Islam, Islamism, Conflict & Terrorism (a collection)

[120mm]

Just finished reading Who Speaks for Islam: What a Billion Muslims Really Think by John L. Esposito & Dalia Mogahed.

The book is based on Gallup's World Poll, and evaluates the attitudes and opinions of Muslims toward the West, and the West's attitudes and opinions toward Islam.

Very, very good read and there are some shockers (to me, at least) in there.

First, they pretty much destroy the correlation between religious fundamentalism and extremist violence that is so chic in the west. Basically, in the Islamic world, violent extremists aren't particularly demonstrably religious.

Second, they pretty much prove that the great majority of the Islamic world admires American freedom and technology. Which appears to weaken the position that "Islamic extremists attack us for our freedom and success" (shockingly, to me, the majority of self-described supporters of terrorism admire American freedoms and success; it's the perceived unfairness of action that they detest).

Third, they question effectively the presumption that Muslim women want western-styled women's liberation (they use the terms "libertine" versus "liberation" to make their point.)

I cannot remember reading a book so hungrily as the way I read this. I was prepared to tolerate this book, but ended up eager to get to the next point. I recommend reading this book, and welcome others' views on it. I picked out only two definite "weasel-passages" in it, where the authors very craftily side-stepped an issue that wasn't addressed in their research, but for a book that tries to achieve as much as this did, that's not bad....

[Tom Odom]

Well Drew I for one want you to write a review for the blog to capture your thoughts.

I would agree with the key points you say the book makes. What has eluded much of our IO efforts to date are those key points.

Best

Tom

[davidbfpo]

Professor Esposito appeared at the Islam Expo conference in London, earlier this year and spoke very well - to a mainly Muslim / Arab audience. Noticeable that he was listened to, rarely do Americans appear at such meetings. Will look at the book closer.

davidbfpo

[SWJED]

Drew,

I second Tom's recommendation for a blog review.

Dave

[120mm]

Well Drew I for one want you to write a review for the blog to capture your thoughts.

I would agree with the key points you say the book makes. What has eluded much of our IO efforts to date are those key points.

Best

Tom

Drew,

I second Tom's recommendation for a blog review.

Dave

That means I need to go find the book and check it out again... Why don't we have a "Smilie" for "lazy..."

I'll get right on it...

[Schmedlap]

they pretty much destroy the correlation between religious fundamentalism and extremist violence that is so chic in the west. Basically, in the Islamic world, violent extremists aren't particularly demonstrably religious.

In my opinion, that perceived correlation is a view crafted for consumption by the lowest common denominator. It seems to be the counterpoint to an equally invalid view that extremists hate us because America's foreign policy is dominated by neo-conservatives, even though the fervent disdain for America began at least as early as the 1970s, which was hardly the heydey of neo-con foreign policy. Jihadists have been chanting, and attempting to cause, death to America through the administrations of Carter, Reagan, Clinton, and Bush - four administrations whose foreign policies differed significantly.

My understanding, and what I percieve to be a fair consensus opinion, is that jihadists are motivated more by politics than by religion and more by broad anti-western fervor than with any opposition toward a particular brand of US foreign policy. "Political Islam" is a pretty good description, since the fervent opposition to the US is political and wrapped in a veil of pseudo-Islam for the purpose of perceived legitimacy. If the entire US converted to Islam, they would still hate us. But, if our government seized all of our multi-national corporations, liquidated their assets, taxed all of its citizens into oblivion, and then distributed the proceeds from that wealth confiscation to the rest of the world, and we apologized for being successful, then we might make some progress. (I'm not suggesting we do that.) We are, and will be, hated because of the degree of influence that we have upon the world, regardless of how we exert that influence. It has nothing to do with freedom and little to do with religion. But being hated often comes with the territory when in a leadership position. How many leaders have gone into combat with the attitude of, "I don't care if you hate me - I just care that we accomplish the mission and you go home alive"? I think the most important question is not, "how do we become less hated?" It is "how do we make the world less hospitable to terrorist networks?"

they question effectively the presumption that Muslim women want western-styled women's liberation (they use the terms "libertine" versus "liberation" to make their point.)

Check out the latest GPS podcast with Fareed Zakaria. He interviews the queen of Jordan and talks about this. Aside from being very easy on the eyes, it is also an interesting discussion on this topic.

[Rebecca White]

Schmedlap said: Check out the latest GPS podcast with Fareed Zakaria. He interviews the queen of Jordan and talks about this. Aside from being very easy on the eyes, it is also an interesting discussion on this topic.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bes...ef=videosearch

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bes...ania.part2.cnn

Very interesting videos, Schmedlap. Thanks.

I look forward to the possibillity of a book review of Who Speaks for Islam.

[SWJED]

... I look forward to the possibillity of a book review of Who Speaks for Islam.

... now posted at SWJ Blog. Nice review by LTC Drew Schumann.

[Tom Odom]

Great review!

Write more!

Tom

[davidbfpo]

Yes, a good review, which I will circulate to a few Muslims here in the UK for comment - including several women. Alongside the review is an advert for singlemuslim.com and a photo of a lady with a scarf. As the review comments on the views of Muslim women the advert is cannily well-placed.

davidbfpo

[Rebecca White]

Thanks for the well written, comprehensive review, LTC Schumann. This is a book I will read and share.

[Ken White]

...even though the fervent disdain for America began at least as early as the 1970s, which was hardly the heydey of neo-con foreign policy.

said disdain was prevalent pretty much world wide in the 1950s and was more virulent than today in the late 1960s. It did hit the ME in the 70s but it is absolutely NOT a new phenomenon.

...Jihadists have been chanting, and attempting to cause, death to America through the administrations of Carter, Reagan, Clinton, and Bush - four administrations whose foreign policies differed significantly.

That got started with the 'success' of the Munich Olympics hostage operation and several subsequent airline hijackings as the ME developed a worldwide focus. However, there is no doubt that the flawed policies and tepid response to provocations from the ME of all the Presidents you named put us where we are today.

...
I think the most important question is not, "how do we become less hated?" It is "how do we make the world less hospitable to terrorist networks?"

Yep...

[davidbfpo]

The links above did not work and found this one did: http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video...ef=videosearch

davidbfpo