ISIS Is Islamic -- Very Islamic
People who haven't read much in Islam are like I used to be -- naive and wanting to believe the best about it. I believed that Islam was just another religion -- just a different flavor of religious mumbo-jumbo ice cream from Judaism, Christianity, and the other religions out there. It is not.
To give you a bit of a top line on that, Islam means "submission," and getting the world to submit is the ultimate goal. The Quran is deemed the infallible and unquestionable word of Allah, and Mohammed's words and deeds, as detailed in the Hadiths, are to be emulated -- such as raping and looting and slaughtering the infidel. Islam is actually a totalitarian system masquerading as a religion -- one that demands the death or conversion of the infidel, and the overthrow of governments and free people, the removal of rights from women, and the slaughter of gays and apostates.
(A wee bit different from all that Jesus stuff of "Feed the poor!" "Heal the sick!" "Turn the other cheek!", n'est-ce pas?)
And now, there's a terrific long read, "What Isis Really Wants," by Graeme Wood, in The Atlantic, explaining a good bit of what I've been saying over the years:
There is a temptation to rehearse this observation--that jihadists are modern secular people, with modern political concerns, wearing medieval religious disguise--and make it fit the Islamic State. In fact, much of what the group does looks nonsensical except in light of a sincere, carefully considered commitment to returning civilization to a seventh-century legal environment, and ultimately to bringing about the apocalypse.The most-articulate spokesmen for that position are the Islamic State's officials and supporters themselves. They refer derisively to "moderns." In conversation, they insist that they will not--cannot--waver from governing precepts that were embedded in Islam by the Prophet Muhammad and his earliest followers. They often speak in codes and allusions that sound odd or old-fashioned to non-Muslims, but refer to specific traditions and texts of early Islam.
To take one example: In September, Sheikh Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, the Islamic State's chief spokesman, called on Muslims in Western countries such as France and Canada to find an infidel and "smash his head with a rock," poison him, run him over with a car, or "destroy his crops." To Western ears, the biblical-sounding punishments--the stoning and crop destruction--juxtaposed strangely with his more modern-sounding call to vehicular homicide. (As if to show that he could terrorize by imagery alone, Adnani also referred to Secretary of State John Kerry as an "uncircumcised geezer.")
But Adnani was not merely talking trash. His speech was laced with theological and legal discussion, and his exhortation to attack crops directly echoed orders from Muhammad to leave well water and crops alone--unless the armies of Islam were in a defensive position, in which case Muslims in the lands of kuffar, or infidels, should be unmerciful, and poison away.
The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic. Yes, it has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers derives from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam.
Virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, "the Prophetic methodology," which means following the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail. Muslims can reject the Islamic State; nearly all do. But pretending that it isn't actually a religious, millenarian group, with theology that must be understood to be combatted, has already led the United States to underestimate it and back foolish schemes to counter it. We'll need to get acquainted with the Islamic State's intellectual genealogy if we are to react in a way that will not strengthen it, but instead help it self-immolate in its own excessive zeal.
> People who haven't read much in
> Islam are like I used to be -- naive
"Read much in Islam"?
It's a language?
You've learned it?
From the "concert promoter"
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at February 15, 2015 10:46 PM
Actually, reading this passage, it's kind of a backtrack from the usual sentiments here.
Very good. Carry on: See February 16, 2015 12:12 AM & later.
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at February 16, 2015 1:07 AM
Crid, I'm so happy you're coming around to understand what I've been saying for so long. As this guy says:
The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic.
Amy Alkon at February 16, 2015 4:32 AM
And as I say at the other link (and sorry, but I don't get your "concert promoter" sneer):
Amy Alkon at February 16, 2015 4:33 AM
And yes, I read a great deal in Islam, just as I do in biological and behavioral science.
Amy Alkon at February 16, 2015 4:33 AM
The Koran also says you cannot make slaves, of other Muslims. Anyone else is ok.
Fred Mallison at February 16, 2015 6:32 AM
> I don't get your "concert
> promoter" sneer
We've often wished you'd read the comments on your blog. It too often seems you know what you wanna know and don't wanna hear any more. It's almost like you're religious or something.
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at February 16, 2015 9:50 AM
"In Islam"
?
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at February 16, 2015 9:50 AM
Atlantic has taken a real dive over the last fifteen years, and this morning's peace is a good example: Let's appeal to the readers who want to flatter themselves.
"What Isis Really Wants"== Secret knowledge, just like high school! Only the hip people know! The rest are sheeple!
"The simplicity of these questions can be deceiving, and few Western leaders seem to know the answers." == Don't be a rube!
"President Obama has referred to the Islamic State, variously, as “not Islamic” and as al-Qaeda’s “jayvee team,” statements that reflected confusion about the group"== You can be cooler than POTUS! Seize the moment!
"Our ignorance of the Islamic State is in some ways understandable:"== We can pretend to be humble!
"Hence, perhaps, the incredulity and denial with which Westerners have greeted news of the theology and practices of the Islamic State."== Sheeple sheeple!
"A theological alternative to the Islamic State exists—just as uncompromising, but with opposite conclusions."== Phew! We were worried about that!
But there's an alternative! Which is good!
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at February 16, 2015 10:32 AM
"In Islam"?
English allows the use of ellipsis, so all of the folowing constructions are okay, whether you understand them at first reading or not:
"Crid says he's read widely in the subject of comparative religion and has concluded that ..."
"Crid says he's read widely in [the subject of] comparative religion and has concluded that ..."
"Crid says he's read [widely] in [the subject of] comparative religion and has concluded that ..."
Like that.
JD at February 16, 2015 2:20 PM
Cheesy.
Crid [CridComment at Gmail] at February 16, 2015 3:46 PM
Leave a comment