No Islam is not to blame for the state of affairs in the Middle East! What may be to blame, are those individuals who have destroyed the original concept, that was super-tolerant peace-loving Islam, and replaced it with the Brotherhood of totally intolerant hate.
And or, replaced it with dictatorial theocracies and or so-called strong men?
When we look around the world, we see places like Islamic Turkey, Malaysia, and Indonesia, which are all functioning secular democracies. While they are not perfect, neither is any other so-called democracy?
So no, Islam is not to blame, just those who have abused it and dramatically altered it, so that it no longer represents the original teachings, except say, in the Sofie tradition, which as the least altered over the centuries, remains true to Islamic core principles and original esoteric teachings, which by the way include meditation, as did esoteric Christianity.
Rhrosty.

There's one important omission from the article -- the fact that in Muslim nations half the population are subjected to various forms of constraint and oppression, ranging from dress codes to sexual regulations to legal statutes that reduce them to the level of goods and chattels. THERE'S your 'democratic deficit'; and Islam's blood-soaked hands are red to the elbows with the responsibility for it.

Thank you Riaz, I enjoyed your article. I found it informative, balanced and thought provoking.

I have never been comfortable with the western tendency to blame Islam for the problems Islamic nations’ experience. This is because these problems are not unique to Islamic nations. Their problems are however, a common feature of all totalitarian regimes.

Dictatorships come in a variety of flavors, military, religious, political ideologies and benign dictatorships or royal families. I think Islam is more vulnerable to totalitarian control because their religion “binds” together their social, political, religious and economic fabric. It is just a very small step to shift to dictatorships.

Once in power it is almost impossible for their poverty stricken and disenfranchised populations to gain social equity or justice. In fact many Muslims express their desire to not have these, mostly because they have been lead to believe that these things as bad.

One of the great tragedies of modern times and one of the greatest evils perpetrated upon the peoples of the underdeveloped nations, is the notion that their pain, suffering and poverty is a direct result of the policies, oppression, domination and power of the developed world, when in fact, it is a direct result of the policies, oppression, domination and power of their own leadership that is the primary cause.

Israel has shown what can be done since 1948. They have turned desert land into prosperity and achieved more than Islamic nations have done in centuries.No doubt that is part of the reason the left and others hate them so much.

The article makes an interesting point about the failure of Islamic business values and procedure and the consequence for accumulation of capital as a bar to prosperity relative to Western nations.

Unfortunately this is gibberish. What has happened in Islam is the centralistion of all economic wealth within the Islamic hierarchy. There has been no trickle down effect to the masses, who in any event have been constrained by the oppressive social and personal nature of Islam. Saudi Arabia is text book for this, as is Iran, previously Iraq and Libya, certainly Syria and Pakistan.

And this is the key point because economic prosperity can only be achieved in free countries with individual rights. The failure of Communisn demonstrated that.

What has happened in the West is that the previously oppressive influence of Christianity has been vitiated through the Church's own reformation and the developement of individual rights beginning with the Magna Carta.

There is no equivalent process taking place in Islam or capacity for such.

I am astounded by the author's listing of Islamic countries such as Turkey, Albania, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia, which are likely to have happy endings.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Turkey is only still a success because of its powerful secular tradition enforced by the military. This is now being severely encroached by the current Islamist government.

As for the rest, they all have elements of state failure.

It is not the Arabian heritage which is at fault; it is Islam.

Another propaganda piece for Islam motivated by either ignorance or deceit. There is no "debate". Never was.

Robert Spencer: " ... all of the schools that are considered orthodox teach, as part of the obligation of the Muslim community, warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers."
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2007/11/pure-islam-and-michael-van-der-galien.html

For example ...

"Hanafi school: A Hanafi manual of Islamic law repeats the same injunctions. It insists that people must be called to embrace Islam before being fought, “because the Prophet so instructed his commanders, directing them to call the infidels to the faith.” It emphasizes that jihad must not be waged for economic gain, but solely for religious reasons: from the call to Islam “the people will hence perceive that they are attacked for the sake of religion, and not for the sake of taking their property, or making slaves of their children, and on this consideration it is possible that they may be induced to agree to the call, in order to save themselves from the troubles of war.”

However, “if the infidels, upon receiving the call, neither consent to it nor agree to pay capitation tax [jizya], it is then incumbent on the Muslims to call upon God for assistance, and to make war upon them, because God is the assistant of those who serve Him, and the destroyer of His enemies, the infidels, and it is necessary to implore His aid upon every occasion; the Prophet, moreover, commands us so to do.” (Al-Hidayah, II.140)"

Ditto for all the other schools of Islamic theology.

mralstoner.

You just skimmed the piece, didn't you? You've come in with a rigid preconception, and any message that was anything less than a total damnation of Islam wouldn't suffice.

The piece is far from an apologetic piece. It quite frankly acknowledges the backslide in rights and development in Islamic nations, and goes to great lengths to explore what it describes as a 'lack of freedom' throughout much of the Middle East. How is that at all apologetic?

You however, fail to acknowledge that once upon a time, Islamic nations were more developed and had a higher vitality than Western nations.

Surely assessing the reasons behind this historical change is more important than scoring cheap points. Your comment takes one section from one book, without historical context, and claims that this should be representative of all Islamic sects at all points in history?

And you think that is a worthy rebuttal to this piece?

The section on commerce was particularly fascinating, I thought and worthy of further consideration. Damn good piece, should be compulsory reading for anyone engaging in debates on Islam.

"once upon a time, Islamic nations were more developed and had a higher vitality than Western nations."

As all fairy tales begin, once upon a time in the depths of history Islam may have had "higher vitality", what ever that is, but the point is Islam is still mired in that historical context.

It has not changed, it has not had a reformation; it is still as implacable and hegemonic as it ever was.

Islam was and remains a blueprint for military expansion. It has no seperation of religion and politics so its military impetus is continually ratified by divine pronouncements; the Koran is nothing more than a guide for expansion and tactics for dealing with Infidels; as Sam Harris notes in his definitive book on Islam, The End of Faith, on nearly every page of the Koran "observant Muslims are instructed to despise non-believers".

One of the most astounding aspects of the West's interactions with Islam is the belief by the chattering classes, who now dictate policy in most Western nations, that Islam wishes the West well, when not only is there ample evidence in the Koran to the contrary but continual and persistent statements from Islamic scholars that they want Sharia law introduced into the West.

That is the same Sharia law which has remained unchanged since "once upon a time" and which saw its most recent manifestation here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2171004/Taliban-love-triangle-fighters-executed-helpless-Afghan-woman-22-death.html

Let me say this: anyone who writes or says anything supportive of Islam is at best a fool

Just as Christianity has its fundamental schools of thought and historic religious suppression, so also does Islam.
Stoning and ritual beheading, i.e., proceeded Islam!
As did an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth rebellious belligerence.
These older traditions were seamlessly included!
But just like all other religions, much of what has been accorded to the original teachings, was inserted into a reviewed, revised, extensively edited or patently completely corrupted belief system, at a much later date.
[Sun worshipping atheist, Constantine. Was reportedly responsible for the earliest version of today's bible.
Take Jihad, i.e. The Prophet Mohamed, bless his name, was obliged to correct his 2IC, when returning from one of many battles against the Christian crusaders, [crusades that massacred six million Muslins,] when his lieutenant compared the war to Jihad?
Mohamed corrected him quite forcibly, saying that Jihad was not a holy war or "crusade"; but rather, an entirely internal bloodless struggle, against one's own internal demons. [If only we could all do just that much, there'd simply be no wars or want!]
Moreover, that one who knowingly or deliberately spilled so much as a single drop of innocent blood, could never ever enter paradise.
The prophet Mohamed, bless his name, lived in very humble circumstances, a simple mud hut.
He clearly understood much of what he taught would be corrupted by evil men for evil purposes.
Therefore, he created a copy of his original teachings and secreted them in a cavity in the wall of his Home.
When these turned up relatively recently, and according to very cogent eyewitness accounts, Saudi religious officialism rushed in and confiscated them.
Given they were never ever heard of or seen again, they may have been deliberately destroyed?
Understandable, given so much that is now taught by Saudi Imams, is completely at odds with the original writings of the Prophet, or older un-revised Islamic orthodoxy!?
Good men only need stand and do nothing for evil to prosper. Which arguably encapsulates the entire story of Islamic oppression?
Ditto, all other forms of religious oppression, intolerance or unequal treatment!
Rhrosty.

We owe our alphabet and numerical system to Arab scholars.
And stories like Arabian knights, Ali Baba and the forty thieves, etc/etc to Middle Eastern Writers.
These stories invariably tell stories where unlikely heroes topple illegitimate rulers and dictators.
The oldest known library, stacked to the rafters, with scholarly tomes, was located in Alexandria, even as our Anglo Saxon ancestors, were moving out of their caves and into mud huts, to till the land with stone tipped wooden instruments.
It is interesting just how easy it was to turn The middle East into divided warlike camps armed to the teeth and still willing, it would seem, to seek to revenge the ancient crusades, with a western blood bath.
Or just how easily the spirit of freedom was repressed by warlike uneducated Power hungry psychopaths, who used every means, including recruiting a very revised form of Islam, to gain their illegitimate ends?
Even so, the spirit that created The littlest thief, who toppled a tyrant, is very much alive and well in the middle east, as is the hostility/blame shifting to all things white or western.
It is little more than history repeating itself. Given just how easy it was for intensely evil Nazis to blame a Jewish minority for all the evils in the world or endemic Germanic poverty etc/etc!
Ditto those extremely ignorant patently racist white supremists, who now blame Islam for all the world's troubles?
There is a power struggle going on in the Middle east between good and evil, which is clearly not assisted by blame shifting ignorant activists!
The lunatics' hands are being progressively prised from the positions of power in the "asylum"/Syria/Egypt/Lybia!
The lunatic brotherhood of hate cannot be allowed to win or simply get away with blaming the west or whites, for all their problems.
After all, the Middle East and or its potentates, earn an annual four plus trillions from oil sales!
Therefore it follows, there should be no want or endemic poverty in the Middle East; and or, what follows from that?
Rhrosty.

Rhrosty,
You are so wide of the mark I don’t know where to begin!

It sounds like you’ve gleaned most of your information from some of those one-eyed brochures that the local mosque might hand out to unworldly infidels on their open days

There are in fact TWO types of jihad":
i) The “lesser’, which refers to wars against infidels & apostates ,&
ii) The “greater” which refer to personal salvation

Contrary to you rose-coloured view, the “lesser” form has been very much in evidence, prominent even, from the early days of Islam.

“The prophet himself engaged in many military battles and could be merciless to his enemies, even those who simply attacked him verbally. His original sympathies with Jews and Christians as “Peoples of the Book” gave way to a harsher treatment when they did not follow Islam. In one infamous episode, Muhammad cut the heads off hundreds of Jewish males of the Beni Quraiza tribe who did not side with him in battle. The prophet is quoted as saying, “The sword is the key of heaven and hell; a drop of blood shed in the cause of Allah, a night spent in arms, is of more avail than two months of fasting or prayer: whosoever falls in battle, his sins are forgiven, and at the day of judgment his limbs shall be supplied by the wings of angels and cherubim.”

And here’s a few more:

1) Believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you, and let them find in you a harshness; and know that Allah is with the godfearing" (Sura al-Tawba 9:123).
2) "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." (Sura AL-BAQARA 2:16) The Qura

Rhrosty,

I generally agree with SPQR, you are, off the mark.

(1)We don't owe our alphabet to Arab scholars, but to the Phoenicians, Arabs certainly didn't invent the modern numerical system, it's an Indian development.

(2)The library of Alexandria was a product of Hellenistic civilisation, not Islamic, in fact Arab invaders are blamed by some historians for its destruction.

(3)Some of the the "Arabian nights" stories have origins as far away as India and pre-Islamic Persia, the Arabs transmitted those tales to the West, they didn't 'invent' them.

(4) Unlike Christianity, Islam was spread by the sword from its inception, the Crusades were in fact a counter attack in response to 450 years of Islamic aggression.

I certainly don't agree with Western policies in the ME, particularly America's uncritical support of Zionism, but let's get the history straight.

It would not be quite fair to go about and say that Islam is the one to blame for what has been going on in the Middle East for the longest time. And I am saying that because what they have is just a religion and though they are bound to change and pattern their choices to what their religion dictates them, it would not be that easy to make things do. And quite frankly, it is a bitter judgment coming from people on the outside.

Islam’s inability to accept criticising or lampooning does not indicate a healthy or sustainable religion. It seems unable to adjust to any changes to society or the attitudes of its youth. It seems to be locked into a keep the doors closed time warp much the same as Christians of the fourteenth century were. Any one who questioned the logic of the church and its teachings at that time was charged with heresy. Galileo was cautious to veil his discoveries and theory’s but went very close to being labelled a heretic. Being charged with heresy and then being purged with fire does not invite much free thought. Islam’s views on women’s rights, public stoning and praying five times a day etc does not do much for free thought either.

And here is another symptom/ manifestation -- in our own backyard.
Not the actual beating, that happens in all communities but the response or lack of it:

“Muslim leader Abdul-Rahman, who featured at Kevin Rudd's 2020 Summit in 2008 and has been a fighter for justice in western Sydney, was charged with assaulting his wife on February 6…MRS ABDUL-RAHMAN HAS REFUSED TO MAKE A FORMAL STATEMENT AFTER SPEAKING TO HER MOSQUE’S SHIEK AND TO HER FAMILY MEMBERS, court documents said. Police have made several further unsuccessful approaches to Mrs Abdul-Rahman.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-news/youth-leader-fadi-abdul-rahman-on-bashing-charges/story-fn7y9brv-1226419719227

If anyone doubts that Islam is an enemy of democracy they should see this video and text of a speech by noted Arabist Hans Jansen--the subject is Sharia "law" and its toxic effects. You will need to scroll down.

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com.au/