Public Opinion in the Islamic World on Terrorism

**jmm99** · 02-24-2009

Got to thinking about this:

Principle (ideal) > interpretation of ideal > implementation of interpretation.

Concept 1 (expressed in words) > Concept 2 (expressed in words) > Actions to implement Concept 2. "Ye shall know them by their deeds"

in the context of post #28 - Moderate Islam and UBL Critique - in this thread; and in the context of Galula's comments on "Tactical Manipulation of the Cause" (his example is Mao's switches in messages to the masses).

Folks tell you what they think you want to hear (evading an argument); or tell you what they think you should hear (propaganda) - none of which may have anything directly to do with their "ideology", whether you measure that at step 1, 2, 3 or take all into account.

Just thinking out loud about ideology and polling.

**marct** · 02-24-2009

Originally Posted by jmm99

Folks tell you what they think you want to hear (evading an argument); or tell you what they think you should hear (propaganda) - none of which may have anything directly to do with their "ideology", whether you measure that at step 1, 2, 3 or take all into account.

Just thinking out loud about ideology and polling.

It's a good point to keep in mind

. It's also one of the reasons why there is always a lot of conflict (usually joking) between qualitative and quantitative researchers. Even on the qual side, you see the same problems, i.e. with focus groups (there's also a small group role factor working). It's much less of a problem with good ethnographic fieldwork but, the flip side, is that you end up with a really tiny sample

.

Honestly, I have never really liked the term 'ideology" as an analytic term. Systems of governance you can at least measure even if your measurements may not "mean" that much. Ideology? Sheesh! Talk about tricky!

BTW, the reason why I tend to place it in that sort of stage 2 Interpretation area is because when you try and get at what most people believe it is often a pastiche of different things, situationally defined (usually by what role they are in at that point in time) and rarely coherent. Most often, at least when I have been trying to get at it, what I find is an underlying basic epistemology (well, a cross between an epistemology and a cosmology) that seems to influence the likelihood of any particular meme "sticking" in a personal "ideology".

I know, sounds pomo

.

**jmm99** · 02-25-2009

As an example (where we know most of the facts from hindsight), I was thinking about application of stage 2 Interpretation analysis to Mao, during the phase where he was stressing land reform. Based on that evidence, one could reasonably conclude that Mao was an agrarian reformer. And as I recall, ca. 1950, many had been calling him just that during and after WWII.

The reality was that the real goal was not land reform, but collective farming. The folks in the ChiCom inner circles were well aware that stage 2 Interpretation was itself made up of two stages:

1. Stage 2a - interpretation of ChiCom doctrine (end justifies means) to allow a message (land reform) apparently inconsistent with that doctrine (collective farming).

2. Stage 2b - verbalization of a land reform program that would appeal to the greatest number of peasants - which allowed the agrarian reformer label and something of a National Liberation Front.

In South Vietnam, Ho's government (technically, of a united Vietnam) went beyond Stages 2a and 2b to Stage 3 to implement a land reform program, which continued in VM-controlled areas from 1946-1955. When Diem's government employed ARVN to get back the lands (and back-rents) for the landlords, he was left with a horde of very disgruntled peasants. The latter were not unhappy when "their" VM cadres returned a few years later, and the SVN NLF was formed.

The point is that getting back to the actual ideology, in the absence of internal documents, can take a reasonable person down side paths to the wrong conclusions. Agreed that this is a tough area for the researcher or intel officer - lots of chances for errors.

**George L. Singleton** · 02-25-2009

Having completed and mailed in today our new Alabama National Veterans Cemetery Support Committee first federal tax return (I am the Treasurer), belatedly I return to shotgun back some points to several on this thread who spoke about Israel, the Middle East, etc. earlier today.

I think it was MarcT who commented in particular that my remarks about religion (Islam) in terms of mind set/psychology of the Middle Eastern troops/military was mistaken as there are no "Mulsim" armies there. Words to that effect.

With Jimmy Carter's (he still deserves great credit for this in my book, and I am a Republican) Peace Treaty between Israel, Egypt, and Jordan, he/we quieted down two armys which are "essentially" made up of mostly troops of the Muslim faith (Syria,Jordan, and a thrid, now willing to talk "about" Isreal peacefully, Saudi Arabia are in mind), with Egypt having a more secular style of government (Sadat of course later on assassinated) and Jordan having then and now an Islamic Monarchy. ***I was a guest in the Rose Garden audience at the White House signing of the Israel, Egypt, Jordan Peace Accord (or Treaty), courteousy of my distant cousin, Jody Powell, who was Carter's Press Secretary.

Then I recall from earlier today another poster coming down on Israel and castigating President Truman who I personally found to be one of our greatest ever Presidents, exept for Ike, who I liked the most of all our Presidents.

Since 1947 many Arab and other Islamic nations, to include even back then the new nation of Pakistan, opposed the founding by UN Resolution of Israel, together with same Resolution, the founding of a new Palestinian State, which these obstreperous Arab and other Muslim nations flatly rejected and refused to support.

Israel is a brave little nation and a exempliary beacon of democracy, for those who sincerely want to see more democracy in the Middle East, your working example remains one of one, Israel.

I suspect these few remarks will stimulate counter remarks so will shut down for now.

**JJackson** · 02-26-2009

I saw a link to the meeting but not the survey. If this is a duplicate post, sorry and please delete. It is what you would expect.
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pi..._Feb09_rpt.pdf