A Primitive And Unconstructive People

It is small wonder that the Islamist jihadists (as well as the less violently inclined sympathizers and supporters who profess and practice politically oriented Islam) see the Arabian Peninsula of twelve hundred or so years ago as the desired paradigm of the human condition. These people and the societies which produce them are--like their desideratum--both primitive and unconstructive.

When the famed American diplomat and historian, George Kennan first used the term, "primitive and unconstructive," he was referring to a particular stance taken by the Soviet Union of Joe Stalin's day. As a man both knowledgeable of and sympathetic with Russian culture over its vast sweep of time, Kennan never would have applied the term to the entirety of the Russian population no matter how appropriate it might have been with respect to the Soviet strongman.

Faced with the actions and words of Islamist jihadists as well as the never ending paeans sung by the political Islamists to the glorious past of Islam during and after the life of the Perfect Man, Kennan would have been tempted to use the term to apply to an entire people. Or at least a significant component of that people.

Consider for a second the social and cultural nature of the assorted heartlands and havens of Islamist jihadism: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia. All of these geographical expressions (as well as others less closely associated with al-Qaeda or Taliban or al-Shabaab or any of the other multiplying forces of jihad) are essentially tribal. Rulership is based on what anthropologists formerly (in less sensitive times) termed "the mighty man" or the "strongman." Socially and culturally all are disconnected from the streams of change running elsewhere in the world except to exploit those technological developments of use to them from cell phones and laptops to liquid explosives and automatic weapons.

To put the matter bluntly, the places which have given birth and later succor to the jihadists and the political Islamists who cozen and control them are as primitive as the society and culture which existed on the Arabian Peninsula over a thousand years ago. The historical record shows that the legacy of the long dead Muslims of the Peninsula as well as their successors along the roads of war and conquest has been marked by a singular lack of a constructive orientation.

Despite the best efforts of Muslim apologists, the historical record demonstrates beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt that the world today owes very, very little to the creative minds, the productive imaginations of Muslims over the past millennium or so beyond providing sanctuary for Jewish intellects fleeing the mindless repression of the Catholics in Europe particularly Spain.

Developments which have marked the construction of the modern world emerged not from those standing in awe of the Perfect Man and the Companions but those who either bowed to the Cross, contemplated the Buddah, or eschewed religion all together. Europe, North America, and Asia were and are the founts of constructive developments in all fields of human discourse. This is what irks the adherents of the primitive and unconstructive views propounded by Islamist jihadists.

For more than a thousand years the tribally based Muslim religion throughout its great swath of territory from Morocco to Indonesia has done nothing to advance the human condition. And, the march of Islam from its cradle to its current extent has seen far more bloodshed, far more persecution, far more destruction than that inflicted by the long conflicts between varieties of European Christians or between Christians and Muslims.

Only in the colonial sphere can the record of Christians descend to the valleys of devastation which mark the course of Islamic conquest and exploitation. Even in this worst of all Christian campaigns it must be said with honesty that the Europeans did try to create, did try to repair damage, did try to improve in many ways the human condition in the regions they seized. Yes, often the attempts were futile, often they were misguided, occasionally the attempts were both cynical and self-serving. Nonetheless, the balance shows the Christian's did make a good faith effort to bring sophistication in politics, medicine, law, technology, education, social mores, and cultural customs.

The Muslims did none of these things. Societies and polities remained simple, primitive, under the sway of "mighty men" and backward looking clerics. Until challenged, dominated by the West, the lands and people of Islam existed in an eddy of time, motionless as the larger currents of change, innovation, discovery, accomplishment swirled by.

The Islamists and those in Islam who support them either openly or tacitly want to regain the safety of their little motionless warp in time. Worse, they want to stop the currents of change.

There is a deceptive appeal in the simple. The simple life, the closely ordered life, the life which runs according to timeless principles enshrined by both the sacred literature and tradition seems so attractive because it reduces the risks of life, the perils of existence, the messy uncertainties of change. A strong, pure faith backed by a strong "mighty man" has great seductive power--particularly to those who have never left the world of the personal, the tribal, the ever-so-simple.

Even to some living in far more politically, socially, culturally, and technologically sophisticated places than the FATA of Pakistan or the barren hills of Yemen find a sweet, sentimental appeal in the notion of a simplified life in which the never ending dislocations of "progress" are noted by their absence. The human brain molded by its emergence in a simple society of family and tribe, an existence which was as timeless as the rhythm of the seasons and the movements of game, still homes in on the "simple life" as a compass needle seeks True North.

The Islamists and their armed jihadist component want to bring back the Good Old Days by force, violence, and fear. They will continue their efforts unless killed to the last man--an option which is not practical in any sort of real world terms even if it could be ethically justified--from one tribal venue or another. The most rational option available for a long term defeat of the jihadists is the ending of tribalism in those places where it and Islam coexist.

That option looked at objectively is very, very difficult to achieve. It is so not because it would take great amounts of thought, effort, and money. The detribalization of the Muslim world is difficult, not to say impossible, to achieve because the simple life is "primitive and unconstructive." It is in that reality that the appeal resides.