Quote Originally Posted by Abu Buckwheat View Post

This description of AQ absolves the Moslem audience of the unfortunate associations our politicians have been making with Islam. Once AQ are removed as legitimate co-religionists this framing gives them a purely Islamic way of rejecting them as criminals and non-believers. A light always goes on when I propose these frames. When I don't, I am deluged with arguments as to why they have legitimacy, right or wrong, as Mujahideen.

For my Mideast History course last semester I had to review a book called "The Many Faces of Political Islam" by Dr. Mohammed Ayoob, a professor at University of Michigan. I cut and pasted some snippets from my review below.

===================


The Many Faces of Political Islam By Dr. Mohammed Ayoob
University of Michigan Press, 2006, 232 Pages.

Dr. Ayoob’s work on political Islam is a timely assault on many of the myths surrounding the nature and threat of Islamic activism that is often portrayed in popular American media. Dr. Ayoob characterizes the majority of these groups under the title of “Political Islam”, which he defines as “a form of instrmentalization of Islam by individuals, groups, and organizations that pursue political objectives.” In essence, political Islam seeks to apply Islamic principles to the execution of modern government through acquiring the power of the state.

The appeal of political Islam is multifaceted. The author cites the most basic appeal as the romantic notion of a “Golden Age” of Islam at the time of the Prophet and the first four caliphs. The golden age was modeled most prominently in the city-state structure of Medina during this period. Popular conception of this period has been idealized in popular literature and stories much the way the “founding fathers” are venerated in America. This appeal has been maintained throughout the centuries and found major revival in the 19th and 20th centuries as the majority of the Islamic world was brought under European domination during the colonial period.

Dr. Ayoob contends the rise of Arab dictatorships in the mid-20th century has greatly aided the growth of political Islam due to the repressive natures of the regimes which often restricted or outlawed public dissent. Therefore dissent was often voiced through religious, rather than political means, and thus has reinforced the perception that religion and politics are inseparable in Islam. In fact, political repression is often so extreme that if many of these governments fall a religious replacement is the only organized option in many states.

A number of myths regarding the threat of political Islam are addressed in this book. Dr. Ayoob successfully takes on several key contentions of the pundit masses regarding Islam as a monolithic religion. He asserts that “no two Islamism’s are alike”, and notes that almost every Islamist movement has characteristics specific to its local character despite similar rhetoric. Dr. Ayoob contrasts six political Islamic movements in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Egypt, Turkey, Indonesia, and finally the insurgent groups Hamas and Hezbollah to prove his case.

Dr. Ayoob studies each case where a political Islamic group has risen to power and the resulting effect on civil society. In every example the political Islamist groups have either failed to achieve their lofty goals of a religious state (such as Saudi Arabia and Iran), moderated extreme religious principles for democratic unity (Turkey and Indonesia) , or taken a balanced path (Pakistan and Egypt). In each case, the impact of political Islam was far less radical in execution than rhetoric. One of the key problems for many groups is a common vision of what a perfect Islamic state would look like. Dr. Ayoob largely assigns this to the requirements of governing large and complex societies.

Transnational Islamic groups are also addressed; primarily the Al Qaeda movement and also the “Caliphate” movement that have so captured western attention. Dr. Ayoob contends that for all the scare-mongering, the idea of a renewed Caliphate is a fringe idea, with its base of support among British expatriates. He cites numerous surveys to document the extremely small amount of support these groups have and contends western (primarily US) over-reaction is slowly increasing what little support these groups do enjoy. While dangerous, Dr. Ayoob contends that they have no chance of achieving their lofty rhetoric of Islamic domination. On the contrary, most affiliated groups have local, not transnational, goals.

Overall, the book was a fascinating insight into a subject that is much misunderstood and often demonized in the American media. Dr. Ayoob’s dispassionate analysis succeeds in dispelling many myths of an Islamic juggernaut bent on establishing a new world Caliphate. Indeed, most of these movements are local in nature, and political responses to repressive regimes which fail to address the needs of their peoples. The book was highly readable for the student or casual observer. In compiling this book, Dr. Ayoob has done a great service. I would like to see a more mainstream circulation and discussion of these issues in the mass media.