-Caveat Lector-

Nazis, Communists, and radical Islamists by YEHUDA BAUER
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Nov. 29, 2002
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All utopias are murderous; radical, apocalyptic, universalist utopias
are
genocidal

The interviewer, a young Egyptian woman, Doua Amer (IQRA Arab TV, May
7),
was charming. She introduced the interview by admonishing every Muslim
woman strictly to observe the only true religion.

Then she turned to little Basmallah, aged three and a half: "Do you
know
about the Jews?" "Yes." "Do you like the Jews?" "No." "Why?" "Because
they are apes and pigs ... a Jewish woman tried to poison our Prophet
Muhammad." A wonderful example of the kind of "humanistic" education
that
radical Muslims endow their small children with.

Islam is not a murderous religion, and Muslims are no different from
Christians, Jews, Buddhists, or Confucians. But there arose among
them,
in the last 50 years or so, a new interpretation of Islam, a radical
theology that has been spreading like cancer among the 1.2 billion or
so
Muslim believers in the world, or about a fifth of humanity. Where
does
it come from? What does it say?

There are conservative, "fundamentalist," trends in all religions.
They
tend to be exclusionary, arguing that anyone who does not share their
faith is destined to roast in hell. They are fanatic in their beliefs,
and try to convert everyone else to their particular dogma. They
believe
in the literal interpretation and absolute truth of every word of
their
sacred texts.

In Christianity, there are the radical evangelical sects, and the
right-wing Catholics; in Judaism, the haredi and Zionist-religious
fanatics; in Hinduism, the radicals who want to turn Indian democracy
into an exclusivist Hindu society. In Islam, there are religious
conservatives such as the Wahabis, who in the 18th century founded the
belief system governing modern Saudi Arabia.

The radical Islamists are different. They are a modern phenomenon,
founded in Egypt by Hassan el-Banna in 1928, and given an extreme
ideology by Sayyed Qutb, a man who had spent some time in the US, and
had
come back convinced that the West was degenerating, and that the time
had
come for Islam to conquer the world. Qutb published his brochures in
the
Fifties and early Sixties, until he was executed by the Nasserist
regime
in 1966 because his teachings argued against the existence of
Egyptian,
and for that matter any other, Arab nationalism.

Radical, totalitarian Islamists demand that the existing Arab national
states should become Islamized, governed by religious (shari'a) law,
not
by constitutions, and certainly not by democratic institutions
reflecting
the will of a majority. The rulers would be those who are experts in
Islamic law.

The aim is to conquer the world and make it Islamic, and an important
step towards that goal is the toppling of the existing Arab national
regimes. The final result would be a utopia of a peaceful mankind,
ruled
by Islamic religious experts.

Qutb also declared that the Jews were a main enemy of Islam, and
should
be destroyed. The cause of all this may well be the frustration of a
society that has fallen behind because of its inability - though
attempts
were made to overcome it - to change its rigid traditional and
cultural
patterns in order to enable middle-class individualism to develop
democratic institutions and scientific and economic progress. The
ensuing
mass poverty has apparently caused members of the intelligentsia and
upper classes to develop radical Islamism, and recruit the foot
soldiers
for its totalitarian agenda.
Qutb was followed by others, most of them Egyptians; however, one of
the
important teachers of radical Islam was Abul Ala el-Maududi, a
Pakistani
(died in 1979). The teachings spread. In Saudi Arabia, radical Islam
became a real danger for the corrupt, absolutist Saudi dynasty as it
accused the ruling family of betraying "real" Islamic values. It was
out
of this cauldron that Osama bin Laden, and the 15 Saudis who were
among
the 19 terrorists on September 11, emerged.

The Egyptian and most other radical Islamists are Sunni. Parallel to
them, the Khomeini revolution took place in Shi'ite Iran. Some
observers
believe that the Iranian regime is moving towards moderation; yet even
they will agree that the radical conservatives are still in power and
are
vigorous in their attempts to prevent any such development from taking
root.
Trying to destabilize the West, Sunni and Shi'a radicals have now been
cooperating. There is no center to which all these groups owe loyalty
-
one of the novel things about this phenomenon is the fact that it is
the
ideology that is common, whereas the organizational structure is
diffuse.
There are more than a dozen radical groups in Algeria, and an even
larger
number in Kashmir; but they maintain loose associations between them,
and
regard each other as brothers-in-arms; almost all, if not all,
acknowledge their Egyptian, Muslim Brotherhood, origin. Hamas and
Islamic
Jihad in Palestine say so openly.

The ultimate aim of all these groups is not only, as some observers
have
argued, the eviction of American troops from Islamic lands, especially
Saudi Arabia, or the annihilation of Israel - though these certainly
are
immediate targets, and the problems which they represent serve as
triggers for radical Islamist actions. Yet, if all US troops were
withdrawn from Saudi Arabia, and Israel defeated, with its Jewish
population annihilated - and these are declared Islamist aims - the
main
target would still remain: world conquest.

THE PAST hundred years or so has seen three mass movements aiming at
utopias that could only be achieved by world conquest: National
Socialism, Communism, and now radical Islamism (not Islam as such).
There
are vast differences between them, to be sure, but there are also some
interesting parallels. All three developed (quasi-) religious
ideologies
with sacred texts that were literally interpreted.

National Socialist (Nazi) ideology was believed in "religiously" by
very
large numbers of people, and action was guided by its literal
interpretation. Marxist-Leninism was undoubtedly a "religious" belief
system, with sacred texts. So is totalitarian Islamism. All three
aspired, or aspire, to rule over the entire world, promising a utopia
and
an apocalyptic end to history. All three were, or are, genocidal.

One may perhaps change the famous saying of British historian Lord
Acton
and argue that all utopias are murderous; radical, apocalyptic,
universalist utopias are radically murderous.

The Nazis and Communists targeted Jews then, and radical Islamists do
so
now, though each in different ways. The Nazis wanted to murder every
single Jew in the world. The Stalinists wanted to eliminate the Jewish
people as a people, and exile Soviet Jews to Siberia. Osama bin Laden
defined his aims in 1998: to kill "Jews and Crusaders" (i.e.
Christians).

What is the attitude of the West to these developments? Again, there
seems to be a parallel. In the Thirties, there was sympathy with the
aims of a Nazified Germany trying to undo the "unjust" Versailles
treaty
system. In parallel, many intellectuals thought that the Soviet regime
was doing something new and positive - they were to think that way in
the
Fifties and the Sixties as well.

The treatment of minorities, especially Jews, was considered to be
unfortunate, but there were excesses in every positive revolution,
weren't there? Nowadays, there is European lip service to the need to
fight international terror, but many intellectuals and the politicians
who represent their thinking in effect defend the right of the radical
Islamists to pursue their agenda - as long as they don't attack
Europe,
but keep their attacks concentrated on the almost universally hated
US,
and of course Israel.

In the past, Jews were persecuted as individuals. Now it is easier
because one need not be an anti-Semite; one can simply be in favor of
the
annihilation of the collective Jew, Israel.

It is wrong to see in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict either the main
reason for the rise of radical Islamism or, on the other hand, to
ignore
its impact on radical Islamists. It is an ethnic, and now increasingly
an
ethno-religious, conflict, and like all such conflicts between
adversaries that are unable to defeat each other, can only be solved
by a
compromise which at the moment the elites on both sides oppose.

Palestinian society is fragmented: radical Islamists, who apparently
control some 30 percent of the population, do not want any political
settlement, but call for the annihilation of Israel, a member state of
the UN, and by clear implication of its inhabitants; Israeli radicals
demand, under various guises, ethnic cleansing and deportations of
Palestinians, and by implication, massacres.

The Islamic state to which radical Islamists aspire would turn
Christian
Palestinians into non-citizens. Other armed militias oppose this, but
have joined the Islamists in suicide murders and terror attacks. The
Israelis have responded with (unintended but terrible) killing of
civilians, demolition of houses, curfews that prevent Palestinians
from
pursuing normal lives, and denial of civil rights.

The total toll of lives in more than two years of intifada is around
the
2,500 mark (about the number of victims of a week's Hindu-Muslim
disturbances in India, last month); but the issue is not the number of
victims, but the damage done to the two societies.

A political compromise, which is ultimately unavoidable, will
undoubtedly
help in the fight against radical Islamism, but will most certainly
not
end it. The radical Islamist attack on the Jews is a first,
potentially
genocidal step. Ultimately and explicitly, as in similar previous
situations, it is directed against Western civilization as such.

If intellectual, economic and political defense against radical
Islamism,
and not just military responses, is postponed because of weak-kneed
Western attitudes, the price paid later will be very high indeed, as
was
the price the world paid for the rise of National Socialism and Soviet
Communism, if not more so.

The writer, a professor emeritus at Hebrew University, is author most
recently of Rethinking the Holocaust.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/Show
Full&cid=1038544110950

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to