Islamic terrorism-Modernity, not the West, is the enemy

Jun 2016
1,857
England, 200 yards from Wales
#11
It is quite amusing that liberals believe, almost unanimously, that "education" is the panacea of all the world's ills. Of course, hidden behind this belief is a great naivete as well as a great arrogance; they believe that "education" will automatically lead all people to liberalism. The thought that there can be such a thing as an "educated fundamentalist" or an "educated ultraconservative" or even an "educated terrorist" has seemingly never occurred to them.

I suggest you look up the educational backgrounds of such people as Ayman al-Zawahiri, Muhammad Atta, Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, and Anwar al-Awlaki, among others. They were not some random, uneducated country bumpkins who were angry at "modernity" because they had never used the Internet before. In fact, many fundamentalists (including the high-profile terrorists) have college degrees in the hard sciences, and IQs that are probably well above the average for their population group. Given these facts, you might want to think a bit harder about the causes of fundamentalist reaction, as well as proposed "remedies" of it.
I'm sure you're right about those cases, and obviously education does not positively prevent an individual becoming fundamentalist. I would suspect (tentatively, I don't claim positive knowledge) that it makes it less likely though - ie that the incidence of fundamentalist belief is lower among the higher-educated?
There's also the matter of what sort of education - you mention hard science degrees, maybe that sort of education does not involve study of different philosophies and value-systems as much as in humanities, and hence doesn't encourage a wider outlook?
 
Mar 2019
1,535
KL
#12
i think there should be self assessment in the west about their own policies which are ruining countries

if there is islamic terrorism then there is also western terrorism? butchering hundred muslims while they were praying in mosques is not terrorism?

i think terrorism among muslims arouse after afghan war, there was no issue with terrorism in those countries before.

and how did terrorism in muslim countris became a headache, we can systematically see the trend.

afghan war was fueled by western nations USA and its allies, jihadis were armed and funded by USA to counter soviet union, until rise of jihadis or mujahideens, there was no issue of militancy among muslims.

alquaeda in afghanistan check, all its elite members probably received direct funding and training by CIA and its allies.

now comes libya, one can fool this generation about the talibans and alquaeda being the product of mujahideen that it was islamic militancy and islamic extremism due to backward muslim countries, but what about libya and arming the militants there? hasnt the present generation not seen USA and its allies trying to bring down gaddafi's govt by arming militants, again, the unrest was solely because of the west.

now comes syria, what about syria, it was mostly a peaceful country and minding its own business until west again intervened and started arming syrian rebels which lter gave birth to ISIS, more of the ISIS recriits have also come from europe so its a big think to ponder, why all the terror links are involving european or western contribution?

what about yemen?

so all the terrorism and its evidences directly link to the west and not the direct result of any muslim country policy.

Pakistan used terrorists after it was created by CIA so we cannot even blame pakistan etc for directly funding and supporting terrorists. what pakistan learnt was directly from its handler USA which nurtured mujahideen in the first place

CIA also interfered in iran and which resulted in iranian revolution as well

i have little know how about somalia sudan terrorism and i have heard pretty similar stories about how terrorism arouse from these areas as well.

so one way or another, no muslim country has backed terrorim, it has directly result in the funding, arming and political support which the west provided.

british policy of carving a jew state in the middle east also gave birth to long israel vs arab confrontation in the middle east and british policies made that region a conflict zone

cinflic in iraq, again instigated by USA and its allies gave birth to terrorist risings in iraq, i have a friend from iraq and i asked him which was better saddam or present iraq, and the guy was cursing USA and west very much, instead of even refering to the present iraqi govt, he directly blamed USA, so people in the west need to understand its their doing that there is a huge militancy issue in muslim countries in the first place not to mention the burnt of western garbage is faced by muslims as well, talibans are killing, afghans not americans, similarly ISIS is a headache mostly for syrians and not USA or its people.

now muslims and their religion are being labelled as islamic terrorism by people who belong to the same nations who fund these militants. how rich is that.

let me tell you, muslims are among the most tolerant and hospitable people in the world, muslims are not becoming terrorists or fundamentalists by choice, its the western handling/ policies which is causing such, what is an excuse for hindutva extremism for instance, hindutva rising hasn't got anything to do with internaitonal politics and it is where the humanity should really ponder whats causing the rise of hindu extremism or the neo nazis in europe etc. what about islamophobia, which is not covered by the western media, what's causing rise of anti islamic sentiments in the west?

western countries should really rethink their policies in the regions which covers islamic nations and stop brewing conflicts there and stop backing militants which ultimately become terorrists, the terrorism which is foreign instigated will die a natural death.

now fascist countries like china and myanmar are using this excuse to suppress their islamic population and crackdown on entire religion, i dont blame china at all, china itself is learning a lot from the west and using the western ideology for justifying their ethnic cleansing and incursion on muslims.

regards
 
Last edited:
Oct 2012
3,315
Des Moines, Iowa
#13
I'm sure you're right about those cases, and obviously education does not positively prevent an individual becoming fundamentalist. I would suspect (tentatively, I don't claim positive knowledge) that it makes it less likely though - ie that the incidence of fundamentalist belief is lower among the higher-educated?
I actually would suggest the opposite - people who are more intelligent and more educated are more likely to be radicals of one sort or another, and seek some kind of revolutionary change (which can often involve violence). Most of the major revolutions throughout history, including the American Revolution, French Revolution, Russian Revolution, and Chinese Revolution, were spearheaded by educated intellectuals. People who are less intelligent and less educated tend to just go with the flow.


There's also the matter of what sort of education - you mention hard science degrees, maybe that sort of education does not involve study of different philosophies and value-systems as much as in humanities, and hence doesn't encourage a wider outlook?
Yes, there is a very high over-representation of engineers in particular among Islamic fundamentalists. More than twice as many members of violent Islamist organizations have Engineering degrees than Islamic Studies degrees, and nearly half of all college-educated terrorists are engineers. Overall, it seems Muslim engineers are nine times more likely to be fundamentalists than ordinary, uneducated Muslims. Here is an interesting paper on the topic: https://orientemiedo.files.wordpres...-so-many-engineers-among-islamic-radicals.pdf
 
Likes: Ichon

Similar History Discussions