Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: A Political Perspective on Culture and Terrorism. Mahmood Mamdani. Department of Anthropology and. U. MAHMOOD MAMDANI. Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: A Political Pers on Culture and Terrorism. ABSTRACT The link between Islam and terrorism became a. Mahmood Mamdani’s Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: America, the Cold. War and the Roots of Terror is a book about historical memory and politics. Mamdani hopes.
|Published (Last):||22 March 2004|
|PDF File Size:||2.5 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.59 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Out of a population of roughly 15 million, a million died, bwd million and a half were maimed, and another five million became refugees. After that, it seems they just conform to culture. But in the other part of the world, it stands for habit, for some kind of instinctive activity, whose rules are inscribed in early founding texts, usually religious, and museumized in early artifacts?
Transcript: Mahmood Mamdani on Good Muslim, Bad Muslim | Jul 03, |
By persuasion or force? Both consider the world beyond a sea of ignorance, one that needs to be redeemed. The first, called “little Jihad ,” thinks of Jihad as a struggle against external enemies of Islam.
Always, the idea was to leave a few to go and tell the story, to spread fear.
But in times of prosperity, the short-sighted tend to walk away from others. Their culture seems to have no history, no politics, and no debates. Each has a conviction that it possesses the truth.
Terrorism is not a cultural residue in modern politics. All of this magmood true, but I don’t think it explains terrorism.
Good Muslim, Bad Muslim
It is a human tendency to look for others in times of adversity. After all, we are now told to distinguish between muslin Muslims and bad Muslims.
This partnership bolstered a number of terrorist movements: I want to suggest that we turn the cultural theory of politics on its head.
The Question of Responsibility To understand the question of who bears responsibility for the present situation, it will help to contrast two situations, that after the Second World War and that after the Cold War, and goodd how the question of responsibility was understood and giod in two different contexts.
But it was not the only context. Contemporary “fundamentalism” is a modern project, not a traditional leftover. Culture Talk Is our world really divided into two, so that one part makes culture and the other is a prisoner of culture? Even when it tries to harness one or another aspect of tradition and culture, it puts this at the service of a modern project. It mameani not muzlim that they were willing to tolerate a higher level of civilian casualties in military confrontations – what official America nowadays calls collateral damage.
It seems just to have petrified into a lifeless custom. Even more, these people seem incapable of transforming their culture, the way they seem incapable of growing their own food. Thereby, it hoped to contain the influence of the Iranian Revolution as a minority Shia affair.
Transcript: Mahmood Mamdani on Good Muslim, Bad Muslim | Jul 03, 2006
Islam and Christianity have one thing in common. In what follows, I would like to offer you a perspective on contemporary terrorism from an African vantage point.
Both have a sense of mission to civilize the world. mahhmood
What is the link, many seem to ask, between Islam and terrorism? Does culture stand for creativity, for what being human is all about, in one part of the world? Whose responsibility is it? Both share a deeply messianic orientation. The shifting center of gravity of the Cold War was the muslum context in which Afghanistan policy was framed. This conviction is so deep-seated that it is even found in its secular version, as in the old colonial notion of “a civilizing mission,” or in its more racialized version, “the White Man’s Burden.
Mammdani different factions fought over the liberated country – the Northern Alliance against the Taliban – they shelled and destroyed their own cities with artillery. It is my bav construction, but it is not a fabrication.
Should it be held responsible for cultivating terrorist movements in Southern Africa and Central America? Instead, it habitually muslom for a high moral pretext for inaction.
After the meeting, Reagan brought them out into the White House lawn, and introduced them to the media in these words: When I read of Islam in the papers these days, I often feel I am reading of museumized peoples. Are there really two meanings of culture? It is true that, mahood we learn to forget, life will turn into mamdano.
The Islamic world had not seen an armed Jihad for centuries. But civilization cannot be built on just forgetting. I use the word Crusade, not Jihadbecause only the notion of Crusade can accurately convey the frame of mind in which this initiative was taken. Instead of dismissing history and politics as does culture talk, I suggest we place cultural debates in historical and political contexts. I think of civilization as a constant creation whereby we gradually expand the boundaries of community, the boundaries of those with whom we share the world – this is why it is so grotesque to see bombs and food parcels raining on the defenseless people of Afghanistan from the same source.
And only someone who thinks of the text as not literal, but as metaphorical or figurative, is better suited to civic life and the tolerance it calls for? Or, the same thing, that an Orthodox Jew is a potential terrorist and only a Reform Jew is capable of being tolerant of those who do not share his convictions?
Before exploring the politics of it, let me clarify the historical moment.