[lit-ideas] Re: Fukuyama's view of the Islamist threat
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 09:32:43 -0700
I didn't have Huntington in mind when I referred to Fukuyama's strange lapse
in understanding. I wasn't thinking about a counter theory but of the facts
of the threat as described by a number of reputable experts (I had in mind
creating another "roll call" list of the aforesaid "reputable experts" but I
didn't want to offend Omar once again). Not only is Islamism silencing
traditional Islam in the Middle East (as evidenced by the facts that
Moderates* do not speak up there) but it is spreading to Europe. Muslims
aren't going to Europe to be infected by the virus of Western culture (which
seems to be largely true of Muslims coming to the U.S.) but instead are
retaining their culture and living in enclaves.
*unless one uses the definition provided in the Carnegie paper, "Islamist
Movements and the Democratic Process in the Arab World"
[http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/CP67.Brown.FINAL.pdf ] that we
looked at awhile back. Mainstream Islamist movements (according to the
paper, they admit somewhat apologetically) can have, in effect, the same
goals as the Militant Islamists as long as they pursue them peacefully.
Lawrence
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Andreas Ramos
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 8:56 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Fukuyama's view of the Islamist threat
Fukuyama knows the argument ("clash of civilizations") quite well because he
was
Huntington's student.
The idea comes up in the book several times. See later, when he talks about
China and India.
But he doesn't do much with it. He's right: the Islamic threat is the threat
to Islam, not
Islam's threat to the West.
For the Arab world to be a meaningful threat, it must have a technical
infrastructure. In
order to manage their technological infrastructure, they must educate their
population, but
the result of education is independant thinking.
So, the more they become a threat, the more they get infected with the virus
of Western
culture. In the end, they lose.
yrs,
andreas
www.andreas.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 7:49 AM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Fukuyama's view of the Islamist threat
> In rereading The End of History and the Last Man, I came upon the
following
> paragraph and wonder if this early view of Fukuyama's might have
predisposed
> him to accept the views of Olivier Roy and Gilles Kepel as to the Jihadist
> threat being overrated:
>
>
>
> [page 45] "It is true that Islam constitutes a systematic and coherent
> ideology, just like liberalism and communism, with its own code of
morality
> and doctrine of political and social justice. The appeal of Islam is
> potentially universal, reaching out to all men as men, and not just to
> members of a particular ethnic or national group. And Islam has indeed
> defeated liberal democracy in many parts of the Islamic world, posing a
> grave threat to liberal practices even in countries where it has not
> achieved political power directly. The end of the Cold war in Europe was
> followed immediately by a challenge to the West from Iraq, in which Islam
> was arguably a factor.
>
>
>
> "Despite the power demonstrated by Islam in its current revival, however,
it
> remains the case that this religion has virtually no appeal outside those
> areas that were culturally Islamic to begin with. The days of Islam's
> cultural conquests, it would seem are over: it can win back lapsed
> adherents, but has no resonance for young people in Berlin, Tokyo, or
> Moscow. And while nearly a billion people are culturally Islamic -
> one-fifth of the world's population - they cannot challenge liberal
> democracy on its own territory on the level of ideas. Indeed, the Islamic
> world would seem more vulnerable to liberal ideas in the long run than the
> reverse, since such liberalism has attracted numerous and powerful Muslim
> adherents over the past century and a half. Part of the reason for the
> current, fundamentalist revival is the strength of the perceived threat
from
> liberal, Western values to traditional Islamic societies."
>
>
>
> Fukuyama is extremely smart; so why does he ignore the experts who argue
> that Militant Islam is a serious threat and that it is making inroads in
> places that Fukuyama didn't expect? It is natural (as Collingwood and
> Gadamer argue) to accept arguments that coincide with ones
predispositions.
> In the case of the quoted argument, Kepel and Roy do present arguments
> consistent with Fukuyama's earlier belief, so [perhaps Fukuyama though as
he
> wrote America at the Crossroads] why look further?
>
>
>
> I'm not insisting on what I have argued, merely that it is plausible, and
it
> would explain what in my view is Fukuyama's strange lapse in understanding
> the nature of the Militant Islamic threat.
>
>
>
> Lawrence
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.4/319 - Release Date: 4/19/2006
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
