Roguish Lawyer
12-10-2005, 12:24
by Olivier Roy (Columbia University Press, 2004). This book addresses a hotly debated topic on this Board -- whether we are at war with Islam.
The author teaches at the School of Advanced Studies in Social Sciences in Paris. Yes, he's French. Even admits it in a funny footnote. The book is a sequel to an earlier book entitled The Failure of Political Islam, which originally was published in French in 1992 and then translated into English in 1994. This time, he's writing in English in the first instance. You can tell that English is not his first language, as he uses some archaic spellings like "gaol" instead of "jail." Anyway, my impression is that this guy probably is a fairly well-regarded academic in this area, if not one of the top guys. Some, for example, give him credit for coming up with the term "fatwa." Much of the book is based on his review and analysis of Islamic websites, but he also appears to have conducted many interviews and reviewed other literature. The interviews are pretty high level -- he interviewed Zia, for example.
Jimbo recommended the book to me, so it has to be good, right? Jimbo, I expect you to reply to this thread with some developed thoughts now that I read this thing!
OK, so I think there are two main points made in the book.
First, Roy believes that people are oversimplifying the issue of whether we are at war with Islam. Islam is a religion, yet people often speak and write about it as if it were a culture. There are many schools of thought on key political issues, including, for example, whether jihad is a collective or individual duty. Thus, according to Roy, "there is no systematic link between a radical political position and theological thinking." Furthermore, Roy contends that believers in Islam inherently are influenced by the cultures in which they live, and that their beliefs and customs are far from homogeneous. "Neofundamentalists" like the Taliban are fighting against any cultural influence and effectively seeking to remove culture from Muslim lives and establish a purely religious state.
Second, Roy contends that neofundamentalism is driven by what he calls "deculturation" and "individualization." Most participants in various ongoing jihads around the world do so for nationalistic or other reasons not linked to Islam per se. These people (e.g., Palestinians) are doing what they are doing for local reasons, not to take over the world. The neofundamentalists (i.e., al Qaeda et al.), however, are motivated by faith in a radical worldview that grows out of these two phenomena. These people generally do not have real homes -- they have moved around the world, they may have multiple citizenships, etc. They don't have any natural sense of belonging to any particular culture or country. As a result, there is a psychological vacuum to be filled, as they need to belong to something. Enter the Ummah. Screw all these cultures, screw all these countries, I'm a Muslim and I belong to the imaginary global Ummah -- regulated by homogeneous religious norms divorced from any cultural influence. Anyone can join. (Roy often compares these people to the so-called Christian Right in the US, since anyone can belong and all you need is faith.) So you have a small group, basically a bunch of losers, who dream of achieving something that is completely impossible since most Muslims (and obviously most non-Muslims)have no interest in their program.
Ultimately, Roy thinks that the neofundamentalists' agenda is self-limiting. While it is a security threat, he thinks it should be dealt with through police and intelligence rather than military action.
OK, I'm being told that I've been working on this too long. Gotta go. May edit or add more later. Has anyone else read this?
The author teaches at the School of Advanced Studies in Social Sciences in Paris. Yes, he's French. Even admits it in a funny footnote. The book is a sequel to an earlier book entitled The Failure of Political Islam, which originally was published in French in 1992 and then translated into English in 1994. This time, he's writing in English in the first instance. You can tell that English is not his first language, as he uses some archaic spellings like "gaol" instead of "jail." Anyway, my impression is that this guy probably is a fairly well-regarded academic in this area, if not one of the top guys. Some, for example, give him credit for coming up with the term "fatwa." Much of the book is based on his review and analysis of Islamic websites, but he also appears to have conducted many interviews and reviewed other literature. The interviews are pretty high level -- he interviewed Zia, for example.
Jimbo recommended the book to me, so it has to be good, right? Jimbo, I expect you to reply to this thread with some developed thoughts now that I read this thing!
OK, so I think there are two main points made in the book.
First, Roy believes that people are oversimplifying the issue of whether we are at war with Islam. Islam is a religion, yet people often speak and write about it as if it were a culture. There are many schools of thought on key political issues, including, for example, whether jihad is a collective or individual duty. Thus, according to Roy, "there is no systematic link between a radical political position and theological thinking." Furthermore, Roy contends that believers in Islam inherently are influenced by the cultures in which they live, and that their beliefs and customs are far from homogeneous. "Neofundamentalists" like the Taliban are fighting against any cultural influence and effectively seeking to remove culture from Muslim lives and establish a purely religious state.
Second, Roy contends that neofundamentalism is driven by what he calls "deculturation" and "individualization." Most participants in various ongoing jihads around the world do so for nationalistic or other reasons not linked to Islam per se. These people (e.g., Palestinians) are doing what they are doing for local reasons, not to take over the world. The neofundamentalists (i.e., al Qaeda et al.), however, are motivated by faith in a radical worldview that grows out of these two phenomena. These people generally do not have real homes -- they have moved around the world, they may have multiple citizenships, etc. They don't have any natural sense of belonging to any particular culture or country. As a result, there is a psychological vacuum to be filled, as they need to belong to something. Enter the Ummah. Screw all these cultures, screw all these countries, I'm a Muslim and I belong to the imaginary global Ummah -- regulated by homogeneous religious norms divorced from any cultural influence. Anyone can join. (Roy often compares these people to the so-called Christian Right in the US, since anyone can belong and all you need is faith.) So you have a small group, basically a bunch of losers, who dream of achieving something that is completely impossible since most Muslims (and obviously most non-Muslims)have no interest in their program.
Ultimately, Roy thinks that the neofundamentalists' agenda is self-limiting. While it is a security threat, he thinks it should be dealt with through police and intelligence rather than military action.
OK, I'm being told that I've been working on this too long. Gotta go. May edit or add more later. Has anyone else read this?