Evading the risk of Islmophobia, the point is obvious that the realities of islamic history are subject to a cover up. That’s not even news, the historical reality is so out front that it is remarkable it is even debated. But the legacy has obviously and compassionately tried to create an edited understanding of the historical reality.
A book like Fregosi’s Jihad, despite its Islmophobic cast, exposes the reality with almost crushing clarity, whatever its historical faults. This isn’t even a debate, so as outsiders we need to welcome efforts by islamic scholars to bring the facts into the open.
The issue is confused almost beyond imagining by the suspected and almost proven facts of false-flagging ops by rogue states like the US and Israel. It is a calamity of historical crime that has put the issue of modernity in check.
But here I think the jihadists make a mistake: they have every right to defend themselves against american and israeli criminality but the joker in the deck is that we also suspect abortions like Isis to be manufactured, and this makes idiocy of everyone.
At this point I would simply inject a counterintuitive recommendation, as an outsider, but as an involved co-participant. I have lived and endured the best and worst of Islam’s former sufi glory and the result is not pious intercultural swoon but a Bronx cheer heard all the way from Bronx to Bhagdad. I think the world of islam and sufism are hitting the skids after the manner of xtianity and its reformation.
The secular is ambiguous and misdefined by its own proponents, but its point is clear: you dare not delay the transition to modernity. Islam actually has many elements of modernity already and a good makeover could leave a ‘protestant reformed islam’ of great cogency for the modern world. But like everything else in life the optimum is likely to be an illusory hope. So it will happen by another route, and that looks like what we see now, a conspiracy by israel and the US to seed and foment the destruction of islamic civilization, a crime against humanity so stark it seems like a are a refutation of the secular. In fact, I suspect ultimately a concealed xtian attempt to destroy the islamic world. But whatever the case the response of holding onto the past never works. The islamic world was on the threshold of modernization in the nineteenth century, witness the turkish case, but something happened on the way to the twentieth and capitalist/neoliberal oil politics could be one of the major components.
The issue stalemates because ifthe secularists are a bunch of oil gangsters why not respond with a jihadic restoration of a calipahate? Dunno, but I do know one thing clearly: it won’t work. Let’s repeat that, it won’t work. So let’s move on to other options.
The best option is a turkish style reformation underway/done so fast, the whole middle east can be done with Islam in a decade or two and in the process restoring turkey to something like its original secularism, or better, by throwing out bums like Estrogan.
Presumption on my part? Mind you own business? I have a friend in the new age movement who had his brain fried by rogue sufis, ten thousand miles away. To say one should take this lying down is unrealistic. The old rules of cultural boundaries no long apply. These days some people have to mind their own business all the way to Bhagdad, and vice versa, watch out Bronx…
I think that a form of radical sufism should have been able to turn islam into a sooped up hotrod for the modern age. But the problem with sufism, and sufism was banished in modernizing turkey, is its equally reactionary character, witness the simultaneous reactionary initiative of Gurdjieff as Ataturk was trying to outflank such reactionaries.
There is still time, starting now. And an organized islamic secularism would be able to drive out the yankee/israeli imperialists.