Milestones - the Intellectual Battleground

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Milestones - the Intellectual Battleground

I have been watching the excellent 3-part documentary on CNN called God's Warriors made by Christiane Amanpour. There are three 2-hour segments: (1) God's Jewish Warriors, (2) God's Muslim Warriors, and (3) God's Christian Warriors.

I just saw the second installment last night and I became aware of where one of the primary intellectual battlefields lies. If you read much about Islamist fanatics in Objectivism-land, you will usually come across much bashing of the Qur’an. Although, like the Bible, Book of Mormon, etc., there is a great deal in it that is contradictory and so forth, this rings shallow by being too oversimplified and is probably one of the main reasons it does not spread any kind of meaningful awareness that can be used with Muslims. Most are not bad people and they know it. Telling them that their book of moral instruction (which most use for good) is pure evil will never get many to listen, much less take any argument seriously.

However there is a book called Milestones by Sayyid Qutb that appears to be the Islamist equivalent of Mein Kampf by Hitler. This was featured on Amanpour's documentary. It is the book that needs to be fought at first in any kind of intellectual warfare against Islamism because this is the one used by terrorist recruiters, including Al Qaeda. Here are some links and there exists a free online version.

Sayyid Qutb (Wikipedia article)
Qutbism (Wikipedia article)

Milestones (Free online version by Young Muslims Canada)
Milestones (Free online version by Islamist Watch)

Sayyid Qutb's Milestones: Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sayyid Qutb's Milestones, But Couldn't Be Bothered to Find Out by Elmer Swenson (Q&A on Milestones)
Milestones: The Islamist Manifesto by Rebecca Bynum (commentary on Milestones for Faith Freedom)
The Power of Ideas: Sayyid Qutb and Islamism by Virginia Murr (commentary on Milestones carried out under Advisor, Dr. Stephen Hicks as a research project)

There is much more out there, but just getting through all this is a really good start. I believe if anyone is serious about fighting Islamism on the intellectual battlefield, he will have to read Milestones. I will report on it after I do.

Michael

[Chris Grieb]

A quick look at the article by Virginia Murr confirmed that "Milestones" came from the man who visited the US and was shocked when he attended a church dance.

I hate to say but people who follow an ideology with that kind of basis should be kept in place where they can't obtain sharp objects.

One further note Virginia Murr is a member of OL.

Edited August 23, 2007 by Chris Grieb

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Chris,

I think Objectivists/libertarians shoot themselves in the foot when they rant and rave against the Qur’an. How many Christians do you know who would even listen to an argument that the Bible is unspeakably evil and turns them into monsters?

They will listen to harsh criticism about Christian fanatics, though.

The same principle applies to Islam. I would hate to think that people bash the Qur’an because they feel it is safer than bashing Qutb. That is cowardice.

This Qutb dude is the real starting point and Virginia is already way ahead of us.

Michael

[Chris Grieb]

Michael;

The only question I would raise is why did Milestones so become such an important force in Islam.

[BaalChatzaf]

Michael;

The only question I would raise is why did Milestones so become such an important force in Islam.

Sayyid Qut'b and his ideas are the inevitable outcome of Islam. There is nothing in Q'tub's writing that was not already in the Q'ran and the Hadith. It was as inevitable as the anti-semitism of Hitler. Hitler's Jew hatred was implicit in Paul and John's writing. As Christianity grew so did the hatred of Jews. Hitler was raised as a Catholic, and Catholics in Europe at that time were quite anti-semitic. Qut'b's writing and Mein Kampf are almost in one to one correspondence.

And it isn't recent either. The current wretchedness is the same kind of religious madness and bigotry of the Almohads which ruined the peace of prosperity of Al Andalus in the tenth century. The crazies always come out on top, at least for a little while.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Michael;

The only question I would raise is why did Milestones so become such an important force in Islam.

Chris,

Always whenever a fanatical work becomes popular, there are multiple causes. Obviously there has to be a way to interpret some reference text to suit the violent ends proposed. Religious works like the Bible and the Qur’an are good because contradictions abound in them.

I just saw the third part of the CNN documentary I mentioned above, the one dealing with God's Warriors of Christianity, and you have one guy interpreting the Bible to mean radical support for Israel, another to mean establishing a political coalition, another to mean staying out of politics altogether and even another to mean crusading for environmentalism. These are not just tin-pot preachers. These dudes lead millions and millions of people. And they all use Biblical passages as their foundation.

In a like manner, the same Qur’an can give rise to the followers of Qutb on one end advocating a violent Islamist revolution and Sufis (the pacifist denomination) on another advocating contemplation of one's soul.

Politically, three very powerful things have happened in the Middle East to create an environment suited to a hate work like Milestones:

1. The remnants of Nazism were allowed to continue iin that part of the world after the end of WWII,

2. The USA managed its affairs there in an extremely unpopular manner, especially in courting and supporting bloody dictators (flooding them with wealth the population never saw), and allowed itself to become perceived as having contempt for local culture, and

3. The spoils-of-war ignore-treaty manner in which expansionist settlements in Israel were carried out were not even attempted to be sold to the Islamic population in any other terms other than ram it down the Arab's throat.

These events fueled an already entrenched antisemitism and resulted in a grass-roots backlash against bloody Western-leaning dictators in several countries (later allowing for Islamist dictators to replace them), and transformed the USA into a general scapegoat as a sort of Satan representing moral decadence.

There are other issues involved, but if one looks through the eyes of a Muslim living over there, this is a good part of what he sees and how he sees it. This is fertile ground for setting oneself up as an oppressed people whose moral existence is threatened by evil. People like Qutb prey on this sentiment, throw gasoline on it and light the fire. Not everybody burns, but enough do to organize themselves and start blowing up things, especially the young when they reach the age where idealism opens up a new way of looking at their lives and they strongly desire to make the world a better place.

We must remember that these people think they are making the world a better place. They do not think they are spreading evil. They think they are combating it. That is our biggest intellectual challenge.

Where we can do some good in this scenario is to uncover the distortions one-by-one in this hate literature and put them alongside the truth. This is not as easy as it sounds because the issue of Israel is an explosive one and the whole climate is not even close to the arena of reason. It is in one of "us against them" on both sides. So any issue that gets raised will be distorted by people on both sides and those people will be very vocal.

Fortunately, from what I see, this issue is like most conflicts. You have a relatively small group of people who are extremely strident and near the power centers on both ends and a HUGE population of moderate people who just want to get on with living.

The path I suggest—applying reason to the ideas and issues—certainly is not a popular one with the extreme ends. Those who undertake it will be cussed by them. But I believe in the basic goodness of people, so I strongly believe that appealing to reason IN ALL CASES, regardless of whether this favors the Islamic side or the Jewish side at any particular point, will be heard by an increasing number of people—especially the moderates (on both sides) who finally get pissed off by the excesses and weary of all the bloodshed.

The intellectual price will be to be seen as a betrayer and enemy (or even coward) at times and have one's words twisted to mean wholesale support of different bloody agendas at other times. This will happen from people on both sides. And it will flip-flop constantly, unless the advocate of reason himself finally becomes an object of hatred.

For my own life, though, I can see no other path. Regardless of who is right or wrong, peace will only come when reason prevails. So fighting for reason is a noble cause, THE noble cause, much more noble than fighting for any particular religion or culture.

My first step will be to read all this stuff and start critiquing it. I am glad to have Virginia as an inspiration as one who has started.

Michael

[studiodekadent]

It was as inevitable as the anti-semitism of Hitler. Hitler's Jew hatred was implicit in Paul and John's writing. As Christianity grew so did the hatred of Jews. Hitler was raised as a Catholic, and Catholics in Europe at that time were quite anti-semitic.

Nazi philosophy owes most of its content to many other sources besides Catholicism. You can justify racism with pseudoscience as well. And in addition, there is a lot of German Idealism, Paganism and the like to blame. You cannot pin it all on one source (this applies equally to Objectivists who finger Kant as the root of all evil) at least in this case.

[BaalChatzaf]

It was as inevitable as the anti-semitism of Hitler. Hitler's Jew hatred was implicit in Paul and John's writing. As Christianity grew so did the hatred of Jews. Hitler was raised as a Catholic, and Catholics in Europe at that time were quite anti-semitic.

Nazi philosophy owes most of its content to many other sources besides Catholicism. You can justify racism with pseudoscience as well. And in addition, there is a lot of German Idealism, Paganism and the like to blame. You cannot pin it all on one source (this applies equally to Objectivists who finger Kant as the root of all evil) at least in this case.

Racial Anti-Semitism, as opposed to theological anti-semitsm originated in Spain. The initial anti-semitism centers Jew hatred on the fact Jews did not accept Christ as either the Messiah or the Son of God. Jews often made pains in the asses of themselves by the way they dissed the pagan gods of the locals. Think of it this way. When you go to a hockey game in Canada, out of courtesy you stand up for -Oh Canada-. Similarly, pagans were generally polite in their proforma homage to the local gods when they were in a strange city. Jews did not do this.

However things came to a deadly pass in Spain. Even after many Jews converted to Catholicism (sincerely or not sincerely) they were suspect. The sincere converts and their children rose to great heights in the Church which pissed off the Catholics whose families had been Catholic for many generations. This gave rise to the Limpienza del Sangre (purity of blood) concept. Catholics with Jewish "blood" were excluded from the highest positions in the Spanish church. -This- was the origin of racial anti-semitism. It was no longer necessary to practice Judaism either openly or secretly. If one had Jewish ancestors he was a target. Now fast forward to modern times, where pseudo science and racial anti semitism join and you have what happened in Germany. It happened in Spain, but the Spanish are so damned unthorough and inefficient! Only the Germans could do it so thoroughly. That is Deutsche Ordnung at work!

Ba'al Chatzaf

Edited August 26, 2007 by BaalChatzaf

[studiodekadent]

It was as inevitable as the anti-semitism of Hitler. Hitler's Jew hatred was implicit in Paul and John's writing. As Christianity grew so did the hatred of Jews. Hitler was raised as a Catholic, and Catholics in Europe at that time were quite anti-semitic.

Nazi philosophy owes most of its content to many other sources besides Catholicism. You can justify racism with pseudoscience as well. And in addition, there is a lot of German Idealism, Paganism and the like to blame. You cannot pin it all on one source (this applies equally to Objectivists who finger Kant as the root of all evil) at least in this case.

Racial Anti-Semitism, as opposed to theological anti-semitsm originated in Spain. The initial anti-semitism centers Jew hatred on the fact Jews did not accept Christ as either the Messiah or the Son of God. Jews often made pains in the asses of themselves by the way they dissed the pagan gods of the locals. Think of it this way. When you go to a hockey game in Canada, out of courtesy you stand up for -Oh Canada-. Similarly, pagans were generally polite in their proforma homage to the local gods when they were in a strange city. Jews did not do this.

However things came to a deadly pass in Spain. Even after many Jews converted to Catholicism (sincerely or not sincerely) they were suspect. The sincere converts and their children rose to great heights in the Church which pissed off the Catholics whose families had been Catholic for many generations. This gave rise to the Limpienza del Sangre (purity of blood) concept. Catholics with Jewish "blood" were excluded from the highest positions in the Spanish church. -This- was the origin of racial anti-semitism. It was no longer necessary to practice Judaism either openly or secretly. If one had Jewish ancestors he was a target. Now fast forward to modern times, where pseudo science and racial anti semitism join and you have what happened in Germany. It happened in Spain, but the Spanish are so damned unthorough and inefficient! Only the Germans could do it so thoroughly. That is Deutsche Ordnung at work!

Ba'al Chatzaf

But there is much more to Nazism than antisemitism. The concept is much wider than "hates Jews." Nazism encompasses much more.

[mvir9]

I certainly should have introduced myself in the "new member" area first, but I must thank Michael for posting my essay -- and for the kind comments.

Several years ago I traveled to Ground Zero with the Philosophy Club at Rockford College. After visiting the site, the entire group was silent for about an hour -- we were all overwhelmed with sadness and disgust. My personal reaction was quite fierce. All I could think was "why did this happen?" Then and there I knew that I had to find the answer for myself. I didn't want to listen to political opinions, whether from the media, politicians, or the highest members of academia. I needed to formulate my own opinions based on hard core research. I'm so glad I did

In all of my research, Qutb's work was the most pronounced view of Islamism that I could find. For this reason, I have no problem stating that Sayyid Qutb's Milestones is a wonderful place to start an investigation into Islamism. He was a well-educated, well-connected martyr that still holds a place of reverence in the Islamist world (with personal connections to al Qaeda).

Unlike his ideologue predecessors, Qutb was able to identify a grand philosophical battle between Islam and the West. This apocalyptic battle leaves an all-or-nothing choice to Muslims. Either they are with the Islamists or they and their families will die as members of "The House of War." The House of War, according to Qutb, is any and all societies that reject Shar'iah. Any rejection of Shar'iah is seen as both a rejection of God and an implicit acceptance of Western modernity. And, of course, Western modernity is the enemy of Allah . . .

I look forward to hearing other opinions of Qutb and his work!

Side Note --

What do I love about Objectivism? I love the fact that it encourages independent thinking, sound research, and rational thought to reach conclusions.

[Brant Gaede]

Well, Virginia, I'm glad your name isn't Virginia Dare; we don't know what happened to her. I also have four cats and one dog. The similarity is, well, unnerving.

--Brant

[Chris Grieb]

Virginia; You are a great addition to OL. I hope I can keep up with you.

[BaalChatzaf]

Side Note --

What do I love about Objectivism? I love the fact that it encourages independent thinking, sound research, and rational thought to reach conclusions.

In certain areas this is true. The Objectivist movement shines in the areas of politics and economics. Unfortunately this is not so true in the technical areas of physics and mathematics. True Blue O'ists tend to gag on quantum theory and their grasp of mathematics rarely gets beyond simple algebra. As long as you stay away from science and mathematics (that is where I live) you can be happy with Objectivism. The Founding Fathers/Mothers of the movement had a very crude understanding of science and mathematics.

For support of capitalism, private property, individual rights you could hardly find a more comfortable place. That is the good news. The bad news is that some of the adherents to the philosophy do not react well to those who have reservations or disagreements with the basic philosophical concepts. There is a fervent quasi-religious hostility to intellectual opposition. That is why there have been purges in Organized Objectivism. They bear an uncomfortable resemblance to the rooting out of heretics from the Catholic Church (but without burning at the stake, for which we can be appropriately grateful).

Ba'al Chatzaf

[mvir9]

Virginia; You are a great addition to OL. I hope I can keep up with you.

My husband says the same thing . . .

Thank you for such a nice welcome!

[mvir9]

Well, Virginia, I'm glad your name isn't Virginia Dare; we don't know what happened to her. I also have four cats and one dog. The similarity is, well, unnerving.

--Brant

I am contemplating usurping the name "Dare" -- what a great surname!

[mvir9]

Side Note --

What do I love about Objectivism? I love the fact that it encourages independent thinking, sound research, and rational thought to reach conclusions.

In certain areas this is true. The Objectivist movement shines in the areas of politics and economics. Unfortunately this is not so true in the technical areas of physics and mathematics. True Blue O'ists tend to gag on quantum theory and their grasp of mathematics rarely gets beyond simple algebra. As long as you stay away from science and mathematics (that is where I live) you can be happy with Objectivism. The Founding Fathers/Mothers of the movement had a very crude understanding of science and mathematics.

For support of capitalism, private property, individual rights you could hardly find a more comfortable place. That is the good news. The bad news is that some of the adherents to the philosophy do not react well to those who have reservations or disagreements with the basic philosophical concepts. There is a fervent quasi-religious hostility to intellectual opposition. That is why there have been purges in Organized Objectivism. They bear an uncomfortable resemblance to the rooting out of heretics from the Catholic Church (but without burning at the stake, for which we can be appropriately grateful).

Ba'al Chatzaf

Alas, my mathematical skills will certainly prove disappointing to you. I am a word girl.

The good news is that I am well aware of my intellectual deficiencies and have no problem admitting to them. Therefore, I will not torture you with irrelevant mathematical assumptions -- I'll save us both from the agony . . .

I must say, however, that I am thrilled that there are people out there that are well versed in mathematics and scientific inquiry.

Edited August 27, 2007 by Virginia Murr