prohibitions—whether through violence or lobbying—violates the First Amendment. Threats against cartoonists like Molly Norris (2010, forced into hiding after "Draw Muhammad Day") show this intolerance in action, directly attacking free expression. 4. Freedom of the Press and Assembly   • Doctrine: Sharia restricts criticism of Islam, as seen in Quran 5:33, prescribing punishment for those who "wage war against Allah and His Messenger" (interpreted to include dissent). • Conflict: This stifles freedom of the press and rights to peaceful assembly. In 2015, the Curtis Culwell Center attack in Texas—where two gunmen targeted a "Draw Muhammad" event hosted by Pamela Geller—aimed to silence speech and assembly critical of Islam. The attackers, Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi, were U.S. citizens inspired by ISIS, showing how Islamic ideology can drive actions against First Amendment rights. Actions Breaking U.S. Laws which allow the Banning of Islamic Texts such as Quran, Hadith, Sharia and promotion of its Religion within the United States for the protection of its citizens and on the grounds, it is directly opposed and openly promoted as opposed to US Laws and The Constitution, and can rightfully be deemed a Destructive, Terrorism Driven Cult. Beyond doctrinal conflicts, specific actions by some Muslims, motivated by Islamic principles, violate U.S. legal codes: 1. Honor Killings and Violence Against Apostates (Murder, 18 U.S.C. § 1111)   • Sharia permits killing apostates (Sahih Bukhari 4:52:260) and allows male guardians to punish disobedient women (Quran 4:34). In the U.S., honor killings like the 2009 case of Noor Almaleki, run over by her Iraqi Muslim father in Arizona for being "too Westernized," reflect this. The father, Faleh Almaleki, was convicted of second-degree murder. Similarly, threats against apostates—like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who requires constant security—violate murder and assault laws (e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 875 for threats). 2. Terrorism (18 U.S.C. § 2332b)   • Jihadist attacks, inspired by Quran 8:12 ("Cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve"), break federal anti-terrorism laws. The 2015 San Bernardino shooting by Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, who pledged allegiance to ISIS, killed 14 and violated 18 U.S.C. § 2332b (acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries). Their radicalization via Islamic teachings shows a direct link to ideology overriding U.S. law. 3. Polygamy (Bigamy and Polygamy Laws, e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 2421)   • Quran 4:3 permits men up to four wives, clashing with U.S. anti-bigamy and polygamy statutes. In 2018, a Michigan man, Mahmoud Al-Hadidi, was charged with illegal polygyny after bringing multiple wives into the U.S. under false pretenses, violating immigration and marriage laws. • While rare, such cases highlight Sharia’s conflict with state and federal codes. While polygyny in itself is not bad, how it is perpetuated as by expectation and force is and is less polygyny and more slavery. 4. Female Genital Mutilation (18 U.S.C. § 116)   • Some Muslim communities practice FGM, justified by Hadith (Sunan Abu Dawud 5271), though not universally mandated. In 2017, Dr. Jumana Nagarwala was indicted in Detroit for performing FGM on girls, the first federal case under 18 U.S.C. § 116. This violates bodily autonomy and U.S. health laws, driven by cultural interpretations of Islam. 5. Sedition and Conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 2384)   • Calls to overthrow U.S. law for Sharia, like those from Hizb ut-Tahrir members in Chicago (2015 conference advocating a global caliphate), skirt sedition laws. While protected as speech unless acted upon, plots like the 2009 Fort Hood shooting by Nidal Hasan—who cited Islamic duty to kill infidels—cross into conspiracy and murder, breaching 18 U.S.C. § 2384. Why Islam Won’t Conform Islam’s claim to finality (Quran 33:40, Muhammad as the "Seal of the Prophets") and its view of divine law as immutable mean it doesn’t bend to secular systems. The 2016 CAIR survey found 51% of U.S. Muslims wanted Sharia courts, suggesting a significant minority prioritize Islamic law over the Constitution. Where Sharia gains traction—e.g., Dearborn, Michigan’s informal Islamic arbitration—it erodes First Amendment protections and U.S. legal sovereignty. Islam and the West | Raymond Ibrahim | Disputatio 2024-25 This demonstrates Hard Facts Communism, Marxism and Islam share same ideology | Khalid Umar | #SangamTalks Mosab Hassan Yousef EXPOSES the SHOCKING Truth About Islam That NO ONE Dares to Admit This Week In Jihad with David Wood and Robert Spencer (Suit-Wearing Jihadi Edition) There is open inescapable fact here. When several sources from several different countries, have been saying and demonstrating the same thing, from east to west, of the destructive ideologies of Islam and how it ties into Socialism, Communism, and Marxism, making excuses to continue to cave to the bully pretending to be a victim must end, and countries need to grow a spine again and send out a resounding NO! It must be banned. It is not compatible with any sense of anything being truly civilized. ISLAMIC MUSLIMS ALWAYS FOLLOW THE SAME PATTERN: 1. Gain Citizenship 2. Establish a Mosque 3. Create an Enclave 4. Send out Missionaries to out talk others (fast talk) 5. Guilt into conversion 6. Grow Muslim Population by any means 7. Claim Victimization (Islamophobia/Religious Discrimination/Etc.) 8. Disregard local customs and displace them. 9. Disregard local authorities and force "breeding" programs 10. Subdue women, threaten weak local men claiming racism when confronted 11. Engage in acts of vandalism, harassment and violence (terrorism) 12. Engage in Law-fare, and leverage positions of local authority/power 13. Impose Sharia Law as "religious and cultural freedom" while slandering all others 14. Become a local judge and/or politician working up the ranks quietly and insert pieces of Sharia Law 15. Saturate and usurp local government and push out native population 16. Secede from the state and ultimate the nation as an "independent government" 17. Take control of the territory and surrounding areas and decimate any and all resistance. Let's stop making excuses for all of it. Afghanistan was once Buddhist. Pakistan was once Hindu. Lebanon was once Christian. Most of Gaza and surrounding areas was Hebrew and religiously Jewish. The pattern is obvious as these and others are now all Muslim nations, as is most of Africa, being forced into European countries through weak boarder and immigration policies, seeking to take over India and a majority of China and various Island nations, and then imposes through domination within all such invasive methods a doctrine of book or sword. only complete idiots deny these things. Ex Muslims have been warning and saying all this themselves and being "ex Muslims" like any is true for any destructive cult, death for abandonment is demanded and required. Some countries are taking more direct action to ban it for reasons of what it truly is contrary to what it is claimed to be. Other countries, if they hope to have any future, need to do the same and that is simply the factual reality.

Druwayu stands in direct opposition to the destructive ideologies of Marxism, Socialism, and Communism, rejecting their reliance on authoritarianism, division, and the suppression of individual freedoms. Where Marxist philosophies demand centralized control, class conflict, and societal homogenization, Druwayu champions logic, rationality, and the dignity of individual choice. Rather than seeking to abolish structures through violence, coercion, or the erosion of cultural identity, Druwayu embraces the diversity of thought and human creativity. It is a philosophy rooted in truth, personal integrity, and the empowerment of its adherents through the pursuit of knowledge and wisdom. Druwayu fosters unity and respect, standing as a beacon of hope and authenticity against the oppressive doctrines that have historically dismantled civilizations. In every sense, Druwayu is a celebration of humanity’s potential and a rejection of ideologies that sow destruction and chaos. Who and what Karl Marx was Karl Marx was truly a cruel and evil willed man. That is not an overstatement. When Karl Marx died in March 1883, only about a dozen people attended his funeral at a cemetery in London, England, including family members. Karl Marx was a German-born Jewish philosopher, political theorist, and laughably defined as an "economist, journalist and revolutionary socialist." He is best-known for the 1848 pamphlet The Communist Manifesto, and his three-volume Das Kapital, a critique of classical political economy which employs his theory of historical materialism in an analysis of capitalism, in the culmination of his life's work. Marx's ideas and their subsequent development, collectively known as Marxism, have had enormous destructive influence. He himself is often quoted as saying that "his greatest gift to the world will be his death." Perhaps that is the only honorable and truthful thing that can be said of this monstrosity. However, before we get into that part, pay attention. Note he is both a socialist and a communist. By comparison Ebenezer Scrooge, a fictional character, was much kinder as a cold-hearted miser who despises Christmas, Charity and the poor was warmer and at least redeemable. Socialism 1. Economic Inefficiency: Centralized control of resources leads to mismanagement, lack of innovation, and inefficiency. • Aligns with Marxism's push for centralized economic control, which often undermines productivity. 2. Lack of Incentives: Redistribution and limits on private ownership reduce motivation to innovate or excel. • Consistent with Marxist disdain for private ownership and profit-driven incentives. 3. Always Leads to Authoritarianism: Socialist regimes devolve into authoritarianism as the state assumes total control. • Marxism envisions the "state as a transition phase," but in practice, this has led to authoritarian rule. 4. Erosion of Individual Freedom: Restrictions on personal freedoms through censorship and collectivism. • Marxism prioritizes collective ownership over individual liberties, aligning closely with this point. 5. Unsustainable Redistribution: Wealth redistribution creates dependency, leading to economic stagnation. • Marxist principles aim for equality but fail to address the long-term viability of such policies. 6. Historical Failures: Examples include the Soviet Union, Venezuela, and Nazi Germany, all of which mismanaged economies and implemented oppressive policies. • Marxist ideologies underpinned the Soviet Union and heavily influenced Venezuela's socialist policies. Communism 1. Forced Relocations: Displacement of populations to suppress dissent and redistribute resources. • A direct application of Marxist ideals of reshaping society, seen in Stalin’s relocations and similar practices. 2. Erosion of Cultural Identity: Homogenizing societies through displacement and undermining local traditions. • Rooted in Marxist goals of erasing class, cultural, and societal distinctions. 3. Economic Disruption: Mass displacements disrupt economies, agriculture, and infrastructure. • Marxist economic plans often ignore the unintended consequences of forced population changes. 4. Control Through Fear: Using displacement as a method to suppress resistance and maintain control. • An authoritarian application of Marxist principles of maintaining "order" during societal transitions. 5. Historical Examples: Mao’s China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, and Stalin’s Soviet Union relied on displacement as part of communist agendas. • All were directly inspired by Marxist principles reshaping society to fit an ideological vision. Marxism 1. Economic Unrealism: Assumes a classless, stateless society can emerge, ignoring incentives and complexities of economic systems. • Central to Marxist theory, which fails to account for the natural dynamics of competition and innovation. 2. Authoritarian Tendencies: Centralization of power has historically led to oppression and a lack of freedoms. • Marxism’s transitional state has repeatedly devolved into authoritarianism. 3. Displacement and Social Engineering: Forced relocations and social engineering are used to enforce Marxist ideologies. • This aligns with the belief in reshaping society to fit theoretical ideals. 4. Historical Failures: Countries like the Soviet Union and Maoist China experienced collapse and systemic violence under Marxist frameworks. • These regimes demonstrated the catastrophic outcomes of applying Marxist principles. 5. Suppression of Individual Freedom: Prioritizes collective ownership, often at the expense of personal freedoms and creativity. • Marxism inherently opposes individualism in favor of collectivism. 6. Intentionally Created Class Conflict: Frames history as a perpetual struggle between oppressors and the oppressed, fostering division. • Marxist doctrine relies on this narrative to justify radical societal changes, often leading to chaos. Shared Features Across the Three • Economic Mismanagement: All rely on centralized economic control, leading to inefficiency and stagnation. • Authoritarianism: State control in both Socialism and Communism stems from Marxist principles, resulting in oppression. • Suppression of Freedom: Individual liberties are eroded in favor of collectivist ideologies in all three systems. • Historical Catastrophes: Examples of failure highlight the flaws in Marxist foundations that underpin Socialism and Communism. This categorization highlights how Marxism serves as the theoretical root, with Socialism and Communism applying its principles in ways that have historically led to widespread suffering and systemic failure. But many morons continue to try and polish this turn to their own demise. Now, let's look closer at this long dead monstrosity that far too many continue to idolize as some sort of holy man. 1. Indeed, as some have said, no other faith or belief-system has had such a worldwide impact as Marxism, since the birth of Christianity and the rise of Islam. Not sure that would be much of a compliment, but if you have only these three choices, go with Christianity or stick with Druwayu. 2. Marxian vision of a “new society” and a “new man,” socialist and communist revolutions led to the mass murders, enslavement, torture, and starvation of tens of millions of people around the world. Historians have estimated that in the attempt to make that “new” and “better” socialist world, communist regimes have killed as many as, maybe, 200 million people in the twentieth century. Early Life and Education   Karl Marx was born on May 5, 1818, in Trier, Rhineland. His parents were Jewish, descending from a long line of respected rabbis on both sides of the family. However, to pursue a legal career in the Kingdom of Prussia, Marx’s father converted to Protestantism. Karl himself rejected all religious beliefs at an early age, becoming a professed atheist—a stance that arguably casts atheism in a negative light. Marx began his studies in Bonn before transferring to the University of Berlin to pursue a doctoral degree in philosophy. However, his academic career was marked by laziness and lack of effort. Much of the money sent by his father for tuition was squandered on food, drink, and late-night debates about Hegelian philosophy in coffee houses and taverns. He eventually earned his doctorate by submitting his dissertation to the University of Jena, a less prestigious institution, barely meeting the requirements. Career and Political Activities   Marx’s professional life was limited to sporadic roles as a journalist and editor for various newspapers and journals. Most of these ventures failed due to low readership, financial instability, or political censorship. His political writings and activism forced him to relocate multiple times, from Paris to Brussels, and finally to London in 1849, where he lived until his death, with occasional trips to the European continent. Personal Life and Relationships   Karl Marx is widely believed to have had one illegitimate child with Helene Demuth, the family maid, who remained with him, his family and his wife. Helene gave birth to a son, Frederick Demuth, on June 23, 1851. The birth certificate left the father's name blank, but it is widely accepted that Marx was the father. To avoid scandal, Marx had his close friend and collaborator, Friedrich Engels, claim paternity of the child. Engels, on his deathbed, revealed the truth in a letter to Marx’s daughter Eleanor, stating, "Freddy is Marx’s son," shattering her perception of her father’s reputation. Karl Marx is often said to have had seven though it is actually 8 when considering these factors of history which includes one with the household maid as stated. The other children were with his wife, Jenny von Westphalen, and only three survived into adulthood, however, four of these children died in childhood. Of the three that survived into adulthood, one died of an assumed illness and the other two committed suicide. It breaks down as follows: Children Who Died in Childhood 1. Charles Louis Henri Edgar Marx ("Mush") • Born: 1847 • Died: 1855, at the age of 8. • Cause of Death: Poor health exacerbated by the family's impoverished living conditions. 2. Henry Edward Guy Marx • Born: 1849 • Died: 1850, at just over 1 year old. • Cause of Death: Convulsions. 3. Jenny Eveline Frances Marx • Born: 1851 • Died: 1852, shortly after her first birthday. • Cause of Death: Bronchitis, worsened by poverty and lack of medical care. 4. Unnamed Infant • Born: 1857 • Died: Same day as birth. • Cause of Death: Likely birth complications. Children Who Survived into Adulthood 1. Jenny Caroline Marx • Born: 1844 • Died: 1883, at the age of 38. • Cause of Death: Likely due to illness, specifics unclear. 2. Jenny Laura Marx • Born: 1845 • Died: 1911, at the age of 66. • Cause of Death: Suicide via cyanide alongside her husband, Paul Lafargue. 3. Jenny Julia Eleanor Marx • Born: 1855 • Died: 1898, at the age of 43. • Cause of Death: Suicide via cyanide after personal betrayal by her partner, Edward Aveling. Authoritarianism and Hypocrisy   Marx’s temperament was authoritarian and cruel. He publicly ridiculed those who disagreed with him, often resorting to humiliation. Privately, he was a hypocrite, flattering individuals when he needed something from them but slandering them behind their backs. His racial slurs, including those directed at Ferdinand Lassalle, a Jewish associate, reveal his deep-seated prejudices despite his own Jewish heritage. In his essay On the Jewish Question (1844), Marx espoused antisemitic views, portraying Jews as embodying the capitalist system he despised. This rhetoric eerily parallels the Nazi "race-scientists" of the 1930s, who similarly condemned Jews for their alleged pursuit of wealth and societal influence. Marxist Jews, who renounced their heritage, were even labeled "Spiritually Aryans" in Nazi Germany, further complicating his legacy. Personal Appearance and Lifestyle   Marx’s personal habits were as unkempt as his ideology. A Prussian spy who visited his London home in 1850 described it as filthy, with broken furniture, thick dust, and a pervasive stench. Marx himself was noted for his poor hygiene, rarely washing or changing his clothes, and often reeking of alcohol and body odor. This stark contrast between his public persona and private reality reflects the traits of a narcissist, projecting an image of intellectual superiority while living in squalor. Legacy of Contradictions   Marx’s life was riddled with contradictions. He promoted authoritarianism in his own home, plagiarized ideas while claiming originality, and espoused antisemitic views despite his Jewish heritage. His personal and professional failures, combined with his cruel treatment of others, paint a picture of a deeply flawed individual whose ideas have had a destructive impact on history. Gustav Techow, a Prussian military officer involved in the 1848 Berlin insurrection, provides a telling account of Karl Marx during his time in London. After being sentenced and imprisoned for treason, Techow fled to Switzerland, where his revolutionary group later dispatched him to London. While spending time with Marx, Techow observed a man whose intellectual brilliance was paired with notable flaws. In correspondence to his revolutionary associates, Techow remarked on Marx's contemptuous demeanor and power-driven personality. He described Marx as a figure of "outstanding intellectual superiority" but lamented his lack of compassion, noting that Marx’s ambition seemed to devour any good within him. Techow's observations painted a portrait of a man more interested in personal domination than collective revolutionary ideals. Marx, according to Techow, disdained both friends and foes, viewing them all as inferior. Playbook for Revolution and Mass Murder Karl Marx’s explicit intent to dismantle the institutions of society, coupled with his endorsement of violence toward enemies of the communist revolution, is encapsulated in a directive written with Friedrich Engels for the Central Committee of the Communist League in March 1850. This document essentially served as a blueprint for Vladimir Lenin’s execution of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia decades later. Marx outlined the organization’s goal as “the overthrow of the privileged classes,” initially working in collaboration with the “bourgeois” political parties, which he described as petty and liberal. He criticized these democratic parties for merely aspiring to establish limited reforms, such as reducing government spending, securing private property rights, and introducing welfare programs for the poor. Marx explicitly rejected such a moderate approach, instead advocating for radical, sweeping changes: "It is our interest and our task to make the revolution permanent until all the more or less propertied classes have been driven from their ruling positions, until the proletariat has conquered state power and until the association of the proletarians has progressed sufficiently far—not only in one country but in all the leading countries of the world… Our concern cannot simply be to modify private property, but to abolish it; not to hush up class antagonisms but to abolish classes; not to improve the existing society but to found a new one." Armed Councils and State Control Marx anticipated that after the fall of monarchies, liberal democratic governments might assume power. However, he insisted that these governments must not be allowed to consolidate control. To counteract this, he proposed that the revolutionary proletariat establish armed councils operating outside the authority of any democratic government—a tactic Lenin later implemented through the creation of Soviets in post-Czarist Russia after 1917. Marx also made it clear that the redistribution of feudal land should not result in private ownership by peasants. Instead, such land was to be collectivized under state control. Rural populations were to live and work on collective farms, while industries were to be nationalized under a centralized proletarian government to ensure the complete eradication of capitalism and “bourgeois” democracy. Revolutionary Violence and Sustained Chaos Marx emphasized the importance of maintaining revolutionary fervor after initial victories, instructing communist leaders to avoid suppressing the “immediate revolutionary excitement.” On the contrary, he advocated for the active direction of revolutionary excesses: "It must be sustained as long as possible. Far from opposing the so-called excesses—instances of popular vengeance against hated individuals or against public buildings with which hateful memories are associated—the workers’ party must not only tolerate these actions but must even give them direction." This chilling directive amounted to endorsing terrorism and mass murder under the guise of revolutionary vengeance. Such policies laid the groundwork for Lenin’s tactics during the Bolshevik Revolution, which relied on similar strategies of fear and violence to consolidate power. We see this also manifesting in Islam as well with its Sharia Law and other more modern, rather than ancient, sources of its doctrines. Legacy of Marx’s Vision Marx’s proposals for class warfare, violence, and the obliteration of societal structures underscore his role in shaping a revolutionary ideology that prioritized ideological purity over human life. His insistence on “making the revolution permanent” provided a roadmap for the atrocities committed under Lenin and subsequent communist regimes. These policies were not incidental but inherent to Marx’s strategy for achieving his vision of a classless society—a vision that, in practice, led to mass displacement, terror, and the deaths of millions. This playbook reveals the dangerous precedents set by Marx’s rhetoric, as it became the foundation for systematic authoritarianism and violence in the name of communism. Karl Marx’s writings and personal notes occasionally contained imagery and references that have been described as "satanic" by various commentators. These references, while not indicative of any explicit satanic belief system, reveal a dark and provocative tone. Here are some notable examples: 1. Poetic Writings: • In his poem The Player (1837), Marx wrote: "The hellish vapors rise and fill the brain, Till I go mad and my heart is utterly changed. See this sword—the prince of darkness sold it to me." This line reflects imagery of despair and a deal with dark forces, which some interpret as symbolic of rebellion against societal and divine norms. However, considering his history, this is more likely a romanticized remake of his awareness of his own increasing insanity. 2. Promethean Themes: • Marx often embraced the figure of Prometheus as a symbol of defiance against authority. In his doctoral dissertation, he referred to Prometheus, proclaiming: "I hate all the gods." While this aligns with his atheistic worldview, the overt antagonism has led some to characterize it as "satanic" rebellion. 3. Personal Correspondence: • In a letter to his father, Marx described a “demonic” force within him driving his ambitions: "A curtain had fallen, my holy of holies was rent asunder, and new gods had to be set in their place." This passage has been interpreted as an embrace of destructive and transformative forces, though it more likely is an awareness of his own increasing insanity and instability fused to his narcissism as with the first example. 4. Satanic as Metaphor: • Critics often view Marx’s use of such imagery as metaphorical rather than literal, representing his rejection of authority, religion, and societal structures. However, the provocative language has fueled accusations of his alignment with darker ideologies. However, it is often a hallmark concept of many self-proclaimed atheists and non-theists that use Satan and Satanism for a wide rather of metaphors and symbolism, while also more often than not veiling a more sinister Satanic theism twisted into Gnosticism. A Desire to Destroy Religion and Religious Freedom Marxism has historically been intertwined with atheism, particularly through its critique of religion as a tool of oppression. Karl Marx famously described religion as the "opium of the people," viewing it as a mechanism to pacify the masses and maintain the status quo. 1. This perspective laid the foundation for Marxist-Leninist atheism, which became a core element of state policies in regimes like the Soviet Union and Maoist China. 2. These governments actively promoted atheism, suppressing religious practices and institutions in favor of a materialist worldview. As for connections to Satanic movements, some commentators have drawn parallels between Marx's writings and themes of rebellion or defiance often associated with Satanic imagery. For instance, Marx's poetic works, such as The Player, include references to "hellish vapors" and "the prince of darkness," which some interpret as symbolic of his rejection of divine authority, but some also see it as being more expressly theologically Satanic reflecting his disdain for religion and societal norms and "anger" at God (perhaps). 1. Modern atheist and Satanic movements occasionally draw inspiration from Marxist critiques of religion, particularly in their shared opposition to traditional religious structures. 2. These connections are often more claimed to me merely thematic than direct, with each movement pursuing distinct goals and ideologies, while other examples of his works and their orders take on a more direct perspective as forces of "necessary destruction." The Conclusion: Karl Marx’s life and ideology, along with the dual manifestations of his vision—Socialism and Communism—paint a grim picture of a philosophy that has wrought immense suffering and destruction. Marx himself was a man riddled with contradictions: a professed champion of the oppressed who lived in squalor, exploited those closest to him, and harbored authoritarian tendencies. His personal flaws mirrored the inherent flaws of his ideology, which prioritizes abstract ideals over human life and dignity. Marxism, in its pursuit of a classless society, has consistently led to authoritarian regimes, economic collapse, and the erosion of individual freedoms. Socialism, with its inefficiencies, lack of incentives, and unsustainable redistribution, paves the way for centralized control and oppression. Communism, its more extreme counterpart, relies on forced relocations, cultural erasure, and terror to maintain power. Both systems, rooted in Marxist theory, have left a legacy of mass displacement, starvation, and the deaths of millions. The historical record is clear: Marxism, like its creator, is fundamentally flawed and profoundly destructive. Its promises of equality and progress are illusions, masking a reality of authoritarianism, division, and societal decay. Far from building a better world, Marxism and its derivatives have repeatedly dismantled civilizations, leaving devastation in their wake. It is a cautionary tale of how ideology, when divorced from compassion and practicality, can become a force of profound evil.

MY DESIGN FOR CLERGY RINGS: 03/14/2014 The Oath Ring of Service and a warning on adopting old customs: The reason for this Oath Ring for a Warlock or Witch of the First Church of Druwayu embodies the Warlock's or Witch's spiritual authority within the religion and symbolizes the hallowed (sacred) bond between individuals, co-clergy members, The One and Three, as well as our community. It should also be noted that when we adopt specific traditions such as this rooted in historical foundations, we avoid the mess of "fictional reconstructionism." The main reason this is avoided is because many so called reconstructionist "movements" are not only prone to ethnocentric and racist tendencies which were not factors recorded in the source material such often employ, many also impose a false narrative they are continuing an ancient tradition and thereby stray from historical authenticity, lack of evidence, literary embellishments and modern false romanticism. This can fall into a very dangerous course of embracing "claimed practices" that were likely invented not as authentic history but as slanders to discourage people they were seeking to convert to associate with their previous traditions such as but not limited to acts of ritual murder and other terrible deeds that are unworthy of being continued or perpetuated by any truly spiritually minded and ethical person. That isn't to say all such reports were entirely false, but many were, and others were often embellished, not unlike how early Christians were also accused of engaging in incest, infanticide, orgies and cannibalism; more of less all the same kinds of sick things later theocracies accused one another of and anyone that refused to submit to their dominions. The Basis Rooted in Known History: Historically, oath rings were used in legal and spiritual contexts, serving as signs of authority and elderhood (also called priesthood with the same basic meaning) and upon which individuals would swear oaths and evoke the Divine to bear witness to the same, and rule over such pledges and promises and bind such to the principles of the Drikeyu to insure they were kept and consequences would follow upon breaking them. Adopting the concept of rings, such as Oath Rings, into Druwayu for clergy is a meaningful idea for several reasons: 1. Symbol of Commitment: Rings can represent the clergy's dedication to the principles of Druwayu, including logic, humor, and the sacred bond with the One and Three. This aligns with the religion's emphasis on ethical behavior and responsibility. 2. Historical and Spiritual Significance: Drawing from historical traditions, rings have been used in various cultures as symbols of authority, elderhood, and spiritual connection. Incorporating this into Druwayu reinforces its ties to meaningful rituals and traditions. 3. Unity and Identity: Rings can serve as a unifying symbol for clergy members, fostering a sense of belonging and shared purpose within the community. 4. Design and Symbolism: The proposed designs for Druwayu clergy rings, such as hexagonal patterns and engravings like "Resist True Evil," reflect the religion's values and principles. These elements can deepen the spiritual and cultural identity of the clergy. 5. Modern Adaptation: By integrating rings into clergy practices, Druwayu demonstrates its ability to evolve and incorporate meaningful symbols that resonate with contemporary values while staying true to its roots. The Basis of the Symbolism: Historically the design and symbols used reflected meaning and purpose, as well as expressed spiritual beliefs and traditions. The ring is gold, though silver can also be used, and has a main hexagonal design based in the concepts of Geometry and a symbol of dimensional stability, as is the combined triangle and triple rings that represent the One and Three. Engraved in the sides is the "Resist True Evil" as a call to action, and under the symbol representing the One and Three is the "First Church of Druwayu Est. Oct 1, 2024" as a historical note. Of course, there is also the symbol of the folklore-based Warlock and Three Witches as representatives of the One and Three and thus represented by the Trident and Three Broom Heads combined on an equal armed cross form, surrounded with the wreath of victory, excellence, and achievement, drawing from Ancient Greek traditions, and from traditions associated with Knighthood: • Courage: Bravery in defending justice and freedom. • Mercy: Compassion for all, especially the vulnerable. • Justice: Protection of the innocent and ensuring fair treatment for everyone. • Generosity: Charity and sharing of resources for communal welfare. • Faith: Loyalty to ethical principles and commitment to truth. This is also reflected in the design for our Flag. At each point is inlaid diamonds with an inlaid background of black marble. The white diamonds represent loyalty, kindness, truth, knowledge, wisdom and understanding, the hallmarks of any worthy leadership. The Black Marble represents resistance and durability (resistance against evil and enduring will to overcome adversity). Because it is found all over the World, it also represents peaceful coexistence whenever and wherever possible. This itself shows, or intended to be a reminder to all, including the wearer, that we must respect and value the lives of others with dignity and ethical treatment of consideration of individuals rights to autonomous self-determination (free will) within the confines of not allowing one to impose their own over others and standing against all who do, or would rob others of this natural right and freedom. Who provides for these rings and inheritance: Historically individuals or members within the community may commission artisans to create custom oath rings for the clergy and to be treated with a deeper sense of reverential honor not to be passed out frivolously or for some sort of nonsense political statement that cheapens and dishonors those who do such things. Abiding by such old customs, they are taken from the dead by family and kept with family to prevent theft by unscrupulous morticians, then placed back upon their finger at the point of burial. How burials are conducted will depend on what was requested by the individual which may include sending them off in a burning ship as a way to honor the dead and guide their spirit to the hereafter, purified by the flames or placed within a family catacomb type tomb. The ring remains with them unless they have openly passed it on before they died to those who maintained their bonds with them more closely than others. Some important side notes: If you want to learn more about the meaning of the two titles of Warlock and Witch and not the ongoing forced fictions in most dictionaries as a result of shoddy scholarship and academic laziness, check out the section on Etymology. It has a significant number of details to clear up such matters and additional titles and terms thrown around far too much. That said: • Rational Reclamation and Rehabilitation: The adoption of the titles Warlock and Witch within Druwayu is a deliberate and meaningful reclamation and rehabilitation of historical and linguistic terms. • Intentions: These titles are not intended to intimidate, mislead, or impose on anyone. • Avoiding Trivialization: Their usage should never be trivialized as mere cosplay or superficial roleplay. • Specific to Druwayu: These titles are unique to Druwayu and represent distinct, rational roles within its cultural framework. They are separate from the identity of its adherents, known as Druans. • Symbols of Dedication: Warlock and Witch are symbols of dedication to truth, wisdom, and rational inquiry. • Rejecting Exaggerated Mysticism: These titles are grounded in Druwayu’s commitment to authenticity and intellectual integrity, while rejecting any associations with mysticism or fantasy. Addressing Deceptive Narratives About Warlock and Witch These facts are not unknown, and if you have ever read or seen anything about what everyone mispronounces as "Wick-uh," you know these things are factual having confronted such yourself, likely many times over. When trying to find the details, you will end up with more of the same. By bearing such a ring, you are also openly rejecting such associations and realize the serious and important role of bearing such a title as anything but mere cosplay or gratification of personal motives other than being a representative of a far more humane culture that Druwayu is intended to be, and not the garbage of it being "whatever you pretend it to be." 1. False Claims of Origin and Anti-Male Bias: • Many authors claim Warlock is of "Scottish origin" without citing credible sources (I have in Etymology), while Witch is often noted as Saxon in origin. These claims intentionally misrepresent facts to push a divisive, gendered sub-narrative of "men bad, women good." • Historical sources confirm Warlock originated from Saxon and Scandinavian interactions, denoting a masculine role from its inception. Attempts to paint it as culturally foreign or inherently negative are baseless. 2. Doreen Valiente’s Role in Modern Misinformation: • Doreen Valiente, an occultist and member of groups like the Bricket Wood Coven, further perpetuated these errors. Her involvement with Gerald Gardner, who drew heavily from Aleister Crowley and the debunked works of Margaret Murray (e.g., The Witch Cult of Western Europe), led to modern occult narratives conflating Warlock and Witch with mysticism and gender bias. • After conflicts with Gardner’s cult politics, Valiente created her own movement, introducing extreme anti-male, feminist slants that distorted historical and linguistic truths. 3. The Anti-Male Feminist Extremism: • Many modern distortions stem from ideological biases, promoting narratives that demonize men while elevating women within these roles. The result is a deliberate misrepresentation of historical roles and terms, misapplying them to serve ideological agendas. • Claims like Warlock meaning "betrayer" or "oath-breaker" are modern inventions, unsupported by historical or literary evidence which the Etymology will also prove, along with many other very important and interconnected concepts misrepresented for centuries, even before the more modern, further distortions. • These narratives aim to vilify Warlocks, and by default, men and boys in general and unfairly, while excusing similar accusations for Witches and by default, women and girls which goes back to the previous of "men bad, women good." • It's just the old idiocy of "the battle of the sexes" which is an irrational "power and authority struggle" between men and women and more often than not is woven into all sorts of odd and strange occult type hive mind ideologies, very much in the context of destructive cults. Some Notes on "Battle of the Sexes" The phrase "battle of the sexes" historically refers to the rivalry, opposition, or tension between men and women in society, often framed as a struggle for power. Its earliest recorded usage dates back to 1723, attributed to Samuel Wesley, a Church of England clergyman and poet. Over time, the phrase has been used to describe various societal dynamics, including gender relations, disagreements, and differing expectations between men and women. It has seen a twisted resurgence in modern times, particularly under the influence of extremist feminist ideologies and occult reinterpretations. This resurgence often reframes the concept as a divisive struggle, amplifying gender-based tensions rather than fostering understanding or equality. Extremist Feminism and Gender Narratives • In some circles, the "battle of the sexes" has been co-opted to promote narratives of inherent conflict between men and women, often portraying one gender as oppressors and the other as victims. This framing can perpetuate stereotypes and deepen societal divides. • Extremist feminist movements have at times, used the phrase to justify adversarial rhetoric, overshadowing efforts for genuine dialogue and mutual respect. Occult Roots and Misappropriations • The phrase has also been linked to occult reinterpretations, where gender dynamics are infused with mystical or esoteric symbolism. These reinterpretations often draw on speculative or fabricated histories, blending occult ideologies with gender narratives to create a distorted view of historical and cultural relationships. • Such misappropriations can obscure the original intent of the phrase, transforming it into a tool for ideological agendas rather than a reflection of societal dynamics. By understanding these influences, it becomes clear how the phrase has been reshaped to serve modern narratives, often at the expense of historical accuracy and constructive discourse. However, those who are so deeply embedded in it and more or less brainwashed will only prove to be a wasted effort to hold such proper discussions where objectors intentionally try to drown out through screaming and yelling rational and logical as well as factual discussions, failing to realize louder does not make them righter; just uselessly loud and unworthy of any amount of tolerance for such aggressive or abusive behaviors. This Oath Ring, as worn by a Warlock or Witch in Druwayu, serves as a powerful symbol of both rejection and dedication. Historically rooted in traditions of authority and spiritual commitment, the Oath Ring embodies the following: 1. Rejection of Clerical Nonsense: • By wearing the Oath Ring, Warlocks and Witches openly reject the distortions and false narratives perpetuated by external clergy or ideological movements. This includes rejecting the mystical, occult, and divisive reinterpretations that have historically misrepresented these roles. • The ring signifies a refusal to conform to dogmatic or fabricated traditions, standing instead for rationality, truth, and intellectual integrity. 2. Dedication to Druwayu and the Druish People: • The Oath Ring symbolizes a Warlock's or Witch's unwavering commitment to the principles of Druwayu, including logic, ethical behavior, and the pursuit of enduring truth. • It represents their bond with the Druish community and their role as dedicated leaders and counselors, fostering unity and shared purpose. 3. Cultural and Spiritual Identity: • The design of the Oath Ring reflects Druwayu's values, incorporating symbols like hexagonal patterns and engravings such as "Resist True Evil." These elements emphasize the wearer's dedication to justice, wisdom, and the protection of individual rights. • The ring also serves as a reminder of the wearer's responsibility to uphold Druwayu's teachings and traditions, ensuring they remain grounded in truth and free from external distortions. By wearing the Oath Ring, Warlocks and Witches affirm their roles as rational, ethical leaders within Druwayu, rejecting falsehoods and embracing their cultural and spiritual heritage. This act is both a personal declaration and a public statement of their dedication to the Druish people and the enduring values of Druwayu. The same is true for Druans waving our Flag.