Archive for category Philosophy

War : Part VI

The Beginning

Hitler was born on the 20th of April, 1889 in Austria. He was the 4th child of 6, his mother was named Clara, and she was the 3rd wife to his father. Hitler lived a disturbing childhood where his father constantly beat him. scholars suggest that this part of his childhood might have shaped his personality. He was a smart student but failed his 6th grade class when he first attended Realschule school, and for a year he attended the class with Ludwig Wittgenstein who is one of the most famous philosophers of the 20th century although Ludwig was 2 years older than Hitler. Hitler wanted to be an artist, rebelling on his father who wanted him to be a Customs Officer, and when his father died in January, 1903, he wasn’t improved in school, he simply left it when he turned 16 and got no certificate.

Starting from the year 1905, Hitler lived a bohemian life in Vienna, and was refused twice by the Art Academy in both 1907 and 1908 because he wasn’t suitable for the field of art. They advised him to study architecture because it suited him more. He was convinced of this advise where he wrote in his book Mein Kampf (My Struggle) the following “In only few days, I realized from the bottom of my heart that I wanted to be an architect. And actually, taking this road was very difficult for me because it was necessary to finish high school and I didn’t, which was very essential”.

Hitler said that the very first anti-Semite feelings showed up when he was in Vienna where lots of Jews inhabited it, fleeing away from the organized killings they suffered in Russia. Antisemitism was formed in Hitler through various ways, through the music of Wagner who was one of the leaders of the Pan-Germanic movement that aimed to unite all of the German speaking people in Europe under one flag. Also through the writing of Martin Luther (the founder of Protestantism) about the deceiving of the Jews named “On the Jews and their lies”, and in his book Mein Kampf, Hitler pointed out that Martin Luther was a great thinker and warrior, along with Wagner. Hitler’s antisemitism was first the result of religious intolerance but later was transformed into racism where he stated many times that the Jews are the enemies of the Aryan race. Hitler blamed the Jews on the German defeat of the first World War, and also the economical failures of Germany because most of Germany’s bankers during and after the first World War were Jewish business men.

Hitler received some of his father’s possessions in 1913 where he later moved to Munich, he wrote in Mein Kampf that he’s eager to live in the real Germany. In Munich, he showed even more interest in architecture, and of course this helped him from fleeing the Military duty service in Austria but later the Munich police arrested him, and after physically checking him, Austria declared that he’s not suitable for Military service. When Germany entered the first World War in 1913, he begged the King of Bavaria, Ludwig III to allow him to serve in the army, and the King agreed, so Hitler eventually joined the Bavarian army.

During WWI

During the years of the first World War, Hitler became more sure than ever that he was born to be Germany’s savior. His anti-Semite longings grew stronger and the war taught him to be merciless and ruthless. He described war as the best thing the man can ever experience, and he was shocked due to the German surrender in 1918. He like other nationalists and right wingers believed in the Stab-in-the-back legend which is a notion that widely believes that the German army wasn’t defeated but rather betrayed by civilians on the home front, especially the republicans who overthrew the monarchy. The German government leaders who signed the surrender on November 11, 1918 were called the November traitors.

Entering the World of Politics

In July, 1919, Hitler was appointed a spy in the German Police “The Verbindungsmann” to penetrate the DAP party. And while spying on the party, Hitler was affected by the DAP’s leader Anton Drexler who was anti-Semite, and anti-Capitalism. Hitler became active in the party, and Drexler showed a deep interest in Hitler’s talents in speeches, and after few years, Hitler claimed that he was the 7th founder of the Party.

In an attempt to increase the popularity of the party, they changed their name to The National Socialist German Workers’ Party…….commonly known in English as the Nazi Party.

Hitler was thrown out of the army in 1920, but his party colleagues showed a big and deep support for him. He became perfect in giving speeches, and had a bad reputation outside his party of his arrogance, racism, and anti-Semite speeches that targeted Jews and Marxists. Hitler arranged a coup in 1923 but failed, and was jailed due to that failed attempt. The party was banned in Bavaria after that attempt, but Hitler convinced the PM of Bavaria that the Nazi party will try to reach to authority through the legitimate ways of democracy.

Rise to rule and domination of the Nazi party (1933)

In 1933, Hitler along with his party rose to rule in a full democratic elections by telling the masses that he would save Germany from the economical recession that strike the world, and to put an end to both the Versailles treaty that humiliated Germany in WWI and the increasing powers of the Jews who stabbed the Germans in the back during the war.

Hitler began taking the precautions of migrating the Jews out of Germany through signing an agreement with the Zionist leaders on August 25, 1933, that was designed to help facilitate the emigration of German Jews to Palestine. This agreement was called The Haavara Agreement, and although it helped the Jews migrate, it forced them to give up most of their possessions to Germany before departing. Those assets would later be transferred to Palestine as German export goods. This operation was run by a Zionist citrus planting money called Hantoea which took money from prospective immigrants and then use this money to buy German goods. These goods, along with the immigrants, would then be shipped to Palestine. In Palestine, import merchants would then buy the goods from the immigrants, liquidating their investment. After the invasion of Poland in 1939, the continuation of the Haavara agreement seemed no longerpossible, so in 1940, the underground Zionist group Lehi (Militant Zionist group founded by Avraham Stern in the British Mandate of Palestine) met with Von Hentigo to propose direct military cooperation with the Nazis for the continuation of the Jewish migration to Palestine, this proposal however did not produce results because the Jews at the time represented a massive labor force for Germany in the concentration camps.

Hitler believed that the woman’s role is to stay in her house and raise the children of the next generations, and through his charming effective speeches and the brilliant propaganda done by the propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels, he was able to convince most of Germany’s women to stay at their houses and leave a space for unemployed men to take over their jobs which of course resulted in a massive economical advance which led to the developing of the infrastructure that was described as the biggest developing series of projects Germany ever had. The farmers and the workers felt a productive change in their lifestyle and their salaries increased, although the party had to decrease it right before the war. Hitler’s government had a deep interest in a new architectural vision done by the most famous architect under the Reich, Albert Speer who was also the minister of arms and ammunition during the war.

Hitler had a major paramilitary organization formed in 1925 was called the Schutzstaffel…..or in a more famous way, the SS unit which was under Heinrich Himmler’s command. It was originally existent for the personal safety of Hitler, but during the years of war (1939-1945), the SS committed crimes against humanity and spread terror in 1939 through arresting commies, Jews, gypsies, and even Catholic Christians. It’s Einsatzgruppen unit, or Death Squads, were personally responsible for the crimes committed in the concentration camps which were famously known as the Holocaust that took the lives of 6 million Jews, 3 million Poles, 1.5 million gypsies, and thousands of gays, lesbians, and mentally and physically handicapped due to the straight gun shooting, or death cause of medical experiments, exhaustion, hunger and cold.

Dangerous Men

Hitler wouldn’t have reached that position and condition of control without the help of his ministers who were without any exaggeration brilliant in what they do. We’ll take the most important of them one by one, to shed the light on the the role they played during these 10 years of inferno.

1- Joseph Goebbels : Was a German politician and the propaganda minister of Nazi Germany. He’s considered to be one of Hitler’s closest associates and the most devoted Nazi in the party, he truly believed in the ideology that shaped it. The very first act he did after being appointed a minister in 1933 was the burning of the books that were rejected by the Nazis, he totally grasped control over the media, arts, and information in Germany. Goebbels stated in his diaries that his major influences were Friedrich Nietzsche, Oswald Spengler, and Houston Stewart Chamberlain. He knew very well how to manipulate the masses into attracting them to the Nazi disease of intolerance and racism; his techniques are widely used by most of the world’s media to drug the people’s minds. He explains his work by saying “If you tell a lie long and loud enough, people will eventually start to believe it”. A technique looks like it’s doing it’s job pretty well. Goebbels showed full support to Hitler concerning the Jewish matter when he wrote “With regard to the Jewish Question, the Führer is determined to make a clean sweep of it. He prophesied that, if they brought about another world war, they would experience their annihilation. That was no empty talk. The world war is here [this was the week Germany declared war on the United States]. The annihilation of Jewry must be the necessary consequence. The question is to be viewed without any sentimentality. We’re not there to have sympathy with the Jews, but only sympathy with our own German people. If the German people has again now sacrificed around 160,000 dead in the eastern campaign, the originators of this bloody conflict will have to pay for it with their lives.” and in 1942, Goebbels continued to press on the final solution of the Jewish question to be carried out quickly as soon as possible when the Wehrmacht forces were able to control Eastern Soviet Russia which will allow them to deport all the inhabitant Jews there to their concentration camps. He wrote “The Jews are now being deported to the east. A fairly barbaric procedure, not to be described in any greater detail, is being used here, and not much more remains of the Jews themselves. In general, it can probably be established that 60 percent of them must be liquidated, while only 40 percent can be put to work. A judgment is being carried out on the Jews which is barbaric, but fully deserved.” . At the end of the war, during the battle of Berlin, Goebbels speeches became suicidal and apocalyptic, knowing that the end is near and nowhere to run, but as he became more depressed, he even became more ruthless especially when a German army general came to him and said that the situation in Berlin is devastating, soldiers aren’t trained enough and victory is far from the sight, Goebbels reply was “Their endless faith of final victory can compensate the situation.” then his general replied to him by saying that without weapons, the soldiers cannot fight and got no chance, therefore, their death would be useless, Goebbels finally replied in rage and said “I will not feel sorry for them….I repeat, I will not feel sorry for them. The people brought this to themselves, this might be a surprise to you but do not deceive yourself, we haven’t forced the people on anything, they gave us authorization and now they pay for it’s price.”. The idea of surrendering never came to Hitler’s mind despite the continuing requests and pleads by his army generals and his associates except for Goebbels who thought the same like Hitler, that surrender is no option. When Goebbels knew that Hitler committed suicide, he said “‘It is a great pity that such a man is not with us any longer. But there is nothing to be done. For us, everything is lost now and the only way left for us is the one which Hitler chose. I shall follow his example”. On the 1st of May, 1945, the Vice-admiral Hans-Erich Voss saw Goebbels and told him that him and other 10 generals would leave and offered him to leave with them but Goebbels replied “The captain must not leave his sinking ship. I have thought about it all and decided to stay here. I have nowhere to go because with little children I will not be able to make it.”. Later on the evening, Goebbels arranged with the SS dentist, Helmut Kunz to inject his 6 children with morphine and wait till they become unconscious and crush an ampule of cyanide in each of their mouths. Helmut’s testimony stated that he injected the kids with morphine, but then it was Magda Goebbels who crushed the cyanide ampules in her kids’ mouths. All of her kids’ names started with the letter H,….Helga (12 years Old), Hildegard (11 Years Old), Helmut (9 Years Old), Holdine (8 Years Old), Hedwig (7 Years Old), and Heidrun (4 Years Old). Afterward, Goebbels and his wife Magda went outside the bunker to the outer gardens where Goebbels shot his wife and later shot himself dead. It was the end of Joseph Goebbels….the propaganda monster of the 20th century.

2- Heinrich Himmler : Himmler was a military commander, a leading member of the Nazi party, Chief of the German Police, and the Minister of Interior from 1943. Himmler was one of the most powerful men in Nazi Germany, and one of the directly responsible for the Holocaust. He was in the first World War, and when the war was over, he studied agriculture in Munich, worked in a Chickens farm but didn’t succeed. He later joined the Nazi party in 1925 in the SS unit, and Hitler appointed him his personal guard. Himmler was able to develop the SS in a short period of time, making it one of the most well trained militias. The members of the SS special forces in 1929 were 250, and by the year 1933, it became 52,000. Himmler made sure to check himself the purity of the applicant’s blood because Hitler refused to accept any non-Aryan in his units. Himmler had 2 secret speeches known as the Posen Speeches, speeches concerned the treating of Eastern European peoples which said “One basic principle must be the absolute rule for the SS men : We must be honest, decent, loyal and comradely to members of our own bloodand to nobody else. What happens to a Russian, to a Czech, does not interest me in the slightest. What other nations can offer in the way of good blood of our type, we will take, if necessary, by kidnapping their children and raising them here with us. Whether nations live in prosperity or starve to death interests me only so far as we need them as slaves for our culture; otherwise, it is of no interest to me. Whether 10,000 Russian females fall down from exhaustion while digging an antitank ditch interests me only insofar as the anti-tank ditch for Germany is finished.”, concerning the extermination of the Jews that said “I am now referring to the evacuation of the Jews, the extermination of the Jewish people. It’s one of those things that is easily said: ‘The Jewish people are being exterminated’, says every party member, ‘this is very obvious, it’s in our program, elimination of the Jews, extermination, we’re doing it, hah, a small matter.’ […] But of all those who talk this way, none had observed it, none had endured it. Most of you here know what it means when 100 corpses lie next to each other, when 500 lie there or when 1,000 are lined up. To have endured this and at the same time to have remained a decent person – with exceptions due to human weaknesses – had made us tough. This is a page of glory never mentioned and never to be mentioned. […] We have the moral right, we had the duty to our people to do it, to kill this people who wanted to kill us.”, Albert Speer remark and the discussion of the Ghetto Warsaw uprising which said “This entire ghetto was producing fur coats, dresses, and the like. Whenever we tried to get at it in the past we were told: Stop! Armaments factory! Of course, this has nothing to do with Party Comrade Speer. It wasn’t your doing. It is this portion of alleged armaments factories that Party Comrade Speer and I intend to clear out in the next few weeks.” and also some other speeches that had similar contents and phrases. In 13 March, 1945, Himmler left the leadership and fled away, trying to negotiate his surrender to the allies as long as he won’t be convicted in the trials after the War. When Hitler knew of that he flew into rage, made him angry because he always believed that Himmler was second in loyalty only to Joseph Goebbels that he only called him the loyal Heinrich. At the end of the war, Himmler tried to escape the allies through disguising but the British forces arrested him in Bremen in the 22nd of May, 1945. He was supposed to be sent to trial in Nuremberg, but he committed suicide due to a portion of poison.

3- Herman Goering : Goering was one of the most famous leaders of Nazi Germany. He’s the founder of the Gestapo (The Secret Police). In 1922, he joined the Nazi party and was the head of the SA unit, the minister of economy, and the commander chief of Air force. When Hitler became chancellor of the Third Reich in 1933, he made Goering a minister of the Reich without any specific area of responsibility, which means he was not the head of a ministry. Goering was responsible of Jewish businessmen getting removed from the German economic system. In 1941, he ordered Heydrich to make a plan for the final solution of the Jewish question (The Holocaust). During the war, he was responsible for the loss of air battle against Great Britain which made his ranks in the Nazi party go down and became a source of hatred among the masses for his wealth. On the 20th of April, 1945, he left Hitler’s birthday party, telling him that he had important things to do in Southern Germany. He sent a telegram to Hitler from Berchtesgaden asking Hitler to take over the affairs of the State. Hitler said that this is a telegram of a traitor and a man who shows disrespect to the Fuhrer. During Goering’s sending of the telegram, he started communicating with the allies asking for negotiations concerning his surrender. When Hitler knew of this, he ordered the arresting of whom he called the addicted traitor. On the 9th of May, 1945, Goering surrendered to the Americans and was brought to the Nuremberg trials. He was the third highest ranking Nazi officer to be tried in Nuremberg and he was found guilty. Goering was very defensive in his trial claiming that he was never an anti-Semite, never believed in these atrocities, and had several Jews who had offered to testify on his behalf. However, Albert Speer reported that in the prison yard at Nuremberg, after someone made a remark about Jewish survivors in Hungary, he had overheard Goering say “So, there are still some there? I thought we had knocked off all of them. Somebody slipped up again.”. Goering appeared to be winning the trial through making jokes and finding holes in the prosecution’s case, but he was found guilty and was sentenced to death by hanging by stating “There is nothing to be said in mitigation. ForGoering was often, indeed almost always, the moving force, second only to his leader. He was the leading war aggressor, both as political and as military leader; he was the director of the slave labour programme and the creator of the oppressive programme against the Jews and other races, at home and abroad. All of these crimes he has frankly admitted. On some specific cases there may be conflict of testimony, but in terms of the broad outline, his own admissions are more than sufficiently wide to be conclusive of his guilt. His guilt is unique in its enormity. The record discloses no excuses for this man.” Goering appealed to the court’s deaths sentence if he were shot as a soldier and not executed like a criminal, and the appealing was not accepted. Goering spoke about war and extreme nationalism with Captain Gilbert as recorded in Nuremberg’s diary “Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. …voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”. Defying the court’s death sentence, Goering committed suicide by taking a potassium cyanide capsule the night before he was to be hanged.

4- Albert Speer : We mentioned this name few times for now due to his importance. Albert Speer was the architect of Nazi Germany, and indeed a genius he was. He was so talented that he became inside Hitler’s inner circle, and of course we might just assume Hitler’s respect for Speer due to Hitler’s love for architecture that he was about to study during his years in Vienna. By the orders of the Fuhrer, Speer made plans of Berlin’s reconstruction. He had deep respect for Hitler especially when he firstly joined the party in 1930. Speer attended several rallies for the party and was disturbed of how Goebbels drove the masses in a frenzy through his fiery speeches. Speer couldn’t end his impression that Hitler made on him, so he applied to join the Nazi party in 1931. Speer was responsible for most of the rallies that took place since the Nazi rise to rule in 193. In 1934, Hitler appointed Speer as the party’s chief architect. Speer was under a strong psychological pressure when he started doing the works and orders of the Fuhrer “Soon after Hitler had given me the first large architectural commissions, I began to suffer from anxiety in long tunnels, in airplanes, or in small rooms. My heart would begin to race, I would become breathless, the diaphragm would seem to grow heavy, and I would get the impression that my blood pressure was rising tremendously… Anxiety amidst all my freedom and power!”. Stalin was a big fan of Speer’s works, and asked him to visit Moscow to get to know the works of the Architect of the Reich closely, but Hitler of course refused, from the fear that Stalin would lay his hands on Speer and put him in a rat hole. Speer had great powers being so close to Hitler that sometimes Nazi officials went around to him to seek direct orders from the Fuhrer. Also Speer was responsible for the labor force in camps which used the most brutal methods, he later commented “the conditions for these prisoners were in fact barbarous, and a sense of profound involvement and personal guilt seizes me whenever I think of them.”. When the third Reich fell, Speer was tried in Nuremberg and been accused of being part of conspiracy against world peace, planning, and waging wars of aggression and lastly crimes against humanity.Speer during the trial admitted his responsibility and said “In political life, there is a responsibility for a man’s own sector. For that he is of course fully responsible. But beyond that there is a collective responsibility when he has been one of the leaders. Who else is to be held responsible for the course of events, if not the closest associates around the Chief of State?”. Speer during the trial was straightforward, honest, and wasn’t beating around the bush. Speer testified that in 1945, he planned to assassinate Hitler by dropping a canister of poison gas into the bunker’s air tank. He said that his plans failed due to a high wall that been built around the air intake. He stated that he was driven by despair when he realized that Hitler refused to surrender and decided that it’s about time for the German people to be extinct due to their loss. Speer said that he simply showed no mercy to the people. Speer was sentenced 20 years in prison and the court’s judgment stated that Speer was one of the few men who had the courage to tell Hitler that the war was lost and to take steps to prevent the senseless destruction of productive facilities and the robbing of civilians lives. Speer spent his full sentence in the Spandau prison in Eastern Germany and he spent most of his time reading classic novels, ancient Egyptian history and biographies. When he was released in 1966, he released 2 best selling books, Inside the Third Reich, and Spandau : The Secret Diaries and later he wrote a third book called Infiltration that revolved around the SS. Speer died in 1981 while he was visiting London and was known of being the Nazi who said sorry.

3- Martin Bormann : Bormann was Hitler’s private secretary and the head of the Party Chancellery. He had an immense power inside the party, was considered to be the closest to Hitler, and had the power to control the access to Hitler. In 1927, he joined the Nazi party and by the orders of Himmler, he became a member of the SS. In 1933, Bormann became the Reich Leader of the party, and in 1941, he served as the personal secretary for Rudolf Hess. In the same year he became the head of the party chancellery and proved to be a mastermind of political infighting. Bormann was responsible for Hitler’s paper works and, without exaggeration, he held the deepest secrets of the Fuhrer and the Nazi party. Bormann’s power grew in 1942 and established off-shore companies that financed Hitler’s needs in the war. Bormann was an atheist who said more than one time that Christianity is incompatible with Nazism, seeing that the Church’s influence is dangerous to the Nazi goals. Hitler master-planned the Kirchenkampf operation (The Church struggle) which was supposed to be operated by Bormann. The operation aimed to bring down the Churches under the control of the State by taking charge of Church finances and governance structures, therefore, the Nazi regime increased it’s imprisonment of resistant clergies, and of course Bormann had in his hands all of the personal files of Germany’s clergies. Some historians like Roger Griffin argued that Hitler and Bormann didn’t only want to control the Churches but also wanted to fully eradicate the Church institution from the future of Nazi Germany. Bormann was the most enthusiastic one among the Nazi officials who was eager was Hitler to fully eradicate the Jews and made sure that Jews from all around Europe be gathered in the ghettos especially Auschwitz to enslave them stating “The permanent elimination of the Jews from the territories of Greater Germany can no longer be carried out by emigration but by the use of ruthless force in the special camps of the East.”. There was an underground battle of influence and power between Bormann and Himmler, but Bormann’s influence was stronger. One day Himmler talked to Bormann on the phone concerning the 40,000 Jews of Poland in ghetto Warsaw and Himmler showed his concerns from Bormann’s using the word extermination rather than the codeword “resettled”, so Bormann ordered the apologetic Himmler not to report on this by phone but by SS couriers. On the 28th of April, 1945, Bormann stated that “Situation very serious . . . Those ordered to rescue the Fuhrer are keeping silent . . . Disloyalty seems to gain the upper hand everywhere . . .Reichskanzlei a heap of rubble.” Bormann and Goebbels witnessed and signed Hitler’s last will that was given to his personal secretary Traudl Junge. On April the 30th and right before he commits suicide, Hitler ordered a breakout for his loyal associates including Bormann and Goebbels; Goebbels refused the order of the Fuhrer which was the first of it’s kind and prefered to stay with him, while Bormann left the Fuhrerbunker with the SS doctor and leader of Hitler youth. Bormann’s route of escape was walking by railways to Lehrter Station and he was never found. The 5th Soviet army was able to put his hands on his diaries. In Nuremberg he was tried in absentia, receiving a death sentence. Rumors and of sightings were reported about Bormann after 20 years, some suggest that he had a plastic surgery while moving from a different European city to the other, some others claimed that he was living well in South America. Reinhard Gehlen, a general in the German army who served as Chief intelligence-gathering of the Eastern front and one of the most notorious Nazis employed by the United States during the Cold War, wrote in his diaries that Bormann was a Soviet Spy, and his awkward disappearance from Berlin at the end of the war was due to his fleeing to his Russian master. The hunt for Bormann lasted 26 years with no success, searching for him from Paraguay to Moscow, and from Norway to Egypt. On December the 7th, 1972, Dr. Hugo Blaschke identified the skull of Bermann and his remains near the Lehrter station. Turned out that he committed suicide with a cyanide capsule to avoid the allies arresting which of course ended Reinhard‘s claims that Bormann was a Soviet spy.

Friedrich Nietzsche Influence

The famous German philosopher, Nietzsche, is sometimes best described as the Prophet of Nazism and the black devil of philosophy. He was an anti-Democracy, anti-Socialism, anti-Christianity, anti-Judaism and indeed a social Darwinist. His belief in Darwin’s theory of evolution led him to the denial of religions along with compassion itself. Nietzsche described the moral man as the “Sick Man” saying that “The sick are the great danger of man, not the evil, not the ‘beasts of prey.’ They who are from the outset botched, oppressed, broken those are they, the weakest are they, who most undermine the life beneath the feet of man, who instill the most dangerous venom and skepticism into our trust in life, in man, in ourselves…Here teem the worms of revenge and vindictiveness; here the air reeks of things secret and unmentionable; here is ever spun the net of the most malignant conspiracy – the conspiracy of the sufferers against the sound and the victorious; here is the sight of the victorious hated.”. Therefore, Nietzsche’s doctrines had their effect on atheism, nihilism, existentialism, and postmodernism. He had a famous statement which was “God is dead” that suggested that if God truly died once as Christianity claim, then it should lead to the loss of any universal perspective, therefore, killing in our souls everything that got to do with sympathy or morality. The victorious should simply wipe out that weak from existence as it is the natural order of life and evolution.

Nietzschism is considered to be the cornerstone of the most radical doctrines like Nazism, Fascism, and recently, Zionism, but many opinions suggest that if Nietzsche had lived during WWII, he would not have been a Nazi. “Had he lived in that era, Nietzsche might not have become a Nazi. His works include numerous condemnations of anti-Semitism and nationalism (and thus were selectively censored by Elizabeth). But the best measure of Nietzsche’s contribution and importance to Nazism is not in conjectures about what Nietzsche might have thought about Nazism, but in the actual reverence of the Nazis for him.” – The Pink Swastika.

Hitler and the Nazi party found in Nietzsche’s philosophy everything they needed to fully construct their ideology that was responsible for the eruption of the Second World War. Nietzsche’s Superman became Hitler’s Super-Nation.Dr. Abdel Wahab el-Messeri says “Nietzschism was the racist manifestation of Romanticism, or we can say it’s the Romanticism of the racist, imperialist age, for it is the philosophical expression of the Darwinist vision of reality. And we’d like to differ here between Nietzsche’s writings and Nietzschism. Nietzsche’s writings is a complex, overlapped, and contradictory issue. But what happened that some main thoughts were isolated from Nietzsche’s system. And these thoughts, and not Nietzsche’s writings, contributed in shaping the understanding of many Europeans in the last decades of the 19th century.” and then he adds “And Nietzschism is the individual, western nihilistic philosophy that expresses the best expression concerning the cultural, and economical conditions for the western society at the height of the Capitalist revolution and the Imperialist expansion.”. Nietzschism can also be described as a Godless religion or atheism that declared him dead, and abstracts the world into it’s materialistic form that’s fully bounded to the rationality of absolute power. What Nietzsche in my opinion simply did was applying Darwin’s theories of evolution on Man in a philosophical understanding, and Nazism was the rational result.

Hitler’s contradictions, or smart policy ?

Hitler in his speeches used to praise Christianity and God, making the masses fall into a hysterical enthusiasm. But was he really a devoted Christian ?. Most of the resources we have says the opposite. Hitler’s table talk is a title given to a series of wartime conversations by Hitler, which were transcribed from 1941 to 1944. His remarks were recorded by Martin Bormann. It was later published by different editors, under different titles, in 3 different languages. And here are some excerpts from the book.

The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity’s illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity. Bolshevism practices a lie of the same nature, when it claims to bring liberty to men, whereas in reality it seeks only to enslave them. In the ancient world, the relations between men and gods were founded on an instinctive respect. It was a world enlightened by the idea of tolerance. Christianity was the first creed in the world to exterminate its adversaries in the name of love. Its key-note is intolerance.”

As it’s obvious, his criticism to Christianity was very strong, and he never believed in it. He in fact had his plans of ending the influence of Christianity in Germany right after the War, but of course he lost it. Some would find it weird when they know that Hitler respected Islam and favored it on Christianity. “Had Charles Martelnot been victorious at Poitiers, then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism, that cult which glorifies the heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world.”. Sounds like he had the sort of wrong information about Islam as a blood thirsty religion that aims for bloodshed. But later he retreats and says “Without Christianity, we should not have had Islam. The Roman Empire, under Germanic influence, would have developed in the direction of world-domination, and humanity would not have extinguished fifteen centuries of civilization at a single stroke.” . But he just doesn’t stop right there in attacking Christianity but he instead wages his war on religion itself “Originally, religion was merely a prop for human communities. It was a means, not an end in itself. It’s only gradually that it became transformed in this direction, with the object of maintaining the rule of the priests, who can live only to the detriment of Society collectively.”

The fact of an Islamic cooperation with the Nazis cannot be ignored, especially when the grand mufti of Jerusalem Muhammad Amin al-Husayni recruited Muslims for the SS, that there was a whole separate SS unit of Muslims. Also the rise of Nazism in Germany did not target Muslims. But what’s the secret behind these acts ?, was Hitler comfortable with the Islamic ideology, or was it something else ?. Albert Speer says that Hitler only cooperated with the Muslims because he felt the antisemitic views they shared (which appeared only afterthe rise of Zionism that aimed to occupy Palestine and declare it a national land of the Jews, especially that the Jewish Golden age existed at the time of the Islamic rule of the Iberian Peninsula) and Hitler found it a golden chance to gain the Muslims hearts towards him especially that most of the Arab-Muslims lands were occupied by the Great Britain and France. He simply aimed to gain the support of the natives in case the battleground moved from Europe to the Middle East. Albert Speer later wrote in his book “Inside the Third Reich” about Hitler’s respect to Islam by saying “Hitler said that the conquering Arabs, because of their racial inferiority, would in the long run have been unable to contend with the harsher climate and conditions of the country. They could not have kept down the more vigorous natives, so that ultimately not Arabs but Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of this Mohammedan Empire.”. Hitler simply followed the famous saying we all know“The Enemy of my enemy, is my friend”. And it becomes clear when he expresses his original thoughts to Bormann, saying “I m going to become a religious figure. Soon I’ll be the great chief of the Tartars. Already Arabs and Moroccans are mingling my name with their prayers. Amongst the Tartars I’ll become Khan. The only thing of which I shall be incapable is to share the sheiks’ mutton with them. I’m a vegetarian, and they must spare me from their meat. If they don’t wait too long, I’ll fall back on their harems!”.

Hitler was full of contradictions, one second he says he’s a devoted Catholic, and the other second he disses everything about Christianity. This indeed helped him to shape his unidentified character that some argue till this day about his religious beliefs, whether he’s a believer or not, whether he’s even an atheist or not, but the sure thing that his ideology was not the reflection of any religious doctrine, especially the Abrahamic ones.

Concentration Camps

The Concentration Camps were indeed the black mark that shall be forever remembered in Germany and Europe for it cost the lives of millions and millions whether Jews, Gypsies, Commies, Homosexuals, and handicapped. We’ll mention some of the very famous Concentration Camps that had the biggest roles of this hyena’s crime.

Ghetto Warsaw : It was the largest of all Jewish ghettos in Nazi occupied Europe during WWII. It was established in the Polish capital in 1940 with over 400,000 Jews living in an area of 1.3 Square miles. The Ghetto was split into two areas, the small area for the rich jews, and the large area for the poor and middle-classed Jews. 300,000 died in the Ghetto, 100,000 died due to the spread of disease and random killings, while the others died from starvation and exhaustion due to work. At the end of 1942, an Uprising took place in the Ghetto but of course failed and the Nazis managed to re-control it.

Auschwitz : was one of the largest concentration camps that had three main camps and another 45 sub-camps. The camp was based on the thoughts of Himmler concerning the final solution. The camp had Jews, Gypsies, Russians, and others. The camp fell in 1945 by the hands of the Soviets.

The Nazi method of extermination wasn’t random but according to very scientific studies. They only killed what they described as useless consumers like babies, pregnant women, the sick, and the elders. The ones who were healthy were taken care of and left for work, but after time, most of them died from starvation and exhaustion. Medical examinations took place which was inhumane and cannot be described, and after the War, the US had the full access to all of it’s results which of course considered to be unethical.

End of Road

At the final days of the Reich, Hitler was unaware of the defeat he’s having, moving units and armies on maps that did not exist on the battleground. The rumors that were spread by his propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels that claimed that the Americans are gonna stand with the Germans against the Soviets didn’t work and the soldiers were sure that the war was lost. When Hitler finally realized the defeat, he committed suicide along with his mistress Eva Braun on April the 30th, 1945. It marked the end of Nazism. After his suicide, there were series of another suicides committed by his army generals and soldiers. Nazism fell, along with Germany itself.

When the war ended, and the third Reich fell, it wasn’t the end of imperialism for it took place from Europe to the States in the shape of an American invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan in the name of War on terror. The World did not simply live in peace, and a third war might just be on the edge of the World with the rising tension between US, Iran, Israel, Russia, Europe, and China. If there’s a future war, the battleground will take place in the Middle East instead of Europe, which tells us all that what man learned from history, that man never learns from history as Hegel said. I finished my posts about War, or to be more specific, Wars ideology, whether they were religious as in the Crusades or taking the form of Nationalistic one as in WWI and WWII. Hope you liked my analysis, and I welcome any corrections or positive criticism. 

1 Comment

Woman

Woman’s a human being that puzzled most of the world’s philosophers, thinkers and common men. Woman is sometimes being described as the essence of life, as she was described by Al Pacino in Scent of a Woman movie. With your first impression of my post you’d probably think that I’ll be writing about Women’s beauty. But you probably guessed wrong and I would like to ask my “Male” readers who are reading this post right now, When I mention the word “Woman” what do you think of ?, Do you think of Megan Fox or Hypatia the Philosopher?, do you think of Marilyn Monroe or Cleopatra the Queen of Egypt, do you think of Nicole Kidman or Zenobia the famous Syrian Queen who led a revolt against the Roman empire ?, do you think of Carmen Electra or Mary Mother of Christ ?, do you think of Jessica Alba or Aisha, Muhammad’s wife that was the teacher of his disciples after his death? (despite the differences between us in religion, ethnic races or thoughts, we have to agree and give the Woman it’s right and mention it’s huge participation in creating generations of Men who were able to either burn the world or make it part of heaven).

In a world that holds, embraces and adopts the Western modernity whom I criticized in earlier posts, the calls for equality and Women’s rights rise. But I only want to ask a question (How many Hypatia do we have now ?). We have models, actresses, strippers. There are indeed female scientists, novelists, thinkers and philosophers but who’s getting the spot light?, a woman who’s working her brains out, or a woman who’s taking off her clothes for entertainment ?. The standards are switched, and the woman with the great body features now gets the full praise and that’s due to the highly materialistic life we’re living in at the moment.

 So starting from the point about the importance of the Woman’s role in our lives, it’ll be automatically switched to what we call “The Family”. The Society is formed of families that are collected together, and in a way or another, got to deal with each other for the sake of the mutual interests. But is it the same way the family members deal with each other ?(based on interests?). Indeed no, for the family’s basics are built on love and care, not on interests (the same way the society members deal with each other). So eventually the family and the society are living in contradiction and the family itself some times in lots of cases slows down the efficiency of the society. Therefore, in order to create a perfect working society you have to destroy the family. And how do you destroy the family ?. Let’s read Engels point of view in that issue along with Karl Marx and others in order to understand how exactly a society can develop (in a materialistic way) through the destruction of the family.

It’s going to be obvious that in order to free women, the first rule must be applied which’s entering all women into public activity, and this means the delay of the isolated family as an independent economical-social community….Through transforming the means of production to the public property, the family stops it’s role of being the economical community of the society. And house managing becomes a social industry. For the raising of children becomes a matter of public property…and the society raises all children equally, whether they were legal or illegal” (Engles : Introduction to the 1884ed. Of his Origin of the Family.)

While Marx suggests that destroying the family or “wilting” it means the adaption of Man to the society, therefore, all of the human existence basics (social-materialistic-mental) will be transformed from the family to the society.

While Simone de Beauvoir- the famous French writer who’s known of her activity in the field of Women’s liberation in and out of France- is being straight about this issue where she says that “The woman will always be enslaved until the superstition of family and motherhood be destroyed“.

Civilization not only destroys the family from the theoretical view but also from the practical one. It was the Man who was the first to abandon the family and the Woman followed him, and nowadays it’s the kids who are abandoning it as well. And we can easily notice the destruction of the family in our life through noticing the huge recession of marriage with the increase of divorce rates, and also the increase of the families that depend on one part of the parents like the Mother or the father, the sister or the brother.

And that is the difference between Religion and Utopia (Civilization). Religions believed that the family is the nest of Man and the Woman is the number one irreplaceable teacher that is responsible of raising the Man which leads to the raising of the generations. While civilization always talked cheerfully about the Social education, the nurseries  and Children institutions. And no matter what we think about these institutions for there is one thing in common between them all, which’s the absence of the Mother that leads to the raising of the children under the responsibility of the working staff. It was Plato who was the first who created the idea of Utopia and always talked about the social education, and of course his thoughts and doctrines were adopted by the Socialists in both the 19th and the 20th centuries. They see that the social education, social training, and nurseries are (as they claim) the fittest solution for the perfect society. While family love, religious education, art education, individuality and freedom are nothing more but fake romances that shouldn’t get in the way of the perfect society that’s being built. In this perfect society, the Mother has nothing to offer but public disorder to this perfect well suited society.

The Mother gives birth to the child and raises him, while the nursery creates a member of society, designs a civilian that can live in the utopia. The nursery is a factory and a social educational institution.

Civilization made the Woman become the issue and subject of admiration and exploitation, but it deprives the woman from her character ( the only thing that deserves the real admiration ). It’s clearly shown in our societies through modeling for example which led the society to treat Women as an object of beauty and care not about her character for the Woman in the civilization’s point of view is nothing but a “Beautiful Animal”, not even a human that is worth to mention.

The civilization fought Mothers and always preferred the woman to be a cleaner, an employee, a model, or a teacher rather than Motherhood itself. It’s the civilization that declared that Motherhood is slavery and promised to free her from it. And brags about the number of women whom she “freed” from family and kids and made them join their line of employees and workers.

At the time of the Mothers struggle in civilization, Picasso draws his beautiful painting and calls it “Motherhood” and praises the beauty of this nature

3 Comments

The Western Modernity

New expressions invaded our world especially our eastern society. Expressions like “The Natural Man”, “Modernity” and “Secularism”. It may be important to understand and analyze these expressions from our eastern point of view until we understand the hidden meaning of these doctrines. I believe the most important expression that we should understand is “The Unitary”, that means the existence of one and only one essence to our world, despite all of the outer diversities, that eventually  denies the existence of the humane independent essence from the natural/material  space and also denies it’s duality. Therefore the rules that work on nature(material) will be applied on Man concerning him a member of the natural/material world just like any other member. This was the meaning of the material Unitary, but also Unitary can be spiritual that it’s source will be Non-material which’s “God’s Will” or “The Historical Inevitability”, etc.

And then we have “Pantheism” or “Immanence” that says that everything in the universe : God , Man and Nature are all formed of one essence because the creator  united with his creatures forming a bond that cannot be broken. And because the world is formed of one essence, the humane independent essence won’t exist and it won’t exceed nature/material. So with this explanation we have 2 opposite understandings for pantheistic immanence while they are actually one in purpose but with difference in names.

1- In the pantheistic immanent system (The existence of the spiritual unitary), the principle is called “God” but it’s a God that unites with his creatures and dissolves within them that eventually cannot exist without the existence of his creatures; For he is “God” by name but Nature/Material in the practical world.

2-In the pantheistic immanent system (The existence of the materialistic unitary), it automatically gets rid of any spiritual essence or meaning; and the principle will be called “Nature’s Laws”, or “Practical Laws”, or “Materialistic Laws”, or “Motion Laws”, that’s why we call it (Godless Pantheism). This law is a full complete one where it can interpret all phenomena including the humane one.

This will transform us to another issue which’s “Secularism”.  So who is the Secular?; according to Thomas Ford Hoult’s Modern Sociology Dictionary, Secular has many meanings including the meaning “Worldly”, “Unspiritual”, “Unreligious”,  “Belongs to what’s rational or expedient in an abstract form”. And the dictionary sometimes points out that Secular means “The recession of faith or religion in a certain level”.

Then the dictionary moved to the meaning of “Secularism”  that was adapted by an article by Larry Shiner entitled “The concept of Secularism in the Empirical research” which says:

1- The recession of religion and its retreat (The symbols, the faiths, and the religious institutions lose its power and its place).

2- The concentration on the materialistic life in the mean time instead of aiming to a spiritual future (The peak of the secular operation is a society that’s fully embraced in the concept of secularism).

3- The separation of the society and religion (The peak of that kind of secularism is the appearance of a religious belief with an inner nature that doesn’t affect on the institutions or the collective acts).

4- The disappearing of the holy’s concept (The world loses its sacred nature by time when both Man and Nature become bound to the rational interpretations).

And there are many other attempts to identify and explain the meaning of Secularism in the western dictionary. Others illustrated it as “the removal of holiness in our lives”, and others connected it to the material rationalization.

And the other Arab attempts to illustrate or interpret the meaning of Secularism also like the western one varied from a meaning to another in the matter of “Full Secularism” and “Partial Secularism”, for the Professor Muhammad Abed Al-Gabry considered that the concept of Secularism is different to Islam because he sees that “Islam is not a Church so that we separates it from the state”, therefore Secularism isn’t an issue among the issues of the Arab world. That’s why Al-Gabry assured the need to exclude the term “Secularism” out of our thinking Arab dictionary because it doesn’t reflect “The rational Arabian needs” and see that we should replace it by other terms like “Democracy” and “Rationalism”, because both reflect the needs of the Arab society.

So now we are going to be able to fully interpret our concept towards Secularism that’s divided to “Partial Secularism” and “Full Secularism”. They  mix and confuse some:

1- Partial Secularism:

It’s a partial look towards reality that doesn’t deal with the full dimensions of the current system. Therefore it’s not complete. And this vision goes to the point of view that concentrates on the separation of Religion and the world of politics and maybe economy, which’s described by the expression “Separation of religion and state”. This vision is moderate because it doesn’t deny the existence of a metaphysical world, or the reality of religion and doesn’t deny the moral and ethical principle in the society. It’s a certain vision towards Man which sees that Man still has a materialistic side to deal with in this world and that’s it, and it doesn’t discuss about his other parts of life which’s mainly religion. And we can call “Partial Secularism” the “Moral Secularism” or “The humane secularism”.

2- Full Secularism:

It’s a total full look on the principle of secularism that’s embraced by the western modernity. Looks at religion or any metaphysical reference as something that one shouldn’t care for therefore it totally denies it and in the best of cases just puts it aside. And sees the world as a full materialistic element with an endless motion, therefore everything is relative. And in such a materialistic world all what matters is profit, power and interests. It’s a full Darwinist world with no moral or ethical background. It deals with the world as a material substance therefore even the humans within are just part of this system. Therefore we can justify the Imperialistic movements that rose in the 18th century that dealt with the world as a pure materialistic substance and enslaved the people of certain spots as they are nothing but materialistic tools that should be used for the favor of this Imperialistic nation. Full Secularism is a very big look not only to the world. It’s a look that starts with the Man’s look to himself and ends with his look to the way he dresses and the way he eats or drinks, for it is not the separation of Religion and state; It’s the separation of any ethical, moral, religious standard of Man from life itself. It’s similar to the western modernity that’s separated from value.

The Achievements of the Western Civilization project and it’s reasons:

It’s not strange or weird for this model that has a very strong tactical ability of organization to achieve such successes, on both levels the moral and materialist level, and in its first levels it was represented by (Conquests – Products and materialistic comfort for the western societies – great arts – logical materialistic philosophies that has a very strong ability to explain and interpret).

Perhaps the most important reason of these successes of this western model was the western imperialism that achieved a very high living standard for the western man, helped him building a very strong materialistic infrastructure that helped him later to export his own social and materialistic problems to the east.

Although the western modern was built and evolved on a Darwinist vision, it left at the beginning a space for the western man to organize his private life on Christian standards or humane ones with Christian origins. And from here the west succeeded in creating a citizen believes in the Darwinist values and its effects in his social life, while he operates his private one on some ethical and moral standards. (and with this we have to say that during the late 60s, values like the materialistic benefit and the aim towards sensual pleasure got involved more into the private life, that’s why we can notice the fragility of the family now, the aversion for marriage and reproduction, also fragility of faith and nationality.)

The crisis of the modern Western Civilization:

The crisis of the modern western civilization began to appear on surface during the middle of the 19th century, and what’s funny about the current situation that westernized Arabs who call for  catching the west are still living in the principles of the 18th century, and the sciences of the 19th century, and still repeat the west’s optimism concerning its future at the time where the rationality of the 18th century fell  in the eyes of lots of the western scholars when they saw how fragile it is. This fear in the mind of the western scholars nowadays is justified especially when such a civilization was a main cause for the two biggest wars in history (WWI-WWII) and ending with its various problems like the erosion of the family, the spreading of AIDS and drugs, the accumulation of the mass destruction weapons, the environmental crisis, and the feeling of foreignness in the mind of the western man due to his separation from his nature and soul. It’s important for us to analyze such modernity and ask ourselves these questions. Is there a relationship between porn (extracting the holiness away from the man’s body) and the erosion of the family?; and is there a relationship between all of this and the environmental pollution?; is there a relationship between the dismantling  philosophy and the accumulation of Nuclear weapons (that can dismantle his world into smaller pieces while extracting the holiness away from nature) ?.

The Deviation of the western model:

Some of these deviations are sometimes considered by its people as “necessary” flaws that should not be cared about in order to push the wheel of improvement more and more. And some of these deviations are represented in the Imperialistic model of the western civilization like Nazism, Zionism, and Racism.

And such imperialistic movements should not be pictured as flaws but as a serious deviations in the western model, it sometimes should be pictured as fatal mistakes and if they are flaws can we differ between this western imperialism and the materialistic needs of the western man that was built on it when he turned this world into a materialistic substance where he can use and get advantage of it at anytime?, and can we separate between the luxury and the prosperity of the western man and between the huge World-wide looting  (and dividing the world) that was done by the western imperialism?, which cannot be even compared to any other type of imperialism due to its effect on the world and due to its breadth of field across the land?, So starting from this point we shouldn’t talk about the strength of the western economy as a Capitalistic accumulation but as an Imperialistic one.

The total of what England looted from India alone is much bigger and larger than England’s production during the industrial revolution. And England didn’t economically get advantage of its colonies alone but also by displacing the unwanted members in the English society and by exporting the social problems of the society into its colonies, some of these unwanted members were like the Jews when England sent them to Palestine, and like the unemployed workers as well. Not to mention the systematic looting of monuments by England from India and by France from Egypt. Monuments that weren’t retained to its countries till this day, and after all of this we still talk about the Capitalistic accumulation or shall we talk about an imperialistic accumulation considering it closer to reality?. Can we for example study the economical success of Israel without pointing out at the huge American aid to this country that consists of billions and billions of dollars that are divided on a population of 5 million only?, and they are being aided this bug just because of Zionism and because of USA considering Israel as a big American military base in the Middle East that fulfills its duties for the American policy. Therefore we should retain the term imperialism when we analyze the western civilization, because it is indeed a main study concerning this western improvement.

Now concerning Nazism, it is indeed the most unique phenomenon in history. History never witnessed a such biased and well studied way of extermination other than the Nazi model, for the world never seen such a way of eradicating millions and millions with such a systematic professional way, and also Nazism might be the turning moment which showed the ugly part of the western model, and we can notice this if we put Nazism in the model of Racial disparity and the Social Darwinism that formed the doctrine levels of the western imperialism, that turned the world (Nature and Man) into a materialistic consumption if it was put in the model of the systematic eradication of the red Indians that was done by the white man in the Americas and the enslavement of the blacks in Africa and America. If we do that, then we’ll realize that the Nazi moment in the western civilization will show it’s true face , for it is a moment where the western imperialism expressed itself sharply with no mercy following the steps of the original western doctrine. Same thing can be referred to Zionism, for it expresses the same view of western imperialism that turns the world into a materialistic consumption that’s being put for the favor of the stronger society.

The Price of Progress:

Let’s point out at the different negative social phenomenon like Porn (the materialistic costs for producing it and the mental costs for consuming it) – worthless products (that adds nothing to the man while it takes a long social life producing it) – the erosion of family – the way the society treats the elderly – the time the person spends with his wife and kids – the recession of the social connection because of Computers – the mental illness (depression and the unbalancing) – the spreading of the nihilistic philosophies and violent, powerful, and the struggled philosophies (Social Darwinism and Nietzscheism)  – the high expenditure of the government on weapons (It is said that for the first time in human history, man spends on weapons more than he spends on food supplies) – the probability of destroying Earth suddenly (by mass destruction weapons) or  gradually (through pollution) – the increase of crime rates in the societies that are referred to as developed (the budget of prisons are more than the budget of education in 6 American states, while also prisons sector in USA is the largest diffused sector in the American economy).

Not to mention the cosmic price that was paid for such progress. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution and the western man kept on talking about the industrial progress (and we indeed mentioned its positives) but we now know how much humanity paid for such progress. If  we put two terms in front of each other, “The Cosmic Lag” VS “The Scientific industrialized progress” we’ll see how much the latter affects the first. And in order to be accurate we must calculate how much the industrialized progress caused a lag for the environmental system of the universe. Therefore we’ll point out the universal disasters that were caused by such progress: the erosion of the Ozone layer – the pollution of the seas – the desertification due to the cutting of the trees – the nuclear wastes – the air’s pollution and the increase of carbon dioxide – global warming . The comparison should be put this way to know exactly where we stand.

If we make a study to see the real costs of an industrialized project (calculating the final materialistic profit of the project minus the cosmic loss due to this project) we will see that it’s a losing project, and that the western industrialized project made a huge success and continued with efficiency because others paid the price (whether Men or Nature), while during the improved successes of some countries for the sake of catching the west the cosmic disaster began to rise till we started reading about it every day in Newspapers.

What about happiness and balance?, are they linked to the industrialized progress?. Times Magazine from few years write an article entitled “Healthy, Rich, and not happy”, this article had a question that was asked on Europeans: Are you happy?, it showed that the Germans are the most wealthy, the more improved than others and also most miserable, while the Irish and the Portuguese are the poorest, are also the most satisfied. And in a survey that was done by a survey company that called it “Hope Index”. It found that pessimism concerning the future  (18% were included in the survey) prevails Europe, especially the countries that lay on Rhine sea (In Germany were the individual’s rate of payment is 28,000 dollars). While they found that 42% in South Africa, 64% in Brazil (where the individual’s rate of payment is 3500 dollars and 4400 dollars respectively) have hope in the future.

As a primitive tribe in Congo called Bakota describes the western man as “A black bat flies nervously but doesn’t know where to go”.

And if they say that happiness is relative while progress is a scientific model;  does this mean that scientific progress and happiness are different from each other and not related? If they are then what is the purpose of such progress: the materialistic progress without the humane existence?, doesn’t this show the ugly materialistic face of such civilization that drowns us in products and the indicator according to the material world (Speed – productivity, etc) without any care about man’s happiness or sadness.

What about leisure?, Can we consider leisure as a part of the progress as well?. The scientists of anthropology are amazed of how the developing world do not spend much of its time working. The English historian Christopher Hill found out that the English worker in the year 1530 used to work for only 14 or 15 week in the whole year to be able to supply his own life, and then the number after 2 centuries and a half reached 52 week with 12 hrs/day. Can we now talk about the improvement of the worker’s life in England?.

Luckily there is an organization that appeared in the west which’s called (Green groups) that challenges the materialistic principle of the current western society, and cares about Non-Materialistic values like happiness, balance, life style and the realization of the man’s mind ability and how it’s limited and the importance of uniting with Nature. And these groups introduced new expressions and new theories like the expression “Sustainable growth”, which’s a progress that doesn’t cause a deep lag in the cosmic order and puts in its consideration the next upcoming generations, perhaps this way of thinking might be the beginning of a new way of progress and it’s the realization the price the world paid for such a disastrous progress.

I’ve made an odd discovery.  Every time I talk to a savant I feel quite sure that happiness is no longer a possibility.  Yet when I talk with my gardener, I’m convinced of the opposite. – Bertrand Russell

This topic was based on the study of Dr. Abdel Wahab Al Messeri on his book “Cognitive studies in Western Modernity”.

2 Comments

Freedom for the rebellions

You can’t separate peace from freedom because no one can be at peace unless he has his freedom – Malcolm X.

On the 25th of January 2011, The Egyptian people rebelled for their freedom that’s been taken from them for 60 years. A revolution the whole world watched and respected, respected those who no longer couldn’t hold themselves anymore. Egypt; the land that had the most ancient civilization in history, Egypt; the land that it’s people never had the choice to pick their leader for 7000 years. Egypt always been ruled by tyrants whether during it’s golden time or it’s dreadful one. The call for freedom is now the wish of every Egyptian.

Freedom is a responsibility that cannot be carried by slaves unless they take off their dress of humiliation and shame. On the 25th of January Egyptians were able to take off this dress and show the world how freedom is such a valuable thing to die for. The call for freedom in a week of protests cost the lives of 400 Egyptian. Is it too much?, No!, Freedom costs more, Freedom doesn’t have a price!, Freedom cannot be touched by hands and cannot be watched by eyes. Freedom is felt by heart and soul. But unfortunately after a week of protests lots of people backed off; chose to go back to their normal routine life were they don’t have any sort of freedom. Were they only eat, drink, and sleep just like Animals. What differs them from animals anyway. Only few remained in Tahrir square knowing that their call for freedom won’t be stopped by the strongest modern age tyrant. Those knights in the square are the hope of this country, are the hope of having freedom after 7000 years of tyranny and humiliation. We’ve been silent for too long, too long we do not know what freedom is anymore. Is this the reason behind the people’s retreat ? that they do not know what is freedom in the first place?.

It’s a secret agenda that’s being put and orchestrated by foreign members to destroy Egypt. This was the government’s reaction and the Egyptian national TV. And I agree it was an agenda that moved the people this way and indeed it was a foreign one. This agenda was “Freedom” and it was foreign because they never felt it before and never understood it either. But why they want us to be always humiliated and helpless?, why they want us to be not free and not participating in our society?. When you do not have freedom you fall easily for any trick or play and when you believe in freedom you realize what’s wrong from right once you hear it or see it. The rebellions in the square are already free. They already have their freedom even if they got killed, arrested or tortured. But for those who backed off and accused the rebellions of being spies and agents telling them to go home to get back to their normal lives. To go back to the daily routine work, go back to listen to the fake parliament thoughts and laugh with it, go back to stand in rows to get food and supplies and die while trying to get it, to go back being slaves to the system, the system the rebellions call for it’s fall. Don’t you dare to call them spies. They are poets and warriors at the same time. They sold their lives and security but gained their freedom, they no longer see their families but they gained their freedom. The name of the square even close to the purpose of the revolution, it’s called Al Tahrir (The Liberation). The square is the only place where you don’t know who’s the Muslim and who’s the Christian, The only place where you see and witness actual democracy and freedom, The only place where people talk to each other openly without any introductions, the only place where actual freedom exists on the Egyptian soil.

“If we leave the square you’ll find us in jails. I’d rather die here in the square demanding my rights than leaving the square and just get jailed”. Those were the words of a protester in the square who didn’t leave it even for few minutes. He spent a week in the square demanding his freedom and rights from the government that still refuses to answer him and his fellow rebellions. Freedom costs everything in your life and if you chose to live without freedom then you’re actually not living. You’ll be a mummy, a zombie and undead. What does life mean anyway without the freedom of choice and expression?, what does humanity itself mean if we gave up our rights for security. Those who trade freedom for temporary security deserves neither freedom nor security, Said Benjamin Franklin. And we will definitely deserve nothing but slavery and humiliation if we chose not to support the rebellions in the square. Can we overcome this dilemma and the choice between security represented in the system and Freedom that has no price?. If we fail this time we won’t wake up for a long time as well, we might have to wait another 7000 years to realize that Freedom is what we’re missing. But if we succeeded will be free forever, because those who felt freedom cannot under any circumstances accept any other system that’s not built on it’s basics. For once we will be a nation worth to mention and worth to follow.

 

1 Comment

Duality Of Islam : Part (10/10)

This post will be the final post of my illustration of Alija Izetbegovic’s book “Islam Between East and West”. This post is my translation of the introduction chapter by the author, i hope you enjoy it and i hope i delivered my message the right way.

Introduction Chapter:

The World of today features an ideological clash that we all are involved in it whether we are shareholders or victims, So what is Islam’s reaction from this titan clash ? and is there any part for Islam in forming this present World ? This book partially tries to answer this question.

There are only 3 integrative point of views towards this World, and they are : The Religious View, The Materialistic View, and the Islamic View. And these 3 views reflect  primitive qualities which are ( Conscience, Nature, and Man ) each one of them is represented respectively  in Christianity, Materialism and Islam. And We’ll find that all of the ideologies, Philosophies, and doctrinal teachings from the oldest of ages till our World today, in it’s final analysis, Can be  traced  back to one of those 3 main ideologies.

The first point launches from it’s beginning with the existence of the Soul, the Second with the existence of the Material, and third with the simultaneous presence of both Soul and Material, Because if the Material existed alone the Philosophy applied on it will only be the Materialistic Philosophy. On it’s contrary if the Soul existed , Therefore Man will exist too. And Man’s life becomes meaningless without sorts of Religion and Ethics. And Islam is the name that’s called upon the unity of Soul and Material, and it’s the highest definition for Man himself.

The Humane life is only completed when it has the Sensual desires and the Spiritual longings for the Human being. And all of the humane fails are traced back to the Religious denial of the biological necessities of Man or the denial of the Materialistic doctrine for the Man’s Spiritual goals.

Our Ancient fathers assured the existence of 2 things : The Mind and the Material, and according to that they comprehended the existence of 2 elements, 2 systems from different origins, and different nature, the one wasn’t created from the other, and cannot reduce one in another as well. Even the most genius aspects in the World couldn’t avoid this unique difference between the both perspectives no matter how we changed its entry. And we can imagine those 2 World separated by time, Which means they are 2 Worlds following each other in a different course of time (The Present and the Next), or a 2 Worlds existing at the same time but different in Nature and concept, and this is closer to reality.

Duality is the closest feelings to Man, but it’s not necessarily the greatest humane Philosophy. On the contrary , all of the major Philosophies were monistic propensity. The Man during his life may discover through his experience the duality of the World, but the unitary is latent in every humane thought. For Philosophy doesn’t approve duality. And still, its not important what Philosophy approves or disproves because Life, and it’s higher than thought, shouldn’t be judged by it. And since we are humans, we live factually. And we may deny those 2 Worlds, but we cant run away from them, because life doesn’t stop much on our perspective towards it.

Therefore, the question isn’t whether we’re living 2 lives , but the question is : Do we realize that while understanding its reality ? and in that, lies the final meaning of Islam. Life is dual,

and it became practically impossible for us to live one life since the moment we stopped being Plant or Animal, or when the ethical standards were created or “When man was dropped into this World”.

We don’t have rational evidence concerning the existence of another World, but we have this obvious feeling that Man isn’t here just for consuming and producing. Higher purpose of life isn’t presented through thinking for Scientists and Thinkers who run after the truth, even their life whom they spent on finding the truth, ignoring their physical necessities in a sense is the highest form of the humane existence.

The 2 lines of thinking that were discussed during the humane history are paralleled, and it’s easy to identify them. Although they continually clash, they remained till this day not revealing any kind of essential progress.

The first line starts with “Plato” and extends to the Christian thinkers in the Middle ages, followed by “El-Ghazaly”, “Dekart”, “Malebranche”, “Leibniz”, “Berkley” , “Fichte”, “Cudworth”, “Kant”, “Hegel”, “Mach”, and “Bergson” in modern age. The materialistic line is presented by “Thales”, “Anksmenderis”, “Heraclitus”, “Lucretius”, “Hobbes”, “Helvetius”, “Holbach”, “Diderot”, “Spencer”, and “Marx”. And in the field of the practical humane goals those 2 lines stand in the Human thought on odds, the current represents the humane doctrine, while the second represents the progress. There is no progress in the Western understanding of Religion, and Science doesn’t lead to humanity.

Anyway, In reality there’s no abstract Religion or abstract Science, For example there’s no Religion without some Scientific references and there’s no Science without Religious form of hope. This reality created a mixture that is hard to find among it the right origin or the right place for a certain idea or a certain direction. And we, discussing the 2 ideas, aim to reach their clear form with their logical results at the end, and some times vague.  We’ll find that they are both logical systems from the inside and shut upon themselves. But for lots of us the picture would look sudden. For each one of them interprets the other as if it’s a mosaic containing gaps that can be filled with opposite argument. So in a way Materialism claims that the objective factors is independent from Man, it’s the main engine of historical events, We must predict in the second level of the dialects level a total opposite idea from this one. And indeed after a little search the idea of the heroic interpretation to history appeared, the same way with “Carlyle” who tends to say that all of the historical events can be interpreted through the effects of strong characters represented by geniuses. And by this way, Materialists contradict each other, for some say that “The Historian doesn’t walk upon his head ” Karl Marx, and others say that : Geniuses make history.

And by this last example, We find historic materialism versus Christianity, and with the same logic : Creation versus Evolution, ideals versus interests, freedom versus symmetry, individuality versus society etc.

The Religion call for destroying desires has a different paralleled meaning in the concept of Civilization which is “Always create new desires”. And in the tables that are being put in that book, the reader will see a much detailed attempt to categorize the ideas and opinions based upon this form. And the result, although not complete, Can show us that Religion and

Materialism are the 2 main primitive ideas in the World that cannot be divided into smaller parts, and cannot be mixed with each other, and by this context we borrow a verse from the Koran which’s “He has let free the 2 bodies of flowing water, meeting together between them is a barrier which they do not transgress” – Al Rahman verse 19 & 20.

It’s impossible to find a logical excuse to argue theses 2 major global ideas, because each one of them in it’s structure is a logical one, and there’s no other higher logic to condemn it. And there’s no, from the concept of experience or principle, a higher form of life other than humanity itself. To live, and above all to live a complete good life, and it’s a thing better than any Religion and any Socialism. Christianity offers a salvation, but it’s an inner one, while Socialism offers an outer salvation only. And we are standing in front of those 2 paralleled worlds that their logic are totally clashed with no cure, We feel deep inside ourselves that we ought to accept those 2 worlds together in an attempt to find a new natural balance for them. For the opposite doctrines divide the truth as much as it divides the Man’s fate.

There are some main facts that every human being takes in consideration in this life, Regardless the Philosophical vision that he follows.  Man learned this through common sense, or through his successes or fails, These facts contain : The Family, The Materialistic security, Happiness, Righteousness, Honesty, Health, Education, Freedom, Interest, Power, Responsibility, etc.

So if we analyzed these facts, we’ll find that it rotates around one center, and forms in its totality a practical system that may not be synchronized and incomplete, but it recalls in our memory the facts of Islam.

The differences between the main doctrines for the 2 currents we mentioned before seems like it can’t be exceeded, but it’s only like that from the theoretical point of view, but in the practical life, the situation is different. Those who fought against something in the past agree on the same thing in our current day, and only few thoughts remain just like an orient that gives the theory a better look.

Marxism refused the family and the state, but from the practical side, it kept those 2 foundations. And every abstract Religion condemns the Man’s busyness with his life, but because Religion is the faith of living people it accepted the struggle for justice and the struggle for the existence of a better world. Marxism had to accept a degree of individual freedom and Religion to accept using sorts of Power, now it’s clear to see that Man while practicing his factual life, Cannot live on the behalf of a certain fixed Philosophy.

And the question is : Can those 2 systems find an exit and at the same time remain as they are ? the practical reality says something else, Because for them to synchronize with practical life each one of them borrows the other. Christianity that turned to a Church, started talking about work, fortune, power, education, science, marriage, laws, social justice, with lots of other things in practical life. And on the other side, we find that Materialism turned to Socialism or a system or state, started to talk about humanity, morals, arts, creativity, justice, responsibility, freedom, etc

So instead of the abstract beliefs we were given interpretations  of these beliefs for daily use, And the distortion of both Religion and Materialistic sect continued according to a certain law. And in both cases the problem was one : How can a thing that represents only one part of life be applied on the whole factual life while it’s even more complicated?

From the theoretical part the Man can be Christian or Materialist, for he is extremist in a way or another, but things in reality don’t work that way, not for the Christian nor the Materialist.

The new utopias in China, North Korea and Vietnam, consider itself the most stable and consistent form of Marxism teachings. And for real, these utopias are considered good examples for moderate solutions and for the inconsistency from the practical point of view. So instead of letting itself taking time to formulate standards that reflect new relationships in the Economical base, it simply took the usual moral standards that’s prevailing especially 2 of them which are : Moderation and the respect to the elderly. And by this way, we found the extreme Marxism borrowing the 2 ruling principles that are found in the current Religion. And the compilers of this system admit it whether they like it or not, but facts remain as it is regardless of our recognition towards it.

In some of the socialist countries people are awarded by moral incentives due to their work’s consistency along the material incentives as well, although the moral incentives cannot be interpreted among the Materialistic Philosophical understanding, and the same thing is applied on the calls for : Humanity, Justice, Equality, Freedom and Human rights. Because the source of all these calls is Religion. But with no doubt , that every human being has the right to live the way he wants and the way he sees it suits him most, with his right to be incompatible with his own ideology. Anyway, in order to understand this World a true understanding, it’s important to know the true source of thoughts that rule this World, and to also understand it’s meaning.

In a study that we are about to discuss grave dangers lie within, represented in what they call “Things that appear so clear”, and ideas that are well accepted by the masses. The sun doesn’t rotate around the Earth, although it’s what we see. And the whale isn’t a fish regardless the fact that most think it is. Socialism and freedom never  meet together, despite all of the convincing attempts. Regardless the prevailing distortion, ideas remain as it is while it’s affecting the World, not in its imposed meaning or it’s timely nature, but according to it’s original principles we are approaching Islam’s definition in a different way than usual. With keeping the main points in our heads, we can say that Islam means to understand and to admit the initial duality of the World, and then defeating it.

The formulated description that’s represented in the word “Islamic”, as we use in this book, not only to explain the rules that are mostly known to be Islam, but to also identify the basic principles that involves it. By this, Islam becomes a definition of a method more than a predated organized solution, and it means : the combination that unifies the opposing principles. This main principle of Islam reminds us of the study that life was created upon. Because inspiration that attached between Freedom of mind and determinism of nature as shown in life, seems it is also the same inspiration that attached between ablution “wodo'” and the prayer in a unit that’s called “Islamic Prayer”. An instinct that’s very powerful that can build Islam through his meditation in prayer, and he can through his meditation in Islam to assess the duality that includes the Universe.

Europe couldn’t reach a moderate road (Although England sort of tried to be an exception in this field). Therefore , it’s not possible to express Islam by European definitions. Because Islamic expressions like : “Salah” prayer, Zakat, Khalipha “Caliphate”, Jama’a, Wodo’ “ablution” , and lots of other expressions that has no opposite meaning in European languages. Defining Islam as a compound that consists of Religion and Materialism, and that it stands a moderate position between Christianity and Socialism, and it’s an approximate definition that can be accepted under certain conditions. It’s a definition that’s somehow true, but with certain parts and not all. Because Islam isn’t just a simple central mathematical issue nor it is a common ideology between those 2 doctrines. For prayers, zakat, wodo’ (ablution) are things that cannot be divided because it is an expression of a simple natural feeling, it is a certainty that’s expressed by one word with one picture, however it still represents a significant dual system. And symmetry with Man in this case is clear, for man is her interpreter and her scale.

Some people who read Koran by an analytical critical view will feel that Koran from the objective side doesn’t follow a certain system, and will seem like it was assembled from scattered elements. But, it should be clear and understood that Koran is not a literary book but a life. And Islam itself is a way of life more than a way of thinking. The only inherent comment on Koran is to say that it’s “Life” .And as we know this life in it’s embodied model is the life of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH. Islam in it’s written formula (I mean Koran) may sound unorganized from the outside, but Koran in the life of Muhammad PBUH proved that it’s a natural union : Of “love and power”, “transcendental and realistic”, “Spiritual and epidermal”. And this combinational explosive vitality of Religion and Politics provides a massive power to the lives of the societies that embraced Islam. In one moment Islam matches the life’s essence.

Islam’s position “the moderate” can be realized through the fact that Islam always been attacked by the 2 opposing sides : Religion and Science. From the religious side Islam been accused of being too much interacted with nature and reality, and that it’s adapted to life and materialistic life. And from Science’s point of view Islam been accused of having religious elements and cult ones. And in reality there’s only one Islam, but it’s the same as Man (has a body and a soul). For it’s contradicting sides depend on the differences of opinions. Materialists only see in Islam it’s religious form and it’s occult one (a Rightist direction), while Christians see Islam as a social political movement (a Leftist direction).

The impression of duality repeats itself through the look at Islam from the inside, for there’s no single Islamic institution that could be counted as an abstract form of religion only, nor an abstract form of science as well, especially when it contains elements of politics and economy. The Sufis always assured the religious sides of Islam only, while rationalists assured the other side, and both groups didn’t have an easy road with Islam, because of a simple truth that Islam cannot be bound in an understanding of one of the both groups ignoring the other. Take for example Wodo’ “ablution” : The Sufi sees it as a form of religious wash  with religious meanings, while the rationalist sees it as an issue of physical cleanness. And both are right but partially. And the insufficiency of the Sufi interpretation that ignored the physical cleanness in ablution so that he bounded ablution into an abstract form, and surrendering to the same concept in other issues, we’ll see that this understanding bounds Islam in it’s abstract religious form through excluding all of the materialistic, rational and social ingredients from Islam. Whole rationalists took the other opposite direction through ignoring the religious element in Islam, and through this they bounded Islam into an abstract Political movement, making it a sort of nationalism, or what’s could be called “Islamic Nationalism deprived from it’s religious and ethical essence, empty and equaled with all other Nationalities in this field”.

And in that case to be a Muslim doesn’t require a call or a duty or an ethical religious obligation or any positive position towards cosmic truth. But it only means the belonging to a certain group of people different from another one. Islam was never just a nation but it’s probably a call for a Nation “that enjoins what is good and forbids what is evil”. Which means it’s calling for an ethical message. And if we omitted the political ingredient of Islam and abstracted it on the Sufi religious one, we’ll be following blindly drowned in slavery. And on the opposite, if we omitted the religious ingredient of Islam we’d stop being an ethical power. So does it matter anymore if imperialism was called Britain or Germany or Islam, as long as it remains just a power that oppresses people?

For the future of Man and his practical activity, Islam means to create a human being balancing between his soul and body, and a society that it’s laws along with it’s social and economical institutions prevent this balance and doesn’t violate it. Islam is –and it should be remained like this- the continued search through history for the balancing condition of the outside and the inside. This is Islam’s purpose today, and it’s Islam’s fated duty in the future.

The problems that we deal with in that book are somehow synchronized with a form or another with the features that shape the current historic event. And I mean by this : The division of the World into 2 clashed camps based on ideological conflict. The confrontation between the ideas is reflected upon reality with an apparent clarity that was never seen before, taking practical forms that are strictly shaped. It is extremely regretful, that this clash increases day after day. And shows us 2 worlds that are divided into their core, politically, ideologically and emotional. We are seeing with our own eyes a historical example about the duality of the Man’s world. But still there’s a part of the World that’s not affected by this clash, most of it formed of Islamic countries. And this phenomenon didn’t rise up coincidentally. For Islam is dependent from the ideological side –biased- and it’s so because of it’s nature.

The operation of political and ideological independence for Muslim countries will continue, and it won’t be a political disengagement only, it will be followed by strict requests to get rid of foreign affections and doctrines, whether they are eastern or western. This is Islam’s normal condition in the world of today.

Islam that’s having a moderate position between east and west had to exactly know the concept of its message. And now, it became more and more clearer that these clashed ideologies with its extreme forms –cannot be forced on human race, and it must head to a new formula and a new moderate position- we’d like to point out that Islam is compatible with this natural way of thinking, and it’s the most tuned expression. The same when Islam during the past was the “broker” that ancient civilizations passed through to west, has nowadays again to –and as we are at the age of the major dilemmas and options­- bear  it’s role “as a moderate nation” in a divided world. This is the meaning of the third road, road of Islam.

And at last, I would like to finish using few words about this book itself. This book is divided into 2 main sections : The first section discusses generally the issue of religion, while the second section discusses Islam, and to be more accurate a certain part of it, which’s : Duality.

And again I repeat, that this book is not about theology and it’s author is not a theological man. It’s probably an attempt to translate Islam to a language the new generation talks with and understands it. And off from this point there might be insufficiency or defect, for there is no translation that’s empty of insufficiency and imperfection.

Notes:

The book “Islam between east and west” is not a theological book, but it’s a book that discusses the beliefs of Islam and it’s institutions and doctrines, meaning to discover Islam’s position in part of universal intellect. It’s not a vision inside Islam; it’s rather a vision from the outside. By this meaning, the issue of the book is not about Islam as an instructor but as a vision towards the World.

This book has 2 sections the first section carries the name : Introductions, and it discusses generally the issue of religion, while the second is about Islam’s duality.

Introductions in fact are a discussion about atheism and materialism. While the next 6 chapters discuss the situation of both religion and atheism concerning the Man’s origin and other issues that are connected to it, meaning the issue of evolution and creationism as follows:

Chapter 1 : Creationism and Evolution

Chapter 2: Culture and Civilization

Chapter 3 : The phenomenon of art

Chapter 4 : Morality

Chapter 5 : Culture and History

Chapter 6 : Drama and Utopia

And the theory according to inner logic of things shows that evolution, civilization, science, and utopia are paralleled with atheism, while creationism, culture, art and ethics are paralleled with religion.

Evolution by its nature, regardless the fact of its complicity or the time it took in order to work, couldn’t create a Man but created a perfect animal, or he was made that way to become a member of a society.

Socialism as a practical and social result for materialism doesn’t deal with Man, but mostly deal with organizing the social life of an Animal.

Mainly, the Man is a spiritual element and not a biological or social one and cannot exist unless by the act of God creation. Therefore, if God didn’t exist man wouldn’t too, and if Man didn’t exist culture wouldn’t exist as well, what will exist will only be needs and what satisfies these needs, in another meaning, only the existence of civilization.

Atheism acknowledges science and progress. While in its essence there’s everything that denies the Man, and for the same reason it denies humanity, freedom, and human rights. The contradiction between culture and civilization assures in reality a main contradiction between conscience and mind, between existence and nature, or in the practical level between religion and science.

Every culture is a believer in its essence, and every civilization is atheistic. And according to that, as science doesn’t lead to humanity and –in principle- there’s nothing in common between science and culture, religion itself doesn’t lead to progress. And by expansion in this analysis and deepening it, the first section of the book acknowledges this overall duality for the humane world presented in those insoluble contradictions between the soul and the body, between religion and science, between culture and civilization. This look towards this world reflects what’s called the Christian level to the humane awareness.

Socialism is also an expression to the same level of awareness. The impasse itself is also cast, only the choice is different, and the Non-Christian socialism is the overturned of Christianity. For the socialistic values are Christian ones with a denied sign, in fact it’s opposite alternatives : instead of religion we find science, instead of individualism we find society, instead of humanity we find progress, instead of upbringing we find training, instead of love we find violence, instead of freedom we find social security, instead of human rights we find social rights, and instead of kingdom of God we find kingdom of Earth.

Can man defeat this contradiction : either this or that, either heaven or earth, or is Man condemned to be always tensed forever between both ? Is there somehow a way that through it science can serve religion, health, devotion, progress, and humanity? can the utopia of earth’s kingdom be inhabited by humans instead of anonymous individuals without faces, and has the features of God’s kingdom on Earth?

The second section of the book is devoted to that question. And the answer is : Yes, in Islam. Islam isn’t just a religion or a way of life only, but its mainly the principle of cosmic order. Islam was found before Man and Islam as the Koran stated is the principle of how the Man was created upon. Therefore we find a harmonic connate between Man and Islam, or as the book calls it the stratification of Islam along with Man.

Just as the Man is the unity of soul and body, Islam is the unity of both religion and social order, and also just as the body during the prayer can bound to the movement of the soul, the social order by its turn can serve the higher ideals and values of religion and ethics. This unity, that’s strange to Christianity and the material doctrine, is an advantage in Islam.

This concept that we are about to discuss is being searched in the 2nd section of the book, through discussing a chain of issues in the fields of religion, law, culture, and the political history.

This section starts with a comparison between the messages of Moses, The Messiah, and Muhammad (Peace be upon them), and it pictures three primitive answers that shows the confrontation between the human race and history, whilst Koran is a unique combination that combines between the reality of the “Old Testament” and the idealism of the “New Testament”.

In the 8th chapter there’s an analysis about the main 5 pillars of Islam where prayer occupies its backbone.

The prayer in fact is the summary of Islam as a whole; Its Islam’s code. And the reference to that is that prayer combines between 2 principles in one frame considered a contradiction in the Christian point of view, which I mean by this is wodo’o “ablution” and prayer. Those 2 principles go deep down inside in the structure of Islam. Rationalism that refuses the inner vision, and the inner vision that refuses the rational entrance, violates “the principle of balance in prayer”. Any single sided extremism in those both understandings is considered a descent to the level of Christian logic, violating the center of Islam. And if Islam represents the potentials instinct of man, it must have an appearance somewhere on an incomplete form, or as a fragments between here and there where religious people who are in faith or working are found, meaning where the religious people don’t forget their part in the world. The author noticed the symptoms of this phenomenon especially in the Anglo-Saxon world.

And the book ends with an article about submission to God considering him the soul of Islam.

Alija Izetbegovic.


Leave a comment

Duality Of Islam : Part (9/10)

” There are Atheists who have morals, but you’ll never find an Atheistic system that’s built on morality ” – Alija Izetbegovic.

Islam is a dual unite of System

Alija Izetbegovic sees that we cannot apply Islam correctly in an underdeveloped society, Because the moment the society applies Islam correctly it automatically starts to abandon the underdeveloped zone and enters the zone of Civilization. Therefore, Koran  assures that God created Man to make him his successor on Earth and be it’s “Lord”….Which gives the Man the qualifications of controlling Nature and the World through knowledge and Education, and Izetbegovic says in another position ” The insisting of the Koran on the right of fighting Evil and Injustice is not expressed by the narrow reflection of  piousness, because the concept of Non-Violence and Non-Resistance are more closer to the abstract Religion…..And when Koran ordered to fight; i t ordered to fight instead of submitting to Injustice and humiliation….Koran wasn’t setting principles of an abstract Religion or morality, Koran was setting Social and Political rules “. And then later, Izetbegovic comments on the forbidding of Alcohol in Islam by saying ” Banning the drinking of Alcohol  was a first class treatment of  a Social Evil Phenomena and there’s nothing against Alcohol in an abstract Religion, There are even some Religions that used Alcohol as a made up process in order to evoke the Spiritual ecstasy just like Scented Incenses, But when Islam forbid Alcohol it used the road of Science and not the road of the abstract Religion “.

The Secret of the Muslims degeneration

and Izetbegovic asks : What caused the degeneration of the Muslims the way we see these days ?….and he answers ” Islam’s duality of unity was divided by people who framed  Islam on it’s Religious side only , making it lose it’s unity which’s Islam’s unique personality that gives an advantage of itself over other Religions , They framed Islam into an abstract Religion or sort of Sufism that eventually  destroyed the Muslims conditions; because when the Muslims activities get lesser and weaker they stop reacting with the Society and start to ignore their parts in the World  causing the authority in the Muslim Country to become naked serving only itself and not the people, and the abstract sleeping Religion  starts to drag the Society into ignorance, While Kings, Atheist Scientists, Negative Sufism, Drunk Poets start all to form the outer face to the inner division that hit Islam ” .

The Western hostility towards Islam

In this field, Izetbegovic points out that the current  Western hostility towards Islam is not just an extension of the usual hostility and the Civilizational clash that reached to a military aggression between Islam and the West since the Crusades till the wars of Independence, but this hostility is originally formed because of the West’s historical experience with Religion and it’s inability to comprehend Islam’s unique nature, Therefore he presents 2 essential reasons for this hostility which are : The nature of the Western ideology (the single visioned ideology); and the insufficiency of the European language structure to understand the Islamic terms, and he gave few examples concerning this issue like : Zakat – ablution (wodo’) – Khelafah (the order of the Caliphates rule)  and  Ummah where you can’t find opposite meanings in European language for these terms. And Izetbegovic sees also the Islamic terms have dual unite system, and because of those 2 reasons as Izetbeogic says ” The Western Materialists denied Islam because it’s a Religion with occult (Rightist direction), while Christians denied it because they saw a Social – Political movement inside of it (leftist direction), and this is how the whole West denied Islam “.

The Author sees that if the West truly want to understand Islam correctly, The West must reconsider it’s terms that are being directed towards Islam.

With this strong logic and the well done analysis, Alija Izetbegovic shows the weaknesses of the Western ideology, also it’s contradictions in dealing with the issue of  “Man” and life.

“I have finished with my illustration of Izetbegovic’s book Islam between East and West. One more post i will make which will be the translation of the Introduction chapter by the Author ” .


2 Comments

Duality Of Islam : Part (8/10)

” There’s no Evolution in Culture, and Man is the main element in it’s dimensions ” – Alija Izetbegovic.

Heading near towards the end of my humble illustration of Alija Izetbegovic’s most praised work Islam between East and West, I try to gather my pieces back together, I, like any other person who read this book finally got a new vision of things i didn’t fully comprehend before. Maybe the biggest benefit of this book is that it actually expanded my Philosophical realization of the new systems that are being adapted by the current strong and wealthy countries.

The distinguishing between Culture and Civilization:

It’s clear from the studying of Alija Izetbegovic to the issue of Culture and Civilization that there exists a clash between the both understandings.Both Capitalism and Communism are Anti-Culturism by their nature and with various degrees, Because Culture in it’s original form was the result of Religious origins (Notice the word Culture is derived from Cult) , and these origins stretch to a very old past that Alija Izetbegovic calls “The Heavenly boot” and Quranic scenario points to that in it’s verses “Am I not your Lord (who cherishes and sustains you)? they said: yea we do testify (this)” – Quran, Surat Al A’araf verse 172. and since this moment, Man knew that he is different from any other creation on Earth,  that he (Man) is the carrier of a responsibility, that he (Man) has Freedom of any sort of acts, Therefore, He will be judged according to his actions.

Alija Izetbegovic evolves the clash issue between Culture and Civilization with different ways. Culture in Izetbegovic understanding is ” The effect of Religion on Man and the effect of Man on another “, while Civilization is the effect of Mind over Nature….Culture always tends to the sort of art which makes the Human more of a one, while Civilization is an art that’s related to  career, domination and manufacture ….Civilization is the continuity of the technological progress and not the Spiritual one….Plus, the Darwinist evolution is the element of the Biological progress and not the humane one.

Culture is a non-ending feeling of choice and expression of the humane freedom. and on the opposite of Islam’s principle of restraining desires, the Civilization is ruled by another concept that calls for an opposite slogan : ” Always create new desires “. Civilization teaches, while Culture enlightens. The first needs education and the second needs meditation.

These are the areas that Izetbegovic discusses about the issue of Culture and Civilization where he ends his discussions and analysis  by showing that the New Civilization failed an epic fail in it’s attempt to achieve happiness through Education, Power, and Fortune. and he assures that we should understand these facts in order to review our main thoughts that are still adapted by current modern societies ….and see that ” the first idea that should be reviewed is the concept of Science towards Man “.

But Izetbegovic warns us that we mustn’t understand that his critique of Civilization is a call for abandoning it!, Because according to him, Civilization “Cannot be refused even if we wanted to, but the only thing we can do and should do, is to destroy the legend that surrounds it. by destroying this legend, it will cause the Humanization of this World….and it’s a job that naturally belongs to Culture “.

The Fail of the Major Ideologies:

Izetbegovic says that the fail of the major ideologies in the World is due to it’s one sided look towards Man and life that divided the World into 2 clashing parts (A Materialistic Atheism and Catholicism that’s drowned in Secrets. Both of them denying and condemning each other with no hope of meeting “. And by this, we found the Civilization that’s built on Materialistic Knowledge set in  a part, and the Religion that’s based on occult in another part, but Islam as Izetbegovic introduces, is not bound to this division, and this is the big issue that Izetbegovic deals with it in his book Islam between East and West where he allocated the 2nd part of the book for this issue.

 

Leave a comment

%d bloggers like this: