Customer Reviews

The Mind of Jihad

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

A reviewer should focus on the book, not celebrate his own prejudices and bigotry--as the previous reviewer of this book has done. Has he even read it? This valuable, cooly rational work is not a rant of any sort, but a careful historical analysis, based upon decades of studying the background material. Author Murawiec does not impose his own pre-formed views; instead, he does exactly what a serious researcher should do: He allows terrorists and the extremist thinkers who formed their beliefs to speak in their own words. Upon hundreds of occasion in this book, we hear the chilling, to-the-point (of the sword) writings, pronouncements and sermons of radical Islamist thinkers over the centuries. The author does, in my view, a brilliant, pithy job of describing how certain streams within Islam (not Islam as a whole) have constructed their own deviant theologies of death. Does the previous reviewer object to we, the people, hearing what our enemies have said for themselves? If we are ever to get beyond the totalitarian prejudices on both the extreme political left and right in our own country, it will be because concerned citizens read and think about serious works such as this (no mind develops if fed only comfortable, unchallenging food). And let us remember: Over the centuries and unto this day, the all-or-nothing fanatics who have afflicted Islam have killed far, far more Muslims than they have killed non-Muslims. The problem isn't faith, but fanaticism that corrupts faith. On a lesser level, unfair reviews scribbled down in a fit of political pique only make things worse. If we are unwilling to hear that which is uncomfortable, it will be far more difficult for us to do what is right. I strongly recommend this book for serious readers.

The first chapter in this book simply falls flat due to the author's casting of an overly broad net, and then trying to fit his evidence to his conclusions. The author uses Browning's Ordinary Men to compare and contrast the differences between violence from Muslims and Christians. The problem is the comparison in his context is not appropriate. The Einsatzgruppen was comprised of a wide variety of disparate men from differing backgrounds. Most of these men were recruited or drafted into their service and very few knew what they were going to be asked to do and even fewer volunteered. The Muslim extremists he compares them to, on the other hand, are voluntarily committing these acts. These men are not drafted, but instead seek out this violent confrontation. For this very reason the two are not appropriate comparisons. Furthermore Murawiec fails to acknowledge that in Browning's study he found that a certain percentage of men from the Einsatzgruppen showed no moral qualms at all with their new found duties. In fact a certain percentage seemed to relish the torture and brutalization of their victims. In fact Browning's own research actually contradicts this author's very assertion. The author either completely missed the point of Browning's book, or he has misused or taken him completely out of context for his own purposes.

The other main problem is the author is overly broad when discussing the different types of Muslim violence. He uses contemporary violence in the forms of the videoed executions and suicide bombers with state violence and public executions. The problem with this technique is that it melds the two different forms of violence into a single strand but they are vastly different. On the one hand he uses the violence from the Muslim Brotherhood to make his case, and then he turns around and shows violence emanating from the state to put down what he would consider terroristic violence form the Muslim Brotherhood by the Syrian government as a further example that supposedly proves the same point. By taking this overly broad approach all forms of violence can be used to prove his points, but his thesis becomes tenuous for this same reason. His use of public executions and its apparent popularity within Muslim societies as another fact that supposedly proves his contentions contains major holes because public executions have been just as popular in the Christian world throughout history as they are in the Muslim world. Not to mention the fact that these beheading videos received a tremendous amount of traffic in the US as well.

Chapters 5 and 7 were also very weak. While they did not fall as flat as the first chapter, they certainly seemed to add little to the book, and on the whole they seemed to be out of place with the rest of the work. They offered no real analysis at all, and instead seemed to degenerate into a simple historical overview of Muslim interaction with the totalitarian movements of the middle of the 20th century. The strength of this book is in the author's ability to go in and really analyze the radical movements, and dig out influences and trends to the evolution behind these movements. The author moved away from these strengths in these two chapters. While chapter 5 was somewhat interesting, it wasn't what I was looking for from this book.

Chapter 7, on the other hand, falls even flatter. The author gives a historical synopsis of the Algerian war for independence which takes up about a third of the whole chapter. The main problem is that he uses Horne's A Savage War for Peace as pretty much his only source, so if you have read that book then you might as well skip this part of this book since it relies heavily on his work. The other problem is that his rendering of this history dismisses a lot of context that refutes his conclusions. The author attempts to turn this war into a zero-sum game. Basically saying while both sides were bad the Muslims were worse thus proving his contention. The problem is it isn't a zero-sum game, and the violence from the FLN was not uniquely Muslim, but instead quite common to this type of conflict. The author doesn't take into account the years of colonial rule where the Muslims were largely left to languish on the peripheries of society. They were left in stasis with little improvements in their lives and many barely able to survive. What the author fails to mention is that colonialism created the situation in which these FLN thugs could flourish. Had the colonial regime cared to give back or attempt to improve the lot of the natives at all then perhaps the whole terrible history could have been avoided.

The rest of chapter 7 and 8 seem to have the same type of failings. They tend to dismiss the broader context of violence and terror around the world. The West has cultivated violence and terror itself for its own purposes.

With that said let me discuss what I liked. Chapter 2 and 3 were very strong. The author does a magnificent job discussing where the currents of radicalism emanated. What I really found elucidating is the author's discussion of the millenarian movements, and his comparing those movements with the Islamic movements that bare such a striking resemblance to these movements. This really created a whole new perspective for me from which to look at this sort of radicalism. His use of Gnostics and his compare and contrast methodology of looking at all Gnostics really helped me to understand the wellspring for this sort of radical ideologies. What the author does well is to show where these influential Islamic thinkers logic leads. What I found fascinating was the author taking the reader step by step through the process whereby these men like Qutb can conclude that the vast majority of the world is apostates, and it is his divine role to eliminate all of these people. One of the main points I came away with is just how dangerous these people are for everyone. Basically according to their beliefs very few are true believers and the rest of us are to be eliminated. Whether Athiest, Jew, Christian or Muslim these people are a threat to all of us.

Chapter 2 was a bit surprising. I had never assumed there was such a connection between Russian nihilism and radical Islam, but the author's analysis of both movements was eye opening. The way in which both set themselves up above the rest of humanity, and assume that they are the sole arbiters of truth which gives them the right to destroy anything and everything is frightening. I simply never would have seen the connection.

All in all this is a good book with some major flaws. The book changed the way that I will forever look at the Islamic religion. I feel as though I have a much deeper understanding of radicalism of all strains. This book made some important connections for me that will further my understanding and open up a whole perspective in my continuing education. For these reasons I tend to overlook some of my very real problems with this book and score it a 4 star instead of a 3. It is a deeply flawed work, but chapters 2,3 and 4 by themselves are worth the price and the time spent on this book. Despite its problems I do recommend this work.

This is an extraordinarily well informed, intelligent, and deep book on its subject. It sets the problem of jihad in the context of analogous, gnostic movements within Western, Christian culture, at the same time that it gives a time line and a profile of the extra-Islammic (illiberal) influences that have shaped the contemporary phenomenon of radical Islamism.

Murawiec's look at the "mind of Jihad" is not light reading. It is a tough read in two senses: tough because it contains a wealth of information to sift through and tough because some of that information is deeply disturbing. What Murawiec attempts to describe is the extent to which the radicalization of Islam that has taken place over the past 100 years, owes at least part of its shape to the Islamic world's interaction with radical European utopianism, especially in its deadliest forms: National Socialism and Marxist-Leninism. Those who would accuse Murawiec of anti-Islamic bias, should have a close look at the book's second chapter in which Murawiec compares what he regards as the authentic Islamic outlook on "the good life" with what he regards as its "Gnostic" distortion. Nor is he hesitant to critique Christian and Jewish thinkers who have embraced Gnostic" dualisms similar to the ones that have prompted radical Islamic leaders to justify violence in the name of their faith. By no means a perfect book (the narrative thread could, at times have been tighter), this is nevertheless an intriguing and thoughtful look at a complex dimension of the modern world from which none of us can pretend ourselves immune.

One of the few books that presents all aspects of the cultural and social pressures driving young men into the jihadist movement.

Interesting analysis of one of this age's greatest challenges. Very Good price on new book and good delivery

In summary, the book is interesting and informative in its research and placing that research in the context time as far as it goes. However it is by no means exhaustive or balanced to the point that one can draw any concrete conclusions. It is sort of the selective tip of the iceberg well organized. We all know the Communists, Imperialist, Socialist,theocrat's,logocrat's... have manipulated and killed the Islamic World and the Islamic World has manipulated and killed all of them back and the blood of millions has flowed all over the place without arms, heads... All of these various groups have also kill within their own sphere in the millions and that is history as well. The real question I have is who is Laurent Murawiec. His brief resume connects him with a few brand name neo conservative think tanks, Richard Perle, Lyndon H. LaRouche Jr.,Marc Rich Foundation and what I would call some pretty far right marginal sorts of characters. Murawiec caused a big dust up with his 24 point presentation on Saudi Arabia to the Bush administration but that is even vague and published only second hand. Who are his parents? Where was he born? What is his religion or not? What has he done boots on the ground in the old Soviet Union, the Middle East, the Arab world, Asia, South America... I've traveled in all of those place extensively over the past 45 years as a business person and I find very few absolutes and a lot of gray everywhere I go. Maybe I've seen too much on all sides of this broad equation that Murawiec tries to quantify but I am sort of a cynic at heart and I like to see both sides of the ledger on all issues because I have found very few issues that did not have multiple defendable points of view and only a fool makes a decision without knowing all of them and from whence they emanate. Let's clear up this enigma and will the real Laurent Murawiec please stand up and who are you really? I sent an email to the Web Site but did not get an answer. Half the story is worse than none!

It was a matter of time before the European Intelligencia discovered a philosophy in the sacred terror being waged on civilization by its principal enemy, Islamic fundamentalism. Others have traced the movement's history and have thoroughly analyzed the tangle of antecedents which attempt to explain the blood lust of Islamacism. Credit Murawiec for documenting in horrific detail the fundamentalists' insatiable appetite for gore. This is not an entry level book and the reader uninitiated in Islamic savagery will be repelled...precisely the author's intent. It is no surprise that he did not find his message welcome in an increasingly Islamicized France, where apologists for any garden variety atrocity can be found. The United States is the right place for him for it is here and only here where his scholarship can be appreciated. He deserves credit, too, for his courage. However...

Murawiec's crisp, complex syntax, distinctively European, lulls the reader into the illusion of receiving an advanced, postgraduate education. Yet the complexity of the language masks a mélange of blurred themes, many wholly unrelated to the mind of the jihadi. As the reader is led through the author's lengthy reflections on Ali Shariati's Gnosticism, it eventually occurs to the reader that if there is a unifying theme in the book, it fails explain the jihadi's intoxicating excitement at putting innocents to the sword.

I see the absence of firm editorial controls in Murawiec's writing. That writing, which at the outset appears informed and lofty, ultimately becomes merely prolix. A good editor would have distilled the author's ostentatious erudition down to a version more easily digested by the American readership which is now his sole audience. My advice to Murawiec is to get an editor. Show by clear writing that you are capable of clear thinking. It is simply not obvious, as it now stands, how the book advances your cause.

This is a disturbing treatise with descriptions of brutal murder and mayhem, bloody decapitations and methodical brutality by the Islamic fundamentalist terrorists. Read it only if you enjoy bloody violence and nightmares. I want a refund.
R. Claire Friend, MD

Whenever an imperial aggressor attacks a people, they create all sorts of rationales for their violence. We heard bogus assertions about "the mind" of Asians when we were butchering Vietnamese At War With Asia: Essays on Indochina. In an earlier period, we heard about the minds of blacks and Native Americans. All the while, what was missing was an honest look at the mind of the imperialist Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire. U.S. citizens are usually too busy talking about how great and god-blessed they are to notice, but we have a long history of repressing people, seizing resources, overthrowing elected leaders and conducting all sorts of evil in the world. Sometimes our victims respond with violence, the CIA calls it 'blowback' Blowback, Second Edition: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire.
It is a corporate jihad, backed by the U.S. military or its proxies, that is at the root of much of the world's pathological violence and unnecessary suffering The Corporation. And this unholy crusade for higher profit margins has no problem working with oppressive, religious fundamentalists if they'll help maintain 'stability' for investors, as with Saudi Arabia Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum. The U.S. has also happily supported barbaric regimes in Latin America, such as the Christian televangelist and dictator of Guatemala, Rios Montt When the Mountains Tremble; as well as Augusto Pinochet in Chile The Condor Years: How Pinochet and His Allies Brought Terrorism to Three Continents.
The U.S. is waging a war of terror, not 'on' terror; books like 'The Mind of Jihad' serve as convenient diversion from that inconvenient truth The Complex: How the Military Invades Our Everyday Lives.

See also:
Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land: U.S. Media & the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
Why We Fight
Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World (American Empire Project)
Z Magazine - see its excellent website.