On a global scale, Muslims bomb mosques every year. They strap detonators to their belt for suicide missions that they know will kill innocent women and children. Although they carry out these actions in the name of Islam, the Quran forbids both suicide and the slaughter of women and children. Most victims of this nihilistic barbarism are other Muslims. Such savagery will only end when the umma (Muslim community) condemns this blasphemy with the same zeal that it protested the Danish cartoons…
It’s a seductive argument, but it’s misplaced. Extremism doesn’t flourish because moderates are too quiet. It flourishes because it is more relevant to a given context.
Click "Read More" to Continue------->
It is very difficult for religious leaders in any war-torn backwater to preach peace and multiculturalism. These ideals are servants of the status quo. If oppressed groups do not see the status quo as improving (or see potential for improvement within the current system), they will become attracted to calls for overturning it. So mullahs who want power and people who want a purpose (or maybe just some money) join together in violent jihad.
For example, let's take the tribal areas of Pakistan. The level of dysfunction here is difficult to imagine. For 30 years, war refugees, militants, and drug smugglers have flooded the borderlands and overburdened social services. The only foreigners these guys have ever met are troops and jihadists. Remote-controlled American drones fly overhead. Forget gainful employment or reliable electricity: only 17% of people in the tribal areas are even literate. When children's education consists of memorizing the Quran and firing AK-47s, it is no surprise that many grow up with perverted views of the world.
There are, of course, other contributing factors. Rich Saudis, such as Osama bin Laden, leave behind their meaningless and guilt-ridden lives of luxury to live out Quranic fantasies in Afghanistan. Many youth, lacking social freedom, rebel by becoming overly pious. They are frustrated by political stagnation, a lack of jobs, the high costs of marriage, and by the awareness that their co-religionists are suffering. In a different era, these disaffected youth might have become anarchists, pan-Arabists, or communists. We just happen to be in the age of Islamism.
When and where “Islamic rule” comes to power, so too will it be discredited, as is happening in Iran. Islam, moderate or extremist, doesn’t pick up the trash in the morning or put food on the table in the evening. It is neither the problem nor the solution; it is only a vehicle for mobilization.
My aim here is not to exonerate the fundamentalists. They are a loathsome scourge that needs to be expunged. But the fundamentalists are only symptoms of the disease; they are not the source of the illness. Too many corners of the Muslim world have seen too much suffering and too little opportunity. Until the states of these regions pave the path with good governance, moderation will not come to the barren hills of the world’s Wazirstans.
- Jon
Comments
Do you happen to be a Marxist ? :-)
I like your blog, you do good job! Well Done!
In this article you identify the two extremes of muslim society that morph into radical and violent islam: the poor and ignorant of the muslim third world who embrace jihad and martyrdom as a respected (and often well-paid) response to the alien world outside of their mosque or clan, and the privileged few who reject the immorality and exclusivity of their family wealth in favor of anti-intellectual, guilt-cleansing, religious fundamentalism. While the former can be justified as driven by economic necessity or opportunity, the latter is simply the adoption of one nihilistic philosphy over another, and proves that even the well-educated can be brainwashed. Certainly improving education and bringing economic opportunity to the muslim third world will make a tremendous difference. However, as we've seen in Iraq, a country with I believe the highest or second-highest literacy rate in the Arab world, fundamentalist brainwashing and centuries-old clan rivalries combine to thwart the democratic aspirations of moderates and intellectuals. Iraq proves that education and economic opportunity of the masses is not enough to overcome the manipulation of impressionable and idealistic islamic men and women by maniacal imams. The crazies, the brainwashers, the bomb makers and martyr inspirers must be shut down by any means, from outside and from within islam. Destroy the roots of the poisonous and invasive radicalism, and then replace it with the opportunities of a 21st century education and entry into the modern world. It's a tall order, and I believe it will never be accomplished completely. But the institutions of jihadism must be crushed or radical islam will continue to threaten global peace and security. This is both a military and a social challenge that requires full cooperation of the governing moderates in the Arab world. And the Arab press had better buy in quickly, because so long as the jihadists remain popular on the street, the money and sympathy will continue flowing to the crazies. The moderate Arab world, especially the super wealthy oil royalty, ultimately decide islam's fate, whether to carry islam into the 21st century, or stand by while islam is taken over by the 14th century feudalists.
I disagree with you Paul Drescher. I think the problem with the Muslim world is that they don't have competent and effective central states, not because they have extremists. The Islamis extremists kick in to fill the void. Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan are prime examples of these states.
Take the state out of the social life, the extremists in anywhere will kick in. I wonder what would happen if the US government's authority was seriously undermined on American territories. I think we would see the rise of Ku Klux Klan, explosion of racism, religious fanaticism, fragmentation of the US population along the ethnic lines. This is what is happening in the Muslim world I believe. The states are not that effective and competent.
I tend to see what is going on in Iraq as more of a power struggle. Most of the suicide bombers are Sunni Arabs- the group that lost the most in the post-Saddam Iraq. Security increased once the US started paying off the Sunni tribal leaders. Ancient splits are only relevant in times of conflict.
Conversely, the Shia Arab militias have been remarkably restrained over the past couple years. Ayatollah Sistani, the highest Shia authority in the world, has preached peace and reconciliation. Why? Because the Shias have benefited tremendously from the post-Saddam order. Kurds have also benefited tremendously.
Cenk, as for my political philosophy, I tried to outline some of it in the "About" section to the right of the title. I believe that political actors seek power within given constraints. Ideologies that serve interests proliferate, those that do not wither away.
As for Marxism, I appreciate the focus on interests, structure, and power. But history is more than class struggles, and alternative identities are more than simple delusions. I personally don't like consumerism, but I find communism abhorrent. I've been reading a lot of political economy recently, Karl Polanyi in particular, and I'm still forming my thoughts on this topic.
Anyway, glad that you enjoy the blog, and keep checking back often!
