They appeal to the easily seduced regions of the human psyche: to the heroic, the romantic, the apocalyptic, and, ultimately, to the deathwish. Berman shows how, to members of these totalitarian mass-cults, murder and suicide are but "two sides of the same system". The largest part of the book consists of Berman describing the earliest manifestations of the totalitarian impulse; select criticisms and analyses of these manifestations by mid-century anti-totalitarian leftists Camus is given pride of place ; and the writings of post-Second World War Islamist philosophers and theologists to show how their beliefs and goals for Islam are - at heart - from this same anti-liberal family.
Berman gives a superb dissection of the prodigious output of Sayyid Qutb, the towering intellect of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. He concludes by offering his own preferred method for meeting this challenge: an aggressive war-of-ideas, but one backed up by determined and consistent military action when the ideological battle will not suffice. Berman is a skilled writer, and his viewpoints are laid out soberly and clearly.
I found myself persuaded by certain of his arguments; others less so. He falls into the somewhat tired position of considering left-wing hawks vis-a-vis the Afghanistan and the then looming Iraq military offensives as inherently serious, and left-wing opponents as inherently pacifistic and misguided. There were quite valid reasons to oppose the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions that were based neither upon a naive desire for peace-at-all-costs, nor a contemptible refusal to accept Islamism as a serious threat or to take its radicals at their word.
If it is absurd to reduce all military action arguments to being the propaganda of warmongers, it is equally absurd to conflate all opposition to war, especially the war envisioned by the Bush administration, as born from a cowardly closing of ones eyes to a harsh truth about a religio-cultural challenge.
Like other American authors writing about Europe, at times he seems to forget the long and strife-ridden history of the continent when attacking its military hesitations and cautions, and to expect a political unity between European countries similar to that between US states. However, most of its two-hundred plus pages are excellent, and it is well worth the investment of the reader's time. View 1 comment. May 01, AC Thanks all those who have refollowed!
I read this book, admittedly more of a pamphlet It is an attempt by a left-leaning liberal to expose what he sees as the essentially fascistic undertones in Islamism, and thus an attempt to block the apolegetics for Islamism and for Islamic terrorism that has long been issuing from the Left. I fully accept his indentification of Sayyid Qutb with fascism. Berman cites extensively from Qutb's o I read this book, admittedly more of a pamphlet Berman cites extensively from Qutb's own writings, and I think the case is incontrovertible.
I discussed this book with a man I knew, a very well placed journalist, who was then -- and has long been -- intimately connected with the backrooms as a sort of hidden advisor of Israeli politics.
He granted that Berman had a point, but objected that it oversimplified the conflict in the Middle East. I think that he is right in so far as it fails to address entirely the Palestinian 'problem' and much else, but that is not Berman's target -- his target is the pan-Islamism of Qutb and al-Qaeda. It is possible I don't recall that he uses too broad a brush; but that should not detract from his fundamental point.
At any rate, worth a quick read. Oct 10, Murtaza rated it really liked it. I recently wrote an article which made what I thought was a fairly germane point about radical Islamism's ideological links with contemporary European revolutionary and totalitarian movements.
Traditionalist Islamic scholars had been making this point for a long time, so I was surprised at the outrage over this argument from leftists. Among other things I was accused of lifting ideas from this particular book, which I had in fact scarcely even heard of. And so, I decided to give it a read. The I recently wrote an article which made what I thought was a fairly germane point about radical Islamism's ideological links with contemporary European revolutionary and totalitarian movements.
The book makes the point I expected, and elaborates on it rather beautifully. It is truly an admirable work in the sense of its broadmindedness and its absolutely wonderful, energetic prose. Whatever else you may think of him Berman is a truly fantastic writer - witty, erudite and even darkly humorous.
He makes the argument that the totalitarian forces unleashed after WW1 were finally defeated in Europe and elsewhere but still thrive in much of the Muslim world. Islamic radicalism is not a radical other; it is the same extremism familiar to Europe albeit dressed in local garb. In making this argument he marshals and impressive array of history both European and Islamic to make his point, and its one that rings true.
This book was written before the horrors of the Iraq War, which it in fact advocated. So I give it some type of sympathetic leeway.
America went to war in a national mania, and the ideas advanced in here of a global liberal jihad strike me as no less Utopian. This book fails or doesn't even attempt to engage in self-analysis. We're good, they're bad, the details don't matter and let's get on with it. History has borne things out rather differently.
Nonetheless this is a useful and in many respects beautiful book - at least aesthetically. It articulates a specific mood and feeling and really reads as a manifesto for that "muscular liberalism" which has sadly with time shown itself to be yet another regrettable endeavor. View 2 comments. Aug 14, The American Conservative added it. It is more subtle than the writing of many of the hawks who recognizing the utility of an ally from the Left have embraced his book, and a far better argument for pre-emptive war than President Bush makes himself.
Terror and Liberalism has much to interest those who might disagree with its particulars and its general thrust. Aug 04, Worthless Bum rated it it was amazing Shelves: political-philosophy-theory. In this fascinating and eloquent work by "the Philosopher King of the hawkish left", a diverse array of literary, political, philosophical, and especially historical elements are brought to bear upon the appropriate reponse of liberalism to fascism and totalitarianism.
Berman discusses the historical development of modern radical Islamism, citing the influence of Sayyid Qutb, the Muslim Brotherhood, the philosophy of Pan-Arabism, and the unexpected influence of European literature, Nazism, and C In this fascinating and eloquent work by "the Philosopher King of the hawkish left", a diverse array of literary, political, philosophical, and especially historical elements are brought to bear upon the appropriate reponse of liberalism to fascism and totalitarianism.
Berman discusses the historical development of modern radical Islamism, citing the influence of Sayyid Qutb, the Muslim Brotherhood, the philosophy of Pan-Arabism, and the unexpected influence of European literature, Nazism, and Communism to the philosophical influence of modern day Islamic extremism.
Berman draws a number of incisive connections between early anarchist revolutionaries, who would fastidiously refuse to carry out political assassinations if there was any chance that innocent bystanders would be injured, and the increasing erosion of that fastidiousness over time, such that a greater and greater willingness to injure innocent people in acts of assassination and terrorism were used, culminating in suicide bombers who haplessly target innocent civilians.
This historical progression is tied together with a like one in European literature, in which a liberal treatment of ethics is followed by nihilisticly random acts of violence. The hawkish left view is also explored in contrast to the "realist" position of the hawks on the right, and with an opposing view on the left exemplified by Noam Chomsky. The connection Berman makes between Chomsky's views about generative linguistics and politics is very interesting, and has to do with an underlying similarity that all humans share in the generative linguistic framework, and which, Berman says, leads Chomsky to make similar assumptions in the political realm.
Interesting and insightful are the seemingly disparite areas of discourse the Berman manages to bring into a unified whole. Berman seems to have a knack for this sort of multifarious connectivity, and his wonderful literary writing style adds an artistic flourish to his insight, making this a doubly pleasurable read.
View all 58 comments. Feb 03, Amari rated it it was amazing Shelves: general-non-fiction. Extraordinary in scope, remarkable in its erudition, this is nothing less than a courageous, probing study of human nature. Berman, on top of everything a writer's writer, is unfazed by the necessity of posing extremely basic questions about individual and social character; he exposes logical and tragic dichotomies without oversimplifying the political events he cites.
I followed the threads of this essay without a sense of where I was being led, but when I had finished it, I did feel that I had learned something, even though I am unsure of how much I agree with Berman.
Berman offers a new angle of analysis of the so-called War on Terror without proposing a definitive or detailed solution. The author refers to "liberalism" in the sense of Western democracy, an ideology that unites Americans and Europeans; the word is not used at all in reference to the politica I followed the threads of this essay without a sense of where I was being led, but when I had finished it, I did feel that I had learned something, even though I am unsure of how much I agree with Berman.
The author refers to "liberalism" in the sense of Western democracy, an ideology that unites Americans and Europeans; the word is not used at all in reference to the political left-wing, as common parlance has it.
In fact, while speaking glowingly of liberalism, Berman is highly critical of certain elements on both the left and right in the United States and in Europe. Of the constant Islamist talk of the necessity of martyrdom, Berman says, "This is not exotic. This is the totalitarian cult of death.
This is the terrible thing that got underway more than eighty years ago. Berman was present at the Socialist Scholars Conference in New York when the crowd applauded an argument in favor of suicide bombing.
I believe that everyone who paid attention to those images, all over the world, was shocked by those scenes. And the philosophical conundrum was unavoidable. Berman takes issue with Noam Chomsky for trying to discover and cling to a rational explanation for violence across the world. Sometimes, Berman says, violence is driven by irrational philosophies. After the US withdrew from Vietnam, for example, "It began to look as if pathological movements do exist. Berman analyzed some of the work in English translation of the prolific, twentieth-century, Egyptian theologian Sayyid Qutb and, in particular, Qutb's complaint about the Western separation of church and state.
Qutb called this intellectual compartmentalization a "hideous schizophrenia. Berman's thesis would have been improved if he had described a method for teasing apart the rational from the irrational complaints, especially as he thinks the most salient part of the War on Terror is the war of ideas. He interprets the modern War on Terror as a "clash of ideologies" p.
It was going to be a war about the 'cultural influences' that penetrate the Islamic mind, about the deepest concepts of modern life, about philosophies and theologies, about ideas that draw on the most brilliant writers and the most moving of texts. It was going to be, in the end, a war of persuasion Most people would agree that spreading democracy is indeed a lofty cause, but I am not completely convinced that the motivation for war, especially when held merely as the private opinions of individuals, affects the execution of the war.
By this, I simply mean that Iraqis suffer the same under American bombs regardless of whether I happen to think the occupation is a lofty cause or a national shame. Perhaps, if American leaders really cared about spreading democracy and began to "fight the war" on the intellectual front, it would make a real difference in the lives of Afghans and Iraqis; but unfortunately, President Bush "had no ability or language to articulate the ideas of the modern age, and neither did any of the people around him.
May 25, Kurt rated it really liked it Recommends it for: Those interested in Terror War and global radical Islamism. Paul Berman's work is enlightening and interesting. It is more of an essay on the philosophies behind radical Islamism and its various iterations. It also compares radical Islam to totalitarian ideologies of the twentieth century communism and fascism. He calls them all ideologies of death and says they are a continuum of hatred and death that try to knock out liberalism democracy and the like.
This is all very interesting in that his thesis is that liberalism the philosophy on which Americ Paul Berman's work is enlightening and interesting. This is all very interesting in that his thesis is that liberalism the philosophy on which America and the West were founded--individualism, democracy, capitalism, etc is under assault from these types of worldviews and, hence, liberalism needs to be guarded carefully and defenders of liberalism not Modern Liberalism--or the "L" word as Pres George HW Bush 41 called it--or Teddy Kennedy Liberalism, but broad individualistic Lockean liberalism should seek to engage radical Muslims intellectually and if need be Islamist paramilitary non-state actors by military means and others who try to assault freedom and democracy as a system of hedonism.
He examines the Egyptian cleric and one of the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood in the s Sayidd Qutb's work which is the work the Osama bin Laden has read and used to propogate his hate-filled, extremism. What is interesting about this is that Berman is a leftwinger in the socialist tradition, not a rightwing conservative. He will be criticized by Arabs and Arab Muslims for being a Zionist propagandist as a Jewish American with sympathies for the Jewish state of Israel , but his message is clearly one of freedom and liberty which are what America was founded on vs.
If you are interested in global terrorism, the War on Terror, global Islam, you should read this book. It is discursive at times since it is a rambling essay, not a work of methodical political science or history empirically , but nonetheless it is an important work in conceptualizing what the US is fighting for in Iraq today.
May 21, Joseph Stieb rated it it was amazing. The central argument is that extremist Islam is best understood as one of the mass totalitarian pathologies or death cults that we have seen before in the 20th century: Fascism, Nazism, some forms of Christian extremism.
I've heard this argument before but no one brings it home better than Berman. The main mechanism by which political movements become totalitarian death cults is as follows: many groups start with a totally Manichean, millenarian view of the world and a vision of utopia the racial paradise, the restored Caliphate, the communist utopia, the end times that will follow a giant final war against the internal and external enemies The Jews, the Crusaders, the Slavs, the capitalists.
They argued vigorously over imperial expansion, constitutional power, personal liberty, and public morality. In Reimagining Politics after the Terror, Andrew Jainchill rewrites the history of the origins of French Liberalism by telling the story of France's underappreciated "republican moment" during the tumultuous years between and Napoleon's declaration of a new French Empire in Examining a wide range of political and theoretical debates, Jainchill offers a compelling reinterpretation of the political culture of post-Terror France and of the establishment of Napoleon's Consulate.
The political culture of the post-Terror period was decisively shaped by the classical republican tradition of the early modern Atlantic world and, as Jainchill persuasively argues, constituted France's "Machiavellian Moment. Reimagining Politics after the Terror is essential reading for anyone concerned with the history of political thought, the origins and nature of French Liberalism, and the end of the French Revolution.
But there is also the anxiety that a violent response to violence makes us morally indistinguishable from our enemies. There is perhaps no greater political challenge today than trying to win the war against terrorism without losing our democratic souls. Michael Ignatieff confronts this challenge head-on with a combination of pragmatic idealism, historical sensitivity, and astute political judgment. He shows how the most potent response to terror has been force, decisive and direct, but—just as important—restrained.
Restraint also gives democracy its strongest weapon: the moral power to endure when the furies of vengeance and hatred are spent. What is the legacy that the 'West' hopes to hand over as China, India, Brazil and Nigeria lead the 'non-Western' world into prominence in global society as economic power shifts towards them? Professor Castellino reviews the position of the liberal state in international society pre; the events of 11 September and their immediate aftermath; and the current position of the liberal state both abroad and in the UK.
He outlines the reasons why he believes the terrorists are winning, and offers a set of strategies that could reverse the trend - and by so doing ensure a strong legacy that could act as a bulwark to guard against the erosion of the values of democracy and human rights that have developed in Europe since the Enlightenment era. Is torture ever justified? Do we need to suspend human rights in order to fight terrorism? Is multi-culturalism the answer to communal conflict?
Is Israel's treatment of the Palestinians illegal and immoral, an accelerator of terrorism, or legitimately defensive and largely irrelevant to the terrorism problem?
Are terrorists responding to concrete U. Liberal intellectuals and political leaders have been slow to articulate a grand strategy informed by liberal values for confronting these issues surrounding global terrorism. Terrorism remains a serious problem for the international community. This new edition gives more attention to the political and strategic impact of modern transnational terrorism, the need for maximum international cooperation by law-abiding states to counter not only direct threats to the safety and security of their own citizens but also to preserve international peace and security through strengthening counter-proliferation and cooperative threat reduction CTR.
This book is essential reading for undergraduate and postgraduate students of terrorism studies, political science and international relations, as well as for policy makers and journalists. For Paul Berman, the play is an early expression of the terrorist mentality. More radically, Berman also sees a link to the terrorism of al-Qaeda.
The doomed assassin Hernani is not just the model for the classic anarchist or Marxist political terrorist, he is also a model for Mohamed Atta.
As Malise Ruthven revealed in A Fury for God, the most enlightening of the flurry of books on al-Qaeda published in the aftermath of the 11 September attacks, there were connections between Islamism and totalitarian ideology in the early twentieth century. The founder of the the Islamic revivalist Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Banna, for example, was an admirer of the Nazis.
Berman argues that the founder of modern Islamism, Sayyid Qutb, drew on the Marxist concept that 'truth can be obtained only through some kind of active struggle' in developing theories yoking the search for truth and martyrdom. Berman draws similar links between fascism and Baathism, the Arab national socialism both of the fallen regime in Baghdad and of that which still rules neighbouring Syria.
He quotes Sami al-Jundi, who helped found the Syrian Baath Party in the s: 'We were racists, admiring Nazism, reading its books and the source of its thought, particularly Nietzsche. But their common origins do not mean that Baathism and Islamism are the same, as radical Shia opponents of Saddam Hussein's rule discovered.
0コメント