08-10-2006, 11:52 PM
X-Posted from BR
ramana
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Actually blaming Islam for this modern or 'nouveau' radicalization is not correct. This radicalization is an evolutionary end product which can be traced to the melding of political Islam with Hegelian bye-products of Marxism and Fascism. This is beyond Wahabism which still separted the ulema from the Sultan and did not call for overthrow of the rulers. That strain has come from the French revolution. This line of thinking has matured in India which did not have Muslim rulers for over two hundred years after the fall of the Mughals in the 1700s and can be traced to Syed Ahmed to Maduddi.
I would like to term the new Islamism as Maduddiism but to account for the global phenomenon it is more apt to call it Qutbism as the dogma was developed and spread in the Middle East by the Egyptian Qutb through the Muslim Brotherhood.
So what the world is facing is Qutbism and not just Islamism.
A whack moment!<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
and
ramana
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Khomeinism affected only Iran and Shias while the other two affected the Sunnis who are a majority. So Khomeinism is a minor problem and should not confuse the issues.
In fact I can see a pattern similar to the French Revolution and the containment of Khomeinism- the early revolution against the Shah by the disaffected Iranis, the hijacking of the movement by Khomeini supporters, the mass executions and purges by the Khomeini supporters, the fear of spreading the revolution to other Islamic lands, the Iraq war, the eventual defeat of Iran disguised as a peace agreement, the stabilization of the Khomeini revolution in Iran, the rising of a dictator/despot Ahmedinejad. All these are signs of end of history type of course of events. So Fukuyama is right after all only he didint subject it to the right analysis. If this true then Iran is on a path to modernization if the threat to Islam is reduced. Napoleon made the revloution palatable for Catholic France by making his ecclestial concord with Pope Pius. Unfortunately Iran has no leader who can do that yet.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Acharya
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Finally you have connected all of them.
How do you explain what is happening in Kashmir<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My reply
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->All religions did have their exclusivist moorings. The problem at hand is due to the ideological transformations due to the Hegeleian bye-products and has to be recognized as such. By bringinng the roots one will manage to rally the moderates around the hard core with the Islam khatrey mai hain. I am trying to isolate the oil drops and soak them up from the mix.
--------------
The origins of the Kashmir movement are in the revolts against the Maharaja in the 1930s which had broad based support from the Kashmiri Muslims, Pandits etc. This movement become an exclusive domain of Sheikh Abdulla and when he failed ot deliver the promise of liberalism the movement got hijacked by pan Islamism.
In fact I read a report by Madhu Limaye to JL Nehru, published in Ind Express in the 1980s, where he did not want GOI to support the NC folks as they were Communists who were out to get a revolution going in Kashmir. There are anecdotal reprots in British novels of the Kashmir movement being a red movement.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now was AlQ created to bring about a revolution in Sunni lands?
ramana
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Actually blaming Islam for this modern or 'nouveau' radicalization is not correct. This radicalization is an evolutionary end product which can be traced to the melding of political Islam with Hegelian bye-products of Marxism and Fascism. This is beyond Wahabism which still separted the ulema from the Sultan and did not call for overthrow of the rulers. That strain has come from the French revolution. This line of thinking has matured in India which did not have Muslim rulers for over two hundred years after the fall of the Mughals in the 1700s and can be traced to Syed Ahmed to Maduddi.
I would like to term the new Islamism as Maduddiism but to account for the global phenomenon it is more apt to call it Qutbism as the dogma was developed and spread in the Middle East by the Egyptian Qutb through the Muslim Brotherhood.
So what the world is facing is Qutbism and not just Islamism.
A whack moment!<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
and
ramana
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Khomeinism affected only Iran and Shias while the other two affected the Sunnis who are a majority. So Khomeinism is a minor problem and should not confuse the issues.
In fact I can see a pattern similar to the French Revolution and the containment of Khomeinism- the early revolution against the Shah by the disaffected Iranis, the hijacking of the movement by Khomeini supporters, the mass executions and purges by the Khomeini supporters, the fear of spreading the revolution to other Islamic lands, the Iraq war, the eventual defeat of Iran disguised as a peace agreement, the stabilization of the Khomeini revolution in Iran, the rising of a dictator/despot Ahmedinejad. All these are signs of end of history type of course of events. So Fukuyama is right after all only he didint subject it to the right analysis. If this true then Iran is on a path to modernization if the threat to Islam is reduced. Napoleon made the revloution palatable for Catholic France by making his ecclestial concord with Pope Pius. Unfortunately Iran has no leader who can do that yet.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Acharya
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Finally you have connected all of them.
How do you explain what is happening in Kashmir<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My reply
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->All religions did have their exclusivist moorings. The problem at hand is due to the ideological transformations due to the Hegeleian bye-products and has to be recognized as such. By bringinng the roots one will manage to rally the moderates around the hard core with the Islam khatrey mai hain. I am trying to isolate the oil drops and soak them up from the mix.
--------------
The origins of the Kashmir movement are in the revolts against the Maharaja in the 1930s which had broad based support from the Kashmiri Muslims, Pandits etc. This movement become an exclusive domain of Sheikh Abdulla and when he failed ot deliver the promise of liberalism the movement got hijacked by pan Islamism.
In fact I read a report by Madhu Limaye to JL Nehru, published in Ind Express in the 1980s, where he did not want GOI to support the NC folks as they were Communists who were out to get a revolution going in Kashmir. There are anecdotal reprots in British novels of the Kashmir movement being a red movement.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now was AlQ created to bring about a revolution in Sunni lands?