New English  Review
 
ISLAM AS  TOTALITARIANISM
by Ibn Warraq  
(Jan. 2009) 

Charles Watson, and G.-H. Bousquet refer to Islam as a  totalitarian system 
tout court, while Bertrand Russell, Jules Monnerot,  and Czeslaw Milosz 
compare Islam to various aspects of communism, and finally,  among others, Carl 
Jung, Karl Barth,  Adolf Hitler, Said Amir Arjomand, Maxime Rodinson and 
Manfred Halpern note  Islam's similarities to fascism or nazism (the latter 
two terms often used  synonymously).

Charles Watson, a  Christian missionary in Egypt, in 1937, described Islam 
as totalitarian by showing how, "by a million roots,  penetrating every 
phase of life, all of them with religious significance, it is  able to maintain 
its hold upon the life of Moslem  peoples". 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn1) 
_[1]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn1) 
G.H.Bousquet,  formerly 
Professor of Law at the University of Algiers, and later at the  University of 
Bordeaux, one of the foremost authorities on Islamic Law,  distinguishes 
two aspects of Islam which he considers totalitarian: Islamic Law,  and the 
Islamic notion of Jihad which has for its ultimate aim the conquest of  the 
entire world, in order to submit it to one single  authority._[2]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn2) 

Islamic Law has certainly aimed at, to quote another  great scholar of 
Islamic Law, and longtime Professor of Arabic at the University  of Leiden, 
Christiaan Snouck Hurgronje, "controlling the religious, social and  political 
life of mankind in all its  aspects, the life of its followers without 
qualification, and the life of those  who follow tolerated religions to a 
degree 
that prevents their activities from  hampering Islam in any way". 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn3)  
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn3) 
_[3]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn3)  
The 
all-embracing nature of Islamic Law can be seen  from the fact that it does 
not distinguish between ritual, law (in the European  sense of the word), 
ethics and good manners. In principle this legislation  controls the entire 
life of the  believer and the Islamic community, it intrudes into every nook 
and cranny:  everything, to give a random sample, from the pilgrim tax, 
agricultural  contracts, the board and lodging of slaves, the invitation to a 
wedding, the use of tooth-picks, the ritual  fashion in which one's natural 
needs are to be accomplished, the prohibition for  men to wear gold or silver 
rings to the proper treatment of animals is  covered.

Islamic Law is a doctrine of duties, external  duties, that is to say, 
those duties which, continues Hurgronje, "are  susceptible to control by a 
human 
authority instituted by God. However, these duties are, without exception, 
duties  towards God, and are founded on the inscrutable will of God Himself. 
All duties that men can envisage being  carried out are dealt with; we find 
treated therein all the duties of man in any  circumstance whatsoever, and 
in their connections with anyone  whatsoever"._[4]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn4) 

Bertrand Russell in The Practice and Theory of  Bolshevism, published in 
1920 wrote,

"Bolshevism  combines the characteristics of the French Revolution with 
those of the rise of  Islam....Marx has taught that Communism is fatally 
predestined to come about;  this produces a state of mind not unlike that of 
the 
early successors of  Mahommet....Among religions, Bolshevism is to be 
reckoned with Mohammedanism  rather than with Christianity and Buddhism. 
Christianity and Buddhism are  primarily personal religions, with mystical 
doctrines 
and a love of  contemplation. Mohammedanism and Bolshevism are practical, 
social, unspiritual,  concerned to win the empire of this world". _[5]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn5) 

Jules  Monnerot in his 1949 study, Sociologie du  Communisme 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn6) 
_[6]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn6)  
called 
Communism the Twentieth-Century 'Islam'.  Monnerot wrote that the ultimate 
aim of Soviet Communism was "the most absolute  tyranny ever conceived by 
man; a tyranny that recognises no spatial limits  (except for the time being 
those of the planet itself), no temporal limits  (communist believers 
generally refuse to contemplate any post-communist ages),  and no limits to its 
power over the individual: its will to power claims total  possession over 
every 
man it wins, and allows no greater freedom in mental than  in economic 
life. It is this claim that brings it into conflict with faiths,  religions, 
and 
values, which are older than itself or developing independently;  and then 
the battle is joined. We are the  battle".

"Communism,"  continues Monnerot, "takes the field both as a secular 
religion and as a  universal State  
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn7) 
_[7]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn7) ; 
it is therefore more comparable to 
Islam than to  the Universal Religion which began by opposing the universal 
State in the  Hellenistic and Roman worlds, and which can be said to have drawn 
men's hearts  away from the State to itself....Soviet Russia...is not the 
first empire in  which temporal and public power goes hand in hand with a 
shadowy power which  works outside the imperial frontiers to undermine the 
social structure of  neighbouring States. The Islamic East affords several 
examples of a like duality  and duplicity. The Egyptian Fatimids, and later the 
Persian Safavids, were the  animators and propagators, from the heart of 
their own States, of an active and  organising legend, an historical myth, 
calculated to make fanatics and obtain  their total devotion, designed to 
create 
in neighbouring States an underworld of  ruthless gangsters....This merging 
of religion and politics was a major  characteristic of the Islamic world in 
its victorious period. It allowed the  head of State to operate beyond his 
own frontiers in the capacity of  commander of the faithful (Amir 
al-muminin); and in this way a Caliph was  able to count upon docile 
instruments, or 
captive souls, wherever there were men  who recognized his authority. The 
territorial frontiers which seemed to remove  some of his subjects from his 
jurisdiction were nothing more than material  obstacles; armed force might 
compel him to feign respect for the frontier, but  propaganda and subterranean 
warfare could continue no less actively beyond it.  Religions of this kind 
acknowledge no frontiers. Soviet Russia is merely the  geographical center 
from which communist influence radiates; it is an "Islam" on  the march, and it 
regards its frontiers at any given moment as purely  provisional and 
temporary. Communism, like victorious Islam, makes no  distinction between 
politics and religion, but this time the claim to be both  universal State and 
universal truth applies not only within a civilization or  world which 
co-exists 
with other different civilizations, other worlds, but to  the entire 
terrestrial globe"._[8]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn8) 

In The Captive Mind, Czeslaw Milosz devoted  a chapter to how people in 
totalitarian societies develop means to cope  publically with all the 
contradictions of real life. One cannot admit to  contradictions openly; 
officially 
they do not exist. Hence people learn to  dissimulate their views, emotions 
and thoughts, never revealing their true  beliefs publically. Milosz finds a 
striking analogy of the same phenomenon in  Islamic civilization, where it 
bears the name Kitman or Ketman  [Persian word for concealment]._[9]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn9) 

Islam has also  been compared more precisely to Nazism or sometimes 
Fascism, usually used  synonymously. For example, Carl Jung, the famous Swiss 
psychiatrist, was asked  in the late 1930s in an interview if he had any views 
on 
what was likely  to be the next step in religious development. He replied, 
referring to the rise of Nazism in  Germany, "We do not know whether Hitler 
is going to found a new Islam. He  is already on the way; he is like 
Muhammad. The emotion in Germany is Islamic;  warlike and Islamic. They are all 
drunk with wild god. That can be the historic  future."_[10]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn10) 

Karl Barth 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn11) 
_[11]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn11)  
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn11) , 
also writing  in the 1930s  
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn12) 
_[12]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn12) , 
reflected on 
the threat of Hitler, and his  similarities to Muhammad:

"Participation in this life, according to it the  only worthy and blessed 
life, is what National Socialism, as a political  experiment, promises to 
those who will of their own accord share in this  experiment. And now it 
becomes understandable why, at the point where it meets  with resistance, it 
can 
only crush and kill—with the might and right which  belongs to Divinity! 
Islam of old as we know proceeded in this way. It is  impossible to understand 
National Socialism unless we see it in fact as a new  Islam [emphasis in 
original], its myth as a new Allah, and Hitler as this  new Allah’s Prophet.  

"A prayer for the ruling National Socialism and for  its further expansion 
and increase simply cannot be uttered—unless one wishes to  strike his 
confession in the face and make nonsense of his prayer. But there is  one 
prayer 
with regard to the ruling National Socialism which may be uttered and  ought 
to be uttered. It may and has to be prayed, in all earnestness, by  
Christians in Germany and throughout the whole world. It is the prayer which 
was  
uttered right into the nineteenth century, according to the old Basel 
Liturgy:  “Cast down the bulwarks of the false prophet Muhammad!”…And there we 
have it—we  stand today, all Europe, and the whole Christian Church in Europe, 
once again  in danger of the Turks [emphasis in original]. And this time 
they have  already taken Vienna and Prague as well. “Thy will be done!” “If I 
perish then I  perish!” They really knew that at the time of the old Turkish 
menace. They knew  it better, knew it with more resignation to the will of 
God and less  querulousness than we today do."
 
Albert Speer,  who was Hitler’s Minister of Armaments and War Production, 
wrote a memoir  of his World War II experiences while serving a 20-year 
prison  sentence imposed by the Nuremberg tribunal. Speer’s narrative includes 
this  discussion which captures Hitler’s racist views of Arabs on the one 
hand, and  his effusive praise for Islam on the other: _[13]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn13) 

"Hitler had  been much impressed by a scrap of history he had learned from 
a delegation of  distinguished Arabs. When the Mohammedans attempted to 
penetrate beyond France  into Central Europe during the eighth century, his 
visitors had told him, they  had been driven back at the Battle of Tours. Had 
the Arabs won this battle, the  world would be Mohammedan today. 13 For theirs 
was a religion  that believed in spreading the faith by the sword and 
subjugating all nations to  that faith. Such a creed was perfectly suited to 
the 
Germanic temperament.  [emphasis added] Hitler said that the conquering 
Arabs, because of their racial  inferiority, would in the long run have been 
unable to contend with the harsher  climate and conditions of the country. They 
could not have kept down the more  vigorous natives, so that ultimately not 
Arabs but Islamized Germans could  have stood at the head of this 
Mohammedan Empire. [emphasis added] Hitler  usually concluded this historical 
speculation by remarking, “You see, it’s been  our misfortune to have the wrong 
religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of  the Japanese, who regard 
sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The  Mohammedan religion too 
would have been much more compatible to us than  Christianity. Why did it have 
to be Christianity with its meekness and  flabbiness?”
_
Manfred Halpern_ (http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/01/q1/0122-halpern.htm) 
, [1924-2001],  was a politics professor at Princeton for nearly forty 
years. Born in Germany in  1924, Halpern and his parents fled the Nazis in 1937 
for America. He joined the  war against the Nazis as a battalion scout in the 
28th Infantry Division, and  saw action in Battle of the Bulge and 
elsewhere. After Germany's surrender, he  worked in U.S. Counterintelligence, 
tracking down former Nazis. In 1948 he  joined the State Department, where he 
worked on the Middle East, and in 1958 he  came to Princeton, where he did the 
same. In 1963, Princeton published his  Politics of Social Change in the 
Middle East and North Africa, an  academic treatment of Islamism, which Halpern 
labeled "neo-Islamic  totalitarianism":

"The  neo-Islamic totalitarian movements are essentially fascist movements. 
They  concentrate on mobilizing passion and violence to enlarge the power 
of their  charismatic leader and the solidarity of the movement. They view 
material  progress primarily as a means for accumulating strength for 
political expansion,  and entirely deny individual and social freedom. They 
champion 
the values and  emotions of a heroic past, but repress all free critical 
analysis of either past  roots or present problems."

Halpern  continued, "Like fascism, neo-Islamic totalitarianism represents  
the institutionalization of struggle,  tension, and violence. Unable to 
solve the basic public issues of modern  life—intellectual and technological 
progress, the reconciliation of freedom and security,  and peaceful relations 
among rival sovereignties—the movement is forced by  its own logic and 
dynamics to pursue its  vision through nihilistic terror, cunning, and passion. 
An 
efficient state  administration is seen only as an  additional powerful 
tool for controlling the community. The locus of power and  the focus of 
devotion rest in the movement itself. Like fascist movements elsewhere, the 
movement is so organized as  to make neo-Islamic totalitarianism the whole life 
of 
its  members"._[14]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn14) 
As Martin Kramer said "his rigorous treatment of  Islamism stands up well, 
and his equating it with fascism was a serious  proposition, made by someone 
who had seen fascism up  close". 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn15) 
_[15]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn15) 

The comparison of Islamism with fascism was also  put forward by _Maxime 
Rodinson_ (http://www.guardian.co.uk/obituaries/story/0,3604,1229990,00.html) 
, _[_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_26) _1915_ 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1915) - _2004_ 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004) ] the eminent  
French scholar of Islam, and by common consent one of three greatest scholars 
of  Islam of the 20th century, who pioneered the application of  
sociological method to the Middle East. As a French Jew born in 1915, Rodinson  
also 
learned about fascism from direct experience; his parents perished in  
Auschwitz. Rodinson replied to Michel Foucault-to be discussed at length below- 
 
and Foucault's uncritical endorsement of the Iranian Revolution. In a long  
front-page article in Le Monde, Rodinson targeted those who "come fresh  to 
the problem in an idealistic frame of mind." Rodinson admitted that trends in 
 Islamic movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood were "hard to 
ascertain....But  the dominant trend is a certain type of archaic fascism (type 
de 
fascisme  archaïque). By this I mean a wish to establish an authoritarian and  
totalitarian state whose political police would brutally enforce the moral 
and  social order. It would at the same time impose conformity to religious  
tradition as interpreted in the most conservative  light." 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn1) 
_[16]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn1) 

In 1984, _Said Amir Arjomand_ 
(http://www.sunysb.edu/sociol/?faculty/Arjomand/arjomand) , an  
Iranian-American sociologist at SUNY-Stony Brook, also 
pointed to "some striking  sociological similarities between the contemporary 
Islamic movements and the  European fascism and the American radical 
right.... It is above all the strength  of the monistic impulse and the 
pronounced 
political moralism of the Islamic  traditionalist and fundamentalist 
movements which makes them akin to fascism and  the radical right alike."  
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn2)  
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn2) 
_[17]_ 
(http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778#_ftn2) 

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to