The Roots of Islamic Turmoil in the 21st Century


The Roots of Islamic Turmoil in the 21st Century Perhaps the signal for today’s Islamic turmoil all over the world was the “Arab Spring.” But that was only the outward manifestation of the turmoil of the Islamic psyche, of their frustrations of their backwardness and lack of opportunities for their youth. This ferment has been simmering for generations through the myths and falsehoods perpetuated by the Mullahs and Imams of Islam. The invention of the Internet and the possibility to access  information immediate to the youth of Islam has made them envious of their own lack of decent jobs, and professional opportunities, standard of living, and with the availability of unhindered mobility, the differentials in their standards of living becomes obvious and a source of dissatisfaction and envy. So there must be a reason for the West being progressive and successful and wealthy while thousands of Muslim youth languish at home without decent employment despite the Billions of Dollars of oil wealth possessed by Islamic nations. There must be a reason for this and so the “Islamic blame complex” creates the “White Western Colonial Dominance” as the demon to blame and hate without even considering the real cause of this disparity. Islamic Trait of Always Blaming Others for everything

“Why does the treason-discourse seem to rule the Arab scene? It is a discourse which labels ‘others’ as kafirs. Why do the Arab masses accept a confrontational discourse, rather than the one that advocates enlightened points of view? Why does the conspiratorial mind dominate the collective Arab mind? Why do preachers of hate have more followers than preachers of tolerance? And finally, why do the religious pulpits keep on cursing the “Others,” and calling for divine retributions to fall upon them?
There can be only one reason for that, namely the belief of both the elites and the masses that the “Other” must always be blamed; and that he deserves our hatred and enmity. Actually, it is this culture of ‘blaming the Other” that relieves a person of his responsibility to deal with his own situation, and makes him blame the ‘Other.’
“Recently, Sunni and Shi’ite religious leaders met in Dohahoping to achieve a rapprochement between the two religious groups, and to prevent war between their followers. After some deliberations, they concluded that Israel, the United States, and the West were to blame for the problems that hound the Middle East!
The ‘Other’ must always be blamed, as far as the Arab Mind is concerned. He is the cause for our suffering, and the failures of our development projects. The ‘Other’ is responsible for the collapse of our democratic experiments, and for the rise of religious factionalism among us. And yes, it is the ‘Other’ that brought Irhab(terrorism)into our lands!
“The culture of ‘blaming the Other’ is a doctrine believed by some Arab elites and by the Arab masses who remain transfixed by the ‘Other.’ This frame of mind is not of recent origin, it has been with us across our entire Islamic history, going back all the way to the Great Schism. Rather than try to understand the human nature of the Sahaba*, and admit their role in the troubles that irrupted after 632 A.D., Arab historians searched for an imaginary ‘enemy.’ They invented a mythical Jewish figure, Abdullah bin Saba, and made him the villain responsible for the Schism of 656 A. D. [1]
Blaming the Other is a typical Arab/Muslim trait. They never look at the possibility that the blame could lie within their own culture or their own shortcomings. The Muslims have always blamed Western colonial suppression for their backwardness but never once examining their own culture and institutions to see if they could improve themselves to compete in this modern competitive Globalised world. For example:
(1) Islamic Education Too Insular and Confining
Is their Islamic Madrassa education, that concentrates on Islamic knowledge, sufficient to compete with the much broader mathematics, and science subjects that predominates the Hindu, and Chinese and the European educational institutions? Preliminary findings shows that the Islamic education is too centered on Islamic studies at the cost of neglecting the natural sciences. Is the standard of the Madrassa education taxing enough to develop young brains or does it simply promote memorising and regurtigation of verses without much comprehension of its significance and rationale thus not taxing the reasoning powers if the brain. This is because Islamic teachings are usually in Arabic, an alien language for many Muslims, and accuracy in repeating the Quran in Arabic is of the highest achievements expected. This creates robotic thinking.
(2) Islamic Education Stiffles the Inquiring Mind

Muhammad says Allah hates when you ask too many questions

In Sahih al-Bukhari, the most canonical hadith collection: Volume 2, Book 24, Number 555:

Narrated Ash-sha’bi: The clerk of Al-Mughira bin Shu’ba narrated, “Muawiya wrote to Al-Mughira bin Shu’ba: Write to me something which you have heard from the Prophet (p.b.u.h) .” So Al-Mughira wrote: I heard the Prophet saying, “Allah has hated for you three things: 1. Vain talks, (useless talk) that you talk too much or about others. 2. Wasting of wealth (by extravagance) 3. And asking too many questions (in disputed religious matters) or asking others for something (except in great need).

Comment on 1 & 2
By forbidding inquiry into religious matters (The Quran and Ahadith), acceptance is forced upopn the reader with no need to ascertain if it is valid or not. Scientific evolution comes only from curiosity and inquiry. Without this incentive, innovative thoughts and ideas cannot evolve. In Islam this fundamental instinct of inquiry is suppressed and this is becomes part of the Islamic cultural characteristic.
Indoctrination of Islamic education my memorisation without understanding and the discouragement of an inquiring mind is Islam’s greatest mistake in her attempts to subjugate all Muslims to the Will of Allah. It regiments the thinking of all Muslims and does not allow for the inquiring mind to challenge Islam. Although stopping doubts about Allah is the strength of Islam but it is also the curse of Islamic intellectual progress. In fact, there has been almost no provable significant litarary, scientific or philosophical contribution from Islam aside from the Quran, in the last 1400 years that can be directly attributable to Islam, in my personal judgement.
(3) What is the Meaning of “AS SALAM ALE KUM” ?
This greeting means, “Salam ……peace . Alikom ……..upon you.
This is used billions of times by every Muslim. And because no one ever bothered to find out the connections and meanings, thousands of Muslim will tell you that “Islam” means,  “Peace.” It does not. Islam comes for the Arabic word  “Aslam” meaning “to submit. But Muslims will continue to tell you that Islam mean Peace because it is good window dressing. It shows how gullible and ignorant Muslims are of the Arabic language.
(4) Isha’Allah (God Willing)
Insha’Allah/inshallah  another phrase used constantly by Muslims the world over. No matter what happens, it is the will of Allah. It is fatalistic, it is out of the hands of Man, hence inevitable. So there is nothing much man can do against the will of Allah. This fatalistic view, adopted and expressed throughtout the Muslim world is syntomatic of the attitude of the culture of the Islamic peoples. I highlight this as another Islamic trait that holds back the innovation and progress of Islam.
(5) Muslims believe that Allah will Provide

Hadith No. 49

From Umar ibn Al-Khattab from the Prophet (sas) who said: “If only you relied on Allah a true reliance, He would provide sustenance for you just as He does the birds: They fly out in the morning empty and return in the afternoon with full stomachs.” Ahmad, An-Nasaa’I, Ibn Majah, Al-Hakim and At-Tirmidhi who said: “Hassan sahih”

1. Reliance on Allah is one of the most important causes of getting sustenance in this life. Allah said: {And whoever fears Allah, He will provide him a way out and will provide for him from an unforeseen direction. And whoever relies on Allah, He is sufficient for him.}

(5.1) Allah provides, suffices, and makes a Way out of Every Hardship for Those Who have Taqwa Allah said, (And whosoever has Taqwa of Allah, He will make a way for him to get out. And He will provide him from where he never could imagine.) meaning, whoever has Taqwa of Allah in what He has commanded and avoids what He has forbidden, then Allah will make a way out for him from every difficulty and will provide for him from resources he never anticipated or thought about. Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that `Abdullah bin Mas`ud said, “The most comprehensive Ayah in the Qur’an is, (Verily, Allah enjoins Al-`Adl (justice) and Al-Ihsan (doing good) (16:90). The greatest Ayah in the Qur’an that contains relief is, (And whosoever has Taqwa of Allah, He will make a way for him to get out.)” `Ikrimah also commented on the Ayah, “Whoever divorces as Allah commanded him, then Allah will make a way out for him.” Similar was reported from Ibn `Abbas and Ad-Dahhak.`Abdullah bin Mas`ud and Masruq commented on the Ayah, (And whosoever has Taqwa of Allah, He will make a way for him to get out.) “It pertains to when one knows that if Allah wills He gives, and if He wills He deprives, (from where he never could imagine.) from resources he did not anticipate” Qatadah said, (And whosoever has Taqwa of Allah, He will make a way for him to get out.) “meaning, from every doubt and the horrors experienced at the time of death, (And He will provide him from where he never could imagine) from where he never thought of or anticipated.” Allah said, (And whosoever puts his trust in Allah, then He will suffice him.) Imam Ahmad recorded that Ibn `Abbas said that he rode the Prophet’s camel while sitting behind the Prophet , and the Messenger of Allah said to him, (O boy! I will teach you words ﴿so learn them﴾. Be mindful of Allah and He will protect you, be mindful of Allah and He will be on your side. If you ask, ask Allah, and if you seek help, seek it from Allah. Know that if the Ummah gather their strength to bring you benefit, they will never bring you benefit, except that which Allah has decreed for you. Know that if they gather their strength to harm you, they will never harm you, except with that which Allah has decreed against you. The pens have been raised and the pages are dry.) At-Tirmidhi collected this Hadith and said: “Hasan Sahih.” Allah’s statement, (Verily, Allah will accomplish his purpose.) meaning, Allah will execute His decisions and judgement that He made for him, in whatever way He wills and chooses, (Indeed Allah has set a measure for all things.) This is like His saying: (Everything with Him is in (due) proportion.) (13:8) (4. Those in menopause among your women, for them the `Iddah, if you have doubt, is three months; and for those who have no courses. And for those who are pregnant, their `Iddah is until they lay down their burden; and whosoever has Taqwa of Allah, He will make his matter easy for him.) (5. That is the command of Allah, which He has sent down to you; and whosoever has Taqwa of Allah, He will expiate from him his sins, and will increase his reward.)

Comments on 5 & 5.1
That Allah will provide must register high with all devout Muslims. Similar verses can be found in the Bible.  Taqwaq: fear of Allah, or piety will ensure that Allah will provide is a powerful force in instilling total submission to Allah. Thus will Allah take care of our needs is another of those fatalistic ideologies that allows Muslims to depend on Allah’s good graces to care for the pious from birth to death. This again, removes the need for self-reliance and independence of the individual and instead creating an environment of (false) security and dependancy upon inshallah (Allah’s will).
Based on the 5 points above, the Muslim feels secure within these fatalistic beliefs in Allah’s protective and benevolent promises to his believers who serve him with Taqwaq. However when some of these assurances fall short in real life of the promises there must be someone to blame, and that is the “other.”
World War II ended the Old World Power Dynamics and Brought in a New Order (DISORDER)
Franklin D. Roosevelt agreed to assist floundering Winston Churchill to fight Adolf Hitler on one condition, that he agreed to,”The Atlantic Charter.” This Treaty was signed by Churchil and Roosevelt on August 14, 1945 which also spelt the end of European colonial empires. But Roosevelt had no plans (or ideas) or how to fill the voids of power and control with the demise of colonialism. The principles of the Charter are:
First, their countries seek no aggrandisement, territorial or other; Second, they desire to see no territorial changes that do not accord with the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned; Third, they respect the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they live; and they wish to see sovereign rights and self government restored to those who have been forcibly deprived of them; Fourth, they will endeavour, with due respect for their existing obligations, to further the enjoyment of all States, great or small, victor or vanquished, of access, on equal terms, to the trade and to the raw materials of the world which are needed for their economic prosperity; Fifth, they desire to bring about the fullest collaboration between all nations in the economic field with the object of securing, for all, improved labour standards, economic advancement and social security; Sixth, after the final destruction of the Nazi tyranny, they hope to see established a peace which will afford to all nations the means of dwelling in safety within their own boundaries, and which will afford assurance that all men in all lands may live out their lives in freedom from fear and want; Seventh, such a peace should enable all men to traverse the high seas and oceans without hindrance; Eighth, they believe that all of the nations of the world, for realistic as well as spiritual reasons must come to the abandonment of the use of force. Since no future peace can be maintained if land sea or air armaments continue to be employed by nation which threaten, or may threaten, aggression outside or their frontiers, they believe, pending the establishment of a wider and permanent system of general security, that the disarmament of such nations is essential. They will likewise aid and encourage all other practicable measure which will lighten for peace-loving peoples the crushing burden of armaments.
This Charter was responsible for the emergence of Soviet Communism, and the Rise of Islamisation of the World with nothing to conteract it. So from after the end of WWII, there was nothing to moderate the anger and hatred of the supposedly injustices suffered by the Islamic world. This has subsequently led to the Arab Spring and its aftermath. I will briefly list some of the events that has resulted in the revolt from the Islamic world and attempt to find reasons for it. Beginning with the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1920, and thus Islamic influence and voice in the world. (1) 1979: The Iranian Revolution overthrows Shah Reza Pahlavi, resulting in the formation of the Islamic Republic of Iran (2) 1987–1991: The First Intifada, or the Palestinian uprising, a series of violent incidents between Palestinians and Israelis. (3) 1996: An Islamic movement in Afghanistan led by the Taliban established Taliban rule. (4) 2000–2004: The Second Intifada, a continuation of the First Intifada, between Palestinians and Israel. (5) 2010–2012: Arab Spring:

  • The Tunisian revolution (2010-2011) forces President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali to resign and flee the country, and sets free elections.
  • The 2011 Egyptian revolution brings down the regime of President Hosni Mubarak.
  • The 2011 Libyan Civil War in which rebel forces gradually take control of the country, and kill the leader Muammar Gaddafi.
  • 2011 Post-civil war violence in Libya
  • Syrian Civil War (2011–present)
  • 2010–2012 Algerian protests
  • Bahraini uprising (2011–present)
  • 2011 Iraqi protests
  • 2011 Jordanian protests
  • 2011–2012 Moroccan protests
  • 2011 Omani protests
  • 2011 Yemeni revolution the revolt that lead to the eventual resignation of Ali Abdullah Saleh as President of Yemen.
  • 2011–2012 Iranian protests

(6) Mohamed Morsi (Muslim Brotherhood) deposed in coup 2 July, 2013 (7) Osama bin Laden killed  May 2, 2011. The removal of European colonial influence in the Arab Islamic world and the elimination of most of the Arab dictators has still not resulted in the emancipation of the common Muslim.There are still no jobs or career prospects from the large majority of the Muslim youth. As the word of Allah cannot be doubted, then the blame must lie with the western infidels. The Completeness Of Islam From the Word of Allah (1) The Myth promulgated by Muslims that Islam is a religion like all other religions, and is a religion of “peace”  in order to deceive non-Muslims. This is the most common myth believed by millions of westerners as well as Muslims worldwide, that Islam is a religion, and that Islam is a religion of Peace.Studying Islamic elements will soon prove that it is neither. (2) Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult; it is a complete ideological semi-religious and absolute totalitarian theocracy totally subjugated to Allah with the sole purpose of converting and dominating the world to the world of Dar al Islam (The House of Peace.) And Islam will use all the powers (Jihad & Martyrdom) provided by Allah to achieve this ultimate aim. “Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, (personal and social ) and military components. The religious component is a beard (cloak) for all the other components. Islamization occurs when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their so-called “religious (and political) rights.” When politically and culturally diverse societies agree to “the reasonable” Muslim demands for their “religious rights,” they also get the other components under the table. (3) As Muslims accept that the Quran (accompanied by the Ahadith) and Sharia Laws) is the immutable word of Allah and fulfils all their personal, religious, economic, legal, political and military needs, Muslims find no need for any questions or alien thoughts. Muslims option is to resign to the Will of Allah and with Taqwa of Allah will lead a Muslim to an approved Islamic life seeking nothing more than the Blessings of Allah. Islam is a complete ideology for their needs and let no one stand in their way. Globalisation of the 21st Century With the globalisation of the 21st century and the instant access to news and information at the click of a button today, no society is isolated from another. Freedom of speech in the West has allowed concepts previously considered blasphemous to be discussed and dissected freely in open dialogue. Some of these contentious views must have filtered through even to the most isolated communities and caused uneasy doubts to arise. Yet, most of these alien ideas are rejected outright and never investigated any further. But when it is obvious that employment opportunities, standards of living, levels of personal oppression, opportunities for career deveoopment,  are so different in different societies that questions begin to be asked. The automatic normal reaction is to accuse “others” of practicing racial prejudice, or colour prejudice, or religious prejudice, or sexual prijudice, or intellectual prejudice. It is never, (1) do I have the right (or sufficiently high) academic qualifications and training? or (2) Do I have the right experience? or (3) Am I a suitable person for the job, like do I get along with people or do I fight and curse others all the time? (4) Do I have a reoutation of being a trouble maker or terrorist? (5) Am I an amenable person and dependable or do I have strange unacceptable ways? (6) Do I have a reputation of being a death cult member? Most people never look at their own shortcoming but tend to blame the others for their failures. Many Muslims never ask, why is it that as the Arab/Muslim countries have had Billions of Dollars of Oil wealth over hundreds of years, why have their rulers not created jobs in their own countries? What innovations and inventions have the Arab/Muslims countries created that the world needs or wants aside from crude oil? Why have they not created or invented or manufactured goods that can be sold around the world and crete jobs for their people? Where has all that Oil Money gone? Muslim Anger that triggered the Arab Spring Western colonial imperialism ended more than 2 genertations ago. Arab lands were under the control of Arab dictators and much wealth was created from Oil reserves, but Arab/Islamic youth have no jobs regardless of their educational backgrounds. The oil wealth has not created industry or commercial activity to sustain the population. Inflation has reduced Arab families to a state of poverty with very little prospects for the future. Modern internet communication provides everyone with immediate informtion of how people in other parts of the world live, and the standard of the Arabs/Muslims fall wanting. This is the cause of the Muslim frustrations and anger. Their anger is focused against the Western infidels and America in particular, and also with the Arab puppets who have stollen the wealth and imlpoverished the people. I quote from Salim Mansur:

Broadly speaking, the struggle within Islam is between Muslims who embrace the values of the modern world in terms of freedom, individual rights, gender equality and democracy on the one side, and Muslims opposing these values and insisting on a Sharia-based legal system on the other. Any Muslim who even questions this version of Islam they refer to as a heretic or, worse, an apostate to be killed. For Muslims who embrace modernity, Islam is a matter of personal belief, not a political system. A reformed Islam — greatly desired and sought after by swelling numbers of Muslims — cannot succeed without the support of non-Muslims. A decade after operatives of al Qaeda attacked the United States, the Arab and Muslim world was seized by popular uprisings. The so-called “Arab Spring” erupted in Tunisia, swept into Libya and Egypt where dictators of long standing were toppled and, as of this writing, the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria appears doomed in a bloody stand-off against insurgents who are steadily gaining ground. It is perhaps too early to state definitively that the “Arab Spring” is the direct consequence — which no one imagined — of hijacked jetliners flown into tall buildings in New York. Eventually, however, the political success of the Muslim Brotherhood movement, and its parties in the Middle East, might be viewed as the fall-out strategically anticipated by Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda network if they hoped to precipitate a war. They may even have hoped that the war’s twists and turns would destabilize established regimes in the Middle East and North Africa to the advantage of the region’s Islamists. The terrorist attacks on 9/11 did not erupt out of the blue. The nineteen hijackers of the four American jetliners were all Arab Muslims selected by the leadership of al Qaeda, and financed and trained for such an operation. Their mission was an act of war as carefully planned as the attack sixty years earlier on December 7, 1941 by the Japanese imperial navy on Pearl Harbor. The differences between the two acts of aggression were many, but the one striking fact was that the United States in both instances came to be viewed as the enemy to be drawn into war. The varying responses of the government and the people of the United States to these two acts of aggression also indicate how greatly American society changed in the intervening years. What is of greater interest is that most Americans on that September morning were just as unaware of the intense turmoil raging within the Muslim world in general and the Middle East in particular, as they were in December 1941 of Japanese politics and of the extent to which Japan was already militarily engaged on the Asian mainland. The renowned Middle East scholar, Bernard Lewis, in “The Roots of Muslim Rage”[1] was possibly the first to point to an increasingly hostile attitude among Muslims in general, and Arabs and Iranians in particular, toward the West and, especially toward the United States. “Muslim rage” was evident in the 1979 Iranian revolution, which brought about the overthrow of the Shah and the monarchy. The Shah had been a loyal ally of the United States in a region endowed with oil resources that gave it immense strategic importance. The revolution, however, under the leadership of aging cleric Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini — about whom most Americans, including those in government, knew very little — became Islamic and anti-West. Also in 1979, there was a siege of Ka’aba, the holy mosque in Mecca. The siege was begun by armed militants from inside Saudi Arabia who were enraged by the perceived corruption of the Saudi ruling family and Western influence inside the kingdom. The siege of Ka’aba — the holiest site in Islam and the location of the annual Muslim pilgrimage — and the violence that followed, shocked Muslims around the world. Two years later, in October 1981, Egypt’s President Anwar Sadat was assassinated while attending a military parade. His murderer was an Egyptian military officer with ties to an extremist wing of the radical Islamic movement in Egypt headed by the Muslim Brotherhood. Part of the reason for Sadat’s murder was the peace treaty he had signed with Israel two years earlier. There was also popular unrest, violence, terrorism and war found in the Middle East and across the Muslim world. The list is long. Independence from European colonial rule had consequences contrary to the expectations of prosperity in an independent future. Unrest among Muslims was also symptomatic of their anger, disillusionment, and frustration with the state of affairs in their native lands. Independence did not bring any substantial improvement to the prevailing social and economic conditions for most people. Instead, the situation deteriorated as the population grew, and, with it, poverty. The promise of freedom and democracy with the end of Europe’s colonial rule over Muslims was often belied by what came to be dictatorships in the newly independent Muslim majority states. There were wars — Arab states against Israel, Pakistan against India — with non-Muslim armies repeatedly humiliating the military forces of Muslim countries. Lewis described with much sympathy the sense of Muslim frustration, or rage, arising from the failure to meet the requirements of the modernity the West had pioneered in politics, arts and sciences. He spoke of Islam as “one of the world’s great religions,” and emphasized that it “has brought comfort and peace of mind to countless millions of men and women.” He went on to note that Islam

“has given dignity and meaning to drab and impoverished lives. It has taught people of different races to live in brotherhood and people of different creeds to live side by side in reasonable tolerance. It inspired a great civilization in which others besides Muslims lived creative and useful lives and which, by its achievement, enriched the whole world.” And yet, Lewis observed, there were periods in Islam’s history “when it inspired in some of its followers a mood of hatred and violence. It is our misfortune that part, though by no means all or even most, of the Muslim world is now going through such a period, and that much, though again not all, of that hatred is directed against us.”

Such was the situation in Muslim lands entering the final decade of the twentieth century. This rage among Muslims, fuelled by grievances and the sense of past humiliations suffered at the hands of Western powers, turned ominous. Although a Jew and an outsider, Lewis read the pulse of the Muslim world well. He was not alone. Muslim thinkers had also reflected on the condition of their culture and civilization and the extent of Muslim backwardness relative to the non-Muslim West. The disparity between the West on one side, and Islam or the Muslim world on the other, was so vast that it raised questions as to whether the Muslim world had become moribund, decrepit and, more specifically, whether Muslims might have to jettison their culture in order to embrace modernity and follow the West. In the early years of the twentieth century, before the First World War had turned Europe into a killing field, Muhammad Iqbal (1876-1938) spoke in verses of immense power, beauty and passion about the malaise of the Muslim world. Iqbal, revered as the poet-philosopher of Pakistan, was of Indian birth, and wrote his poetry in Urdu and Persian. In his controversial, yet frequently cited, two long poems, Shikwa (“Complaint”) and Jawab-i- Shikwa (“Answer to the Complaint”)[2], Iqbal discussed the failure of Muslims to maintain the dynamism of Islam and its civilizational values. In “Answer,” Iqbal made God respond derisively to Muslims who complained of being ignored and forgotten despite their fidelity in good and bad times. God, in Iqbal’s stirring verses, reminded Muslims that they succeeded when they were dynamic in thought and action: when they were bold, took risks and were creative. Iqbal was not alone in advocating reform and re-awakening Islamic civilization from its stupor. Iqbal admired Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of the modern Turkish Republic in the aftermath of the First World War. Kemal was an ardent modernizer and an enthusiast in adopting Western values in culture and politics. He abolished religious rule based on Sharia law. There were others, such as Malek Bennabi (1905-73), an Algerian born in Constantine and educated in Paris. Bennabi reflected upon the possible causes for the decay of Islam as a civilization and concluded, as had Iqbal, that the loss of internal dynamism and critical thought had impoverished Muslims. He conceived of history in cyclical terms according to Ibn Khaldun, the immensely influential 14th century thinker from Tunis: birth of civilization, followed by growth, expansion, contraction, loss of movement, then demise. Bennabi commented that the Islamic civilization, once the Quranic pressure at its beginning “deadened, little by little the Muslim world came to a stop like a motor that had consumed its last litre of petrol.”[3] During the first half of the twentieth century, the views of modernist Muslim thinkers, such as Iqbal and Bennabi, were ascendant within the Muslim world. Again according to Lewis, “At first the Muslim response to Western civilization was one of admiration and emulation – an immense respect for the achievements of the West, and a desire to imitate and adopt them.”[4] But an alternative view emerged among Muslims that rejected the West and all of its cultural and political values. This alternative view hearkened back to an idealized picture of the first century of Islam (7th-8th century C.E.), when the Arab-Islamic Empire was in the making and Arab rulers laid down the template of the Islamic civilization. It viewed the West as an implacable enemy of Islam and Muslims, and it set its goals in driving Western powers out of Muslim lands and bringing to an end Western influence among Muslims. It spoke about the necessity of jihad (holy war) to achieve its goal of returning Muslim lands to the rule of Sharia. And it declared jihad to be one of the central pillars of Islam – contrary to the traditional consensus of religious scholars. This view was the seed of what would grow into, and might be rightly described as, Islamism against Islam. The most prominent exponents of this view among the majority Sunni Muslims were two Egyptians, Hasan al-Banna (1906-49), the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Sayyed Qutb (1906-66); and from the Indian subcontinent, Maulana Mawdudi (1903-79), the founder of Jamaat-i-Islami. In Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini (1902-89) became the most prominent exponent of Islamism among the minority Shi’a Muslims. In the middle years of the last century, at the end of colonialism in Muslim lands[5], there was an effort to bring about rapid modernization through the adoption of Western ideas. There was a keen interest in building heavy industries, constructing dams and hydroelectric projects, encouraging urbanization, expanding communication networks, investing in higher education, encouraging female education and women in professions, and raising modern armies. But these efforts were not accompanied by an equally urgent commitment of the ruling elites for democracy. This division among Muslims turned out to be a recipe for the eventual collision between those who espoused modernization and those who came to oppose it, due to negative effects in dislocating traditional societies. In explaining the reversal of Muslim reformers and modernizers, Lewis again observed,

“For vast numbers of Middle Easterners, Western-style economic methods brought poverty, Western-style political institutions brought tyranny, even Western-style warfare brought defeat. It is hardly surprising that so many were willing to listen to voices telling them that the old Islamic ways were best and that their only salvation was to throw aside the pagan innovations of the reformers and return to the True Path that God had prescribed for his people.”[6] V.S. Naipaul, the celebrated writer awarded the 2001 Nobel Prize for Literature, published in 1981 an account of his travels in Muslim lands. Naipaul’s Among the Believers was an eyewitness report of the Muslim world in turmoil. His journey took him to Tehran in the midst of a crisis, when Iranian students, following the radical Islamist prescriptions of Ayatollah Khomeini’s sermonizing, took fifty Americans at the U.S. embassy as hostages and held them for over a year. Naipaul described the situation as if “the Muslim world had been on the boil.”[7] As the 1979 Iranian revolution became a tipping point for the Muslim world, opponents of Western-style modernization seized the political initiative while Muslim reformers began to lose ground and turned defensive. In 1971, Pakistan, then the most populous Muslim state, broke apart as a result of a bloody civil conflict and a self-destructive war with India. This Muslim-against-Muslim violence in effect turned genocidal, with massacres in Bangladesh by the Pakistani army, after the people of Bangladesh (then East Pakistan) had voted in a national election for a secular, democratic government to be formed, but the generals rejected the election results, sparking unrest and military brutalities. In the decades that followed, violence inside the Muslim world became commonplace. Modernization came to be viewed disparagingly, and the modernizers were blamed for the wretched situation of Muslims. The “Muslim rage” insisted, instead, on a return to the past. This newly acquired consensus was reflected in the Cairo Declaration of August 5, 1990, released by the foreign ministers of the member states of the Organization of Islamic Co-operation [OIC]. Evidently intended as a response to the United Nations’ Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, the Cairo Declaration stipulated that all rights and freedoms for Muslims were derived from the Sharia. “Sharia,” it states, “is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification to any of the articles of this Declaration.” This signified the long and dispiriting retreat of modernizers who, like Muhammad Iqbal, had greeted with enthusiasm the creation of the Turkish Republic by Mustafa Kemal some seventy years earlier. By the time the second millennium drew to an end, the internal unrest in the Muslim world had reached a breaking point. The decade long war between Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and Khomeini’s Iran in the 1980s displayed the ferocity inherent in sectarian Muslim conflicts. The Arab states were divided over how to confront Israel once Egypt had made peace with the Jewish state. The Russian invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, and the long war that invasion set in motion, aroused Islamic sentiments. Ironically, in this instance, Muslim “rage” was harnessed by the United States to deliver a punishing defeat to the Soviet Union’s imperial overreach. Moscow’s admission of defeat and the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan emboldened militant Muslims as they insisted that their jihad had defeated a military superpower. These Muslim warriors took the message of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Jamaat-i-Islami — that Islam is jihad and jihad is incumbent on Muslims — to its logical extreme. Like the Bolsheviks in 1917, al Qaeda’s jihadists were revolutionaries in a hurry. They wanted to push history on their terms. They argued that confrontation with the West and its most powerful representative, the United States, was inevitable, and that they planned to precipitate it. A return to authentic Islam, to a time and place before the West and its corrupt ways had contaminated the cradle of Islam, required jihad. Accordingly, al-Qaeda developed as a network of militant Muslims in a political climate of spreading Muslim rage. Driven by its utopian view of an Islamic society, al-Qaeda and its supporters prepared for an asymmetrical war waged through indiscriminate terrorism against the West by Islamic warriors of Allah. The collapse of the Soviet Union caught the West by surprise. Some saw the end of the Cold War as the end of history. After the long, demanding and exhaustive effort that went into the containment of Soviet Communism, Americans turned inwards. Few in the West paid serious attention to the troubles brewing inside the Muslim world, and which were heading for an explosion. September 11, 2001 was a return to history with a vengeance. It is not a mistake to view 9/11 as an evil act committed by evil men posing as men of faith and acting for a cause driven by faith. Terrorism in the name of Islam exposed a civilization’s internal rot as it wrestled with its own demise. The modern world, which many Muslims dislike and oppose, cannot be “un-invented.” Despite their rage, Muslims face a challenge in a new century that is essentially the same as one described by Iqbal at the beginning of the twentieth century. It is also somewhat similar to the one Christians and Christendom confronted over five hundred years ago. This challenge consists in determining how to maintain faith in the context of the revolutionary advances in philosophy and science. Christianity met the challenge at the dawn of a new age, which came to be defined as the Enlightenment, by separating the realms of faith and politics. Once the Muslim world has overcome its rage, it would do well to draw on the experience of Christianity in accommodating modernity. The Muslim world cannot remain in a boil indefinitely. There is no ready answer to how a civilization can be repaired or one master key available to insert to repair a broken civilization. Yet Muslims need to find a way of adapting their customs, values and beliefs to the requirements of the modern world, and this will be their burden for much of the present century. The West, however, cannot stand apart at a distance while the Muslim world confronts its problems. As the West did in its relationship with the Soviet Union during the Cold War, it now needs to work out a prudent, safe and firm set of policies for its relationship with the Muslim world in the years ahead. As Muslims in rage fail to stop their descent into an inferno of their own making, the West is inevitably being drawn into the troubles of the Muslim world. [2]

Making Sense of the Turmoil in the Muslims world [Anoushivaran Ehteshami is professor of international relations and head of the School of Government and International Affairs at Durham University.]

It is my view that since the turn of the 20th century the Muslim world has been saddled by two fundamental problems.
First, the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in the early 1920s, at one of the most important turning points in modern times, left it voiceless at the top table of international players. Without the shelter of that Islamic empire, which was not regarded asa perfect model by many Muslims outside Anatolia, the Muslim world found itself exposed and exploited by the bigger European powers such as Britain and France. This was after the humiliations which had followed Napoleon Bonaparte’s invasion of Egypt in 1798 and the systematic weakening of the Persian and Ottoman empires in the face of European encroachments in the 19th century. European colonialism in the region was often brutal and has had a profound legacy in terms of both political institutions

and culture.The Muslim world has probably never recovered, or been given the chance to recover, from these traumatic encounters withthe West. But their sensibilities were further tested with the creation of the State of Israel in 1948 in the heart of Muslim lands and the slow removal of Palestine as a political and cultural entity. Israel’s foundation, its location and Zionist ideology, have been considered by countless people in the Muslim world as a national and religious challenge, and the systematic subjugation of the Palestinian people by Israel as a conspiracy to deprive the Palestinians of their rightful homeland and the occupation of all of Holy Jerusalem by Jews.
The second problem was associated with the very nature of the state in the Arab and the wider Muslim worlds. The modern state in many parts of the Muslim world is not only largely a European creation, where even its boundaries are often those defined by the colonial powers, but one which is overwhelmingly reliant on a highly centralised state machinery and a patriarchal infrastructure. While the former has impregnated these states with a serious legitimacy problem, which was severely tested in the Kuwait crisis of 1990-1991 for example, the
latter has made the elites of these countries more impervious to the calls of their citizens for a bigger share of the economic and political pie.
The deepening political and economic problems at home, brought about partly by corruption, nepotism and bad management, and partly by the ill-defined goals of economic liberalisation and IMF-style structural adjustment, have enabled the radical Islamic forces — who have been able to flourish as other (more secular) political forces were marginalised or exterminated by the ruling elites — to step into the breach and challenge the rulers in the Muslim states. Their challenge is felt from Indonesia to Pakistan and Turkey, in the key Arab countries of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Egypt, as well as in the North African Muslim states of Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco and Libya. Their slogan is a simple one: ‘Islam is the Solution’.
While for the most part the radical groups remained locked in a struggle with their own ruling regimes, with their quarrels largely confined to the territory of the country concerned, the Islamists are now increasingly finding themselves battling much greater outside forces. The infiltration of outside forces they view as beachheads for the ‘Americanisation’ of the Muslim way of life, as a bombardment of alien and corrupting values and influences. This, they believe, requires an international response, which partly explains the existence of international networks of Islamist groups.
Indeed, as the forces of globalisation from the realm of commerce to those of television, food, clothes and the entertainment media — prize open the doors of traditional Muslim societies and challenge the norms and value systems of the local populations, so do they encourage the Islamist forces to act as defenders and protectors of the greater Muslim rights: to become the Muslim community’s latter-day cultural nationalists. In the face of the Islamists’ uncompromising claims to righteousness and protectors of the divine right, the rulers find themselves impotent to act and open to sharp criticism from their opponents for bowing to Western pressure or for harbouring pro-Western sentiments. They are, in short, accused of being ‘Westoxicated’ — a difficult label to shrug off if they are seen to be aiding the West in search of its own interests.


In practice, the broad American neo-conservative agenda for global change has galvanised its opponents, from France and China to political Islam, into action. As a consequence, so long as the forces of radical Islam interpret every American act as hostile and an attack on Islam they will rally against it, inevitably plotting a violent response. The cycle of violence deepens the more intensive the interactions become between the Muslim world and the political and commercial forces of the West. The image of the United States as the New Rome merely makes it easier for the radical Islamists to justify their own violent acts on the basis of
the enemy’s threatening grand design.
In sum, it is reasonable to suggest that radical Islam has failed to gain state power, has failed in its main mission of ‘liberating’ Muslim lands from Western influence, and convince the Muslim masses of the virtues of its brand of jihad. But this is not the same as concluding that political Islam has lost the capacity to act, to remain militant, to under take sophisticated military-style operations, or to generally pose a serious security challenge to Western interests worldwide. As the West is now revisiting another corner of the Muslim world it is perhaps

time to reflect on how the same forces of globalisation have inadvertently invited into the arena actors who refuse to play by the established rules and are bent on breaking the norms. This is less a ‘clash of civilisations’ and more an encounter between forces which are resistant to the other’s ‘rules of the game’. [3]
Disillusionment and Disappointment of Quranic and Political Promises for a Better Life Causes Unrest and Anger
(1) All peoples always long for the days when their people were powerful, respected, were prosperous and ruled a large empire like the Ottoman Empire. This and more is the objective and hopes of must Muslims, to be able to have a powerful Caliphate that had the respect of the rest of the world and they can once again strut with pride wherever they went. It would appear that this is something that the Islamic State is attempting to achieve today with the support of many Muslims throughtout the world who are prepared to serve as mujahideens in the cause of the Islamic State. But the West see this a a threat and are hampering the ambitions of the Islamic State.
Some Muslims will have questioned why Allah has not come to their assistance to defeat the infidels who are hampering their aims. They will then turn their anger and frustrations on the infidels who they see are obstructing their aims in the service for Allah.
(2) The deepening political and economic problems at home, brought about partly by corruption, nepotism and bad management, and partly by the ill-defined goals of economic liberalisation and IMF-style structural adjustment, have enabled the radical Islamic forces — who have been able to flourish as other (more secular) political forces were marginalised or exterminated by the ruling elites — to step into the breach and challenge the rulers in the Muslim states. Their challenge is felt from Indonesia to Pakistan and Turkey, in the key Arab countries of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Egypt, as well as in the North African Muslim states of Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco and Libya. Their slogan is a simple one: ‘Islam is the Solution’.
Unfortunately highly centralised state machinery and a patriarchal infrastructure  are impervious to the calls of their citizens for a bigger share of the economic and political pie.
The two causes above is causing great unrest and anger among the younger Muslims who are impatient for all the promises given in the Quran.
In order to illustrate the anger boiling in the hearts of the younger Muslims let be quote the following:

Overcoming Anger Towards Allah

By Aishah Mohd Nasarruddin People respond differently to crisis. During troubled times, it is natural to be sad and exasperated be it the death of a loved one, being diagnosed with serious illness, trauma, natural disasters or any negative events. Some people become angry, and even turn that anger towards God. After blaming other people, themselves, and fate, they eventually blame Allāh. “It just doesn’t make sense. Why is Allāh doing this to me? How can Allāh allow this to happen? Haven’t I done enough? I did everything because of Him but this is what I get. Do I deserve this?” Yes, it is frustrating when you don’t have all the answers. When things are difficult and out of our control, it is easy to snap. You yearn for the situation in which everything is secure, safe, and predictable. The relationship with God that you used to cherish does not seem comforting anymore.  You feel betrayed, abandoned and mistreated. You stop going to the mosque. You feel like your belief has shattered. You resent religious advice. Whether you are praying to Allāh or not, it does not seem to have any difference. You feel like the world has conspired against you and hold Allāh responsible for that harm, temporarily blind to the reality that afflictions and calamities befall everybody, even the prophets and messengers. The Prophet Muhammad (allallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) was asked, “O Messenger of Allāh, which of the people are the most sorely tested?” He said: “The Prophets, then those similar, then those similar. A man will be tested in accordance with his level of faith. If his faith is strong, he will be tested more severely, and if his faith is weak, he will be tested in accordance with his faith. Calamity will keep befalling a person until he walks on the earth with no sin on him” (1). If you are struggling with this anger, you are not alone.  Many people experience similar struggles. Rather than pulling away or trying to cover up the negative feelings, dealing with the issue in an open and honest way is more helpful in the long term. It may not be serious if you just have a flash of anger towards Allāh, and then the coping mechanisms kick in. However, if you have trouble minimizing the anger, you may need to seek help. Research has shown that anger towards God is associated with poor adjustment to bereavement, particularly when the anger remained unresolved over a 1-year period (2). In addition, all these may lead to depression, withdrawal, and a dangerous drop in religious faith.  Be vulnerable to Allāh and make du’ā’ Al-Khaṭṭābi explains excellently the functions of du’ā’: “The meaning of du’ā’ is the servant’s asking his Lord for His help, and asking His continuous support. Its essence is that a person shows his reliance and need to Allāh, and frees himself from any power or ability to change (any matter by himself). This characteristic is the mark of servitude, and in it is the human submissiveness” (3). With that being said, keep praying and maintaining a religious environment even when you do not feel like it. Do not be arrogant. Even when you are angry, force yourself to turn back to Allāh and complain your grievances to Him. The prophets have shown us perfect examples of how they turned to Allāh during severe circumstances and showed their need of His aid: When Prophet Ayyūb’s (‘alayhi’l-salām) family and wealth was taken away from him on top of his suffering from an awful disease, he called to Allāh: “Verily, adversity has afflicted me, and You are the Most Merciful of all those who are merciful.” (Sūrat’l-Anbiyā’: 83) After Prophet Mūsa (‘alayhi’l-salām) escaped from Egypt to avoid being killed, he arrived all alone in Madyan, he prayed to Allāh: O my Lord! Verily, I am needy to whatever good that you send down to me.” (Sūrat’l-Qaa: 24) When Prophet Ya’qub was grieving over the fate of Yusuf and Benyamin, he cried: “Verily, I only complain of my grief and sorrow to Allāh!” (Sūrat’l-Yūsuf: 86) Rather than being angry and cutting yourself off from Allāh, turning to Allāh actually relieves the distress. In fact, human beings are wired to be this way. [4] Comments on, “Overcoming Anger Towards Allah” Frustrations and disappointments of promises assured in the Quran often lead to disillusionment of the faith. But what does this article advice Muslims? I, as a scientist trained graduate, would seek the truth of the promises made in the Quran and to ascertain its authenticity and its historicity to see how valid those promises were, but a Muslim would be barred from questioning the Words of Allah because that would be ab act of heresy. Instead, as with other religions as well, this article advices the person to make du’a’ with Allah, (seek help and guidance by submission,) thus getting more deeply pious and submitted into the faith. Thus instead of seeking errors or flaws in the teachings, a Muslim gets deeper into its grip. Any blame therefore must lie outside Islam and must lie at the door of “OTHERS.” While attempting to explain that the anger of Muslims is due to their frustrations is in fact a result of the inadequacy of their ideology itself and not because of “others” I came upon a timely article, written by a Muslim that will explain these views from his standpoint rather than from my standpoint and reflects my views completely.  I will reproduce it here in full:

Muslims must shed their narrative of grievance

By Husain Haqqani  7:00PM GMT 12 Jan 2015

As a community, Muslims are obsessed with their past pre-eminence and have made little effort to understand the causes of their decline over the past 300 years.

Soon after the terrorist attack on the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, Islamist sympathisers on social media unleashed familiar rhetoric using Arabic language hashtags such as “our revenge for the messenger (Muhammad)”; “Paris is Burning”; and “Paris under Fire” .
One self-styled Jihadi declared on Twitter: “This is the first reaction. You’ll not live in safety again.” Another said: “This proves that the Islamic State can strike deep in Europe whenever it wishes.” Reuters quoted an Isil fighter named Abu Mussab as saying: “The lions of Islam have avenged our prophet. Let these crusaders be scared because they should be.”
Such bombast reflects the emptiness of the Islamist dream. The killing of 12 unarmed cartoonists and journalists is hardly an act of courage. Paris did not, in fact, burn and this latest act of terrorism mobilised the French against the Jihadis just as terrorist attacks in New York, London and Mumbai had united people against them in the past.
More important, terrorism is unlikely to dissuade anyone so inclined to refrain from insulting Islam, its Prophet or Muslims. Like followers of any other religion, Muslims do not like insults to their faith or to their prophet. But threats and actual attacks of the type witnessed in Paris last week have been limited to Islamists.
Contrary to the assertion of some, such violence has nothing to do with recent wars or the policies of great powers in Iraq, Afghanistan or Syria. A man named Alam Din from Lahore was proclaimed a “ghazi” – or warrior – for killing a Hindu publisher of a book insulting Prophet Muhammad in 1929. Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses prompted fatwas and provoked violent protests 50 years later, in 1989. These incidents cannot be attributed, for example, as reaction to US military intervention. Of course, not all of the world’s more than one billion Muslims react to real or perceived insults to their religion in the same manner. Believers in different deities and prophets have often slandered each other’s faiths. Islam has endured its share of criticism and abuse over the centuries, especially from Christians, against whom they fought for control of the Levant and the southern corners of Europe during the Crusades and the Ottoman wars. But in earlier times, Muslims responded to religious affronts by pointing out the flaws in other religions and outlining their own perfect faith. Muslim armies were violent but then so were the armies of others. The association of extremism and terrorism with Muslims is a phenomenon mostly of the modern era.

When Muslim emperors ruled over large non-Muslim populations, Muslim preachers and Sufi mystics worked to proselytise and win converts to Islam. There is no record in those days of mob violence or targeted attacks against foreign envoys or traders in retaliation for blasphemy against Prophet Muhammad or Islam allegedly committed by Islam’s enemies in distant lands. The phenomenon of violent outrage and killing over insults to Islam and its final prophet seems to have started during Western colonial rule, with Muslim politicians seeking issues to mobilise their constituents. Contemporary Jihadism seems to have grown out of the slogan “Islam in Danger”, which has been periodically invoked as a rallying cry for Islamist politics. Ironically, it is the Islamists who draw attention to otherwise obscure attacks on Islam and then use those attacks to muster popular support. The reaction makes more people aware of a book like Rushdie’s, a YouTube film such as The Innocence of Muhammad or cartoons in small circulation satirical magazines. Charlie Hebdo usually published only 45,000 copies; now it will be read by hundreds of thousands, if not millions. The violence over “Islam’s honour” is a function of the collective Muslim narrative of grievance. Decline, weakness, impotence, and helplessness are phrases most frequently repeated in the speeches and writings of today’s Muslim leaders. The view is shared by Islamists – who consider Islam a political ideology – and other Muslims who don’t. The terrorists are just the most extreme element among the Islamists. As a community, Muslims are obsessed with their past pre-eminence, which stands in stark contrast to their current weakness. The bravado of beheading “blasphemers” and thinking that a terrorist attack can change the global order are ways of reclaiming a glory that is vividly recalled but has not been seen by Muslims in recent centuries. Like all national and community narratives, the current Muslim narrative has some elements of truth. But it is equally true that Muslims have made practically no serious effort to understand the causes and remedies of their decline over the past 300 years. Outrage, resentment and violence — and the conspiracy theories that inform them — serve as palliatives for an Ummah (or global Muslim community) that reads little, writes even less, has not invented much in recent centuries, is economically less productive than comparable peoples and wields little political or military power in the contemporary world. Dealing with the causes of Muslim decline, not random or orchestrated acts of terrorism, would be the real way forward in saving Muslims from dishonour. Husain Haqqani, director for South and Central Asia at the Hudson Institute, was Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States from 2008-11. This article first appeared in the Times of India [5]
The Main Discussion In my attempts to find the basic causes in the Islamic turmoil in the 21st Century I have had to trace Islam from the basics in the Quran to the anger and frustrations of everyday Muslims today. With instant information available because of the introduction of the Internet, even the village crony and compare his lot with that of someone living in Europe, America, or other parts of Asia and realise that he is being left behind. Why? Why has Allah not fulfilled his promises and left us still mired in poverty and backwardness? As Muslims cannot blame Allah, the only other alternative is to blame ‘others’. Let us look at some of these frustrations: (1) Muslims have always place their faith in Allah’s hands, they say,

Insha’Allah (God Willing)
(a) No matter what happens, it is the will of Allah. It is fatalistic, it is out of the hands of Man, hence inevitable. It is the Will of Allah. Everything is left to the Will of Allah who will look after them.
(b) The also believe:
That Allah will provide those with Taqwaq, must register high with all devout Muslims.   (Taqwaq: fear of Allah, or piety will ensure that Allah will provide is a powerful force in instilling total submission to Allah.) Thus will Allah take care of our needs is another of those fatalistic ideologies that allows Muslims to depend on Allah’s good graces to care for the pious from birth to death. This again, removes the need for self-reliance and independence of the individual and instead creating an environment of (false) security and dependancy upon inshallah (Allah’s will).

But this is not what is happening to Muslims today where unemployment, and idleness is all the youths of Islam are faced with. Let us see what affects their reasoning: (2) The Muslims cannot understand the decline of Islam over the past 300 years. (3) For this they are outraged, resentful, and violent blaming “others” for their decline. (4) Yet the Ummah reads little, and writes even less. (5) The Ummah has not invented much in recent centuries (6) The Ummah is ecconomically less productive than comparable peoples (7) The Ummah wields little or insignificant political or military power in this era Is there any wonder that the Muslims are frustrated when the Koran has promised that they are the chosen of Allah? If this was happening in a Western nation, probably riots or a revolution would result. But Muslims have already rioted against their rulers, and past colonial oppressions, yet they remain in this pathetic backward state. So they look for something to blame, and they have found the enemy that is denying them their just rewards, the decadent West who have profitted from the Arabs. Never for a moment do they look inwards to examine if it is themselves, or their culture, or their intransigent beliefs, or their mental attitudes, or their educational quality and standards, or their inability to use their oil wealth to generate industry, commerce and wealth that is the cause of their backwardness. All they can do is to blame others and take out their frustrations and anger that has turned into hatred and violence against the rest of the world. That I believe is the fundamental problem in Islam. It is only Muslims themselves who will be able to rectify their miserable state of affairs by altering their archiac ideologies.

To be saved for quotes:
“Muslims are not the only ones with a superiority complex” I would like to discuss this in further detail: (1) Yes, the Koran preaches that a Muslim is superior to all others because they believe in Allah, and the Allah will provide if you are pious, but the reality is just the opposite and that is why the Muslims are frustrated. Since they cannot take it out on Allah or the Quran, Allah’s  sacred words, he has to blame the “other” and that is the infidel. Let me tell you why the Muslims is frustrated and angry and actually suffer a terrible bout of ‘inferiority complex’: (2) The Muslims cannot understand the decline of Islam over the past 300 years. (3) For this they are outraged, resentful, and violent blaming “others” for their decline. (4) Yet the Ummah reads little, and writes even less. (5) The Ummah has not invented much in recent centuries (6) The Ummah is ecconomically less productive than comparable peoples (7) The Ummah wields little or insignificant political or military power in this era Is there any wonder that the Muslims are frustrated when the Koran has promised that they are the chosen of Allah?
[2] Islam in the Rear View Mirror:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: