GET READY FOR THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD - By Ayaan Hirsi Ali
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
Get Ready for the Muslim Brotherhood by Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Saturday, February 5, 2011
<<< Those who want instant jihad hark back to the time when the
Prophet had small armies that defeated massive ones, as in the
battles of Badr and Uhud. The nonviolent branch of the Brotherhood
emphasizes the Prophet's perseverance and patience. They emphasize
da'wa (persuasion through preaching and by example) and above all a
gradual multi-generational process in coming to power and holding on
to it. Above all, they argue for taqiyyah, a strategy to collaborate
with your enemies until the time is ripe to defeat them or convert
them to Islam. >>>
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/04/opinion/04iht-edali04.html?pagewanted=1&_r=5
I.H.T. Op-Ed Contributor
Get Ready for the Muslim Brotherhood
By Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Washington -- In 1985, as a teenager in Kenya, I was an adamant
member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Seventeen years later, in 2002, I
took part in a political campaign to win votes for the conservative
party in the Netherlands.
Those two experiences gave me some insights that I think are relevant
to the current crisis in Egypt. They lead me to believe it is highly
likely but not inevitable that the Muslim Brotherhood will win the
elections to be held in Egypt this coming September. As a participant
in an election campaign, I learned a few basic lessons:
o The party must have a political program all members commit to
with a vision of how to govern the country until the next election.
Dissent within the party is a sure way of losing elections.
o Candidates must articulate not only what they will do for the
country but also why the other party's program will be catastrophic
for the nation.
o The party has to be embedded in as many communities as possible,
regardless of social class, religion or even political views.
o Candidates must constantly remind potential voters of their
party's successes and the opponent's failures.
The secular democratic and human-rights groups in Egypt and in the
rest of the Arab world show little sign of understanding these facts
of political life. The Muslim Brotherhood, on the other hand, gets at
least three out of four.
True, they have never been in office. But they have a political
program and a vision not only until the next elections, but, in their
view, until the Hereafter. And they are very good at reminding
Egyptians of why the other party's policies will be ungodly and
therefore catastrophic for Egypt. Above all, they have succeeded in
embedding themselves in Egyptian society in ways that could prove
crucial.
When I was 15 and considered myself a member of the Muslim
Brotherhood movement, there were secular political groups in the
diasporas of Pakistanis, Yemenis and Somalis, who lived in exile in
Nairobi like my family. These loosely organized groups had vague
plans for building their countries into peaceful, prosperous nations.
These were dreams they never realized.
The Muslim Brotherhood did more than dream. With the help of money
from Saudi Arabia and other oil-rich countries, they established
cells in my school and functioning institutions in my neighborhood.
There were extracurricular activities for all age groups. There were
prayer and chant hours, as well as communal Koran readings. We were
encouraged to become volunteers, to help the indigent, to spread
Allah's message. They established charities to which we could tithe,
which then provided health and educational centers.
The Brotherhood also provided the only functioning banking networks,
based on trust. They rescued teenagers from lives of drug addiction
and excited them about a purposeful future for justice. Each of us
was expected to recruit more people. Most importantly, their message
transcended ethnicity, social class and even educational levels.
It is true that the movement was violent, but we tend to
underestimate in the West the Brotherhood's ability to adapt to
reality and implement lessons learned. One such adaptation is the
ongoing debate within the network on the use of violence. There are
two schools of thought within the network, and both of them invoke
the Prophet Mohammed.
Those who want instant jihad hark back to the time when the Prophet
had small armies that defeated massive ones, as in the battles of
Badr and Uhud. The nonviolent branch of the Brotherhood emphasizes
the Prophet's perseverance and patience. They emphasize da'wa
(persuasion through preaching and by example) and above all a gradual
multi-generational process in coming to power and holding on to it.
Above all, they argue for taqiyyah, a strategy to collaborate with
your enemies until the time is ripe to defeat them or convert them to
Islam.
Why are the secular democratic forces in Egypt so much weaker than
the Muslim Brotherhood?
One reason is that they are an amalgam of very diverse elements:
There are tribal leaders, free-market liberals, socialists, hard-core
Marxists and human rights activists. In other words, they lack common
ideological glue comparable to the one that the Brotherhood has. And
there is a deep-seated fear that opposition to the Muslim
Brotherhood, whose aim is to install Shariah once they come to power,
will be seen by the masses as a rejection of Islam.
What the secular groups fail to do is to come up with a message of
opposition that says "yes" to Islam, but "no" to Shariah -- in other
words, a campaign that emphasizes a separation of religion from
politics. For Egypt and other Arab nations to escape the tragedy of
either tyranny or Shariah, there has to be a third way that separates
religion from politics while establishing a representative
government, the rule of law, and conditions friendly to trade,
investment and employment.
The bravery of the secular groups that have now unified behind
Mohamed ElBaradei cannot be doubted. They have taken the world by
surprise by mounting a successful protest against a tyrant.
The secular democrats' next challenge is the Brotherhood. They must
waste no time in persuading the Egyptian electorate why a Shariah-
based government would be bad for them. Unlike the Iranians in 1979,
the Egyptians have before them the example of a people who opted for
Shariah -- the Iranians -- and have lived to regret it.
The 2009 "green movement" in Iran was a not a "no" to a strongman,
but a "no" to Shariah. ElBaradei and his supporters must make clear
that a Shariah-based regime is repressive at home and aggressive
abroad. Moreover, as the masses cry out against unemployment, rising
food prices and corruption, Egypt's secular groups must show that a
Shariah-based government would exacerbate these agonies.
The Muslim Brotherhood will insist that a vote for them is a vote for
Allah's law. But the positions of power in government will not be
filled by God and his angels. These positions will be filled by men
so arrogant as to put themselves in the position of Allah. And as the
Iranians of 2009 have learned to their cost, it is harder to vote
such men out of office than to vote them in.
The Obama administration can help the secular groups with the
resources and the skills necessary to organize, campaign and to
establish competing economic and civil institutions so that they can
defeat the Muslim Brotherhood at the ballot box.
As I have come to learn over the years, few things in democratic
politics are inevitable. But without effective organization, the
secular, democratic forces that have swept one tyranny aside could
easily succumb to another.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a fellow of the American Enterprise Institute and
founder of the AHA Foundation, which works to protect the rights of
Muslim women. Her books include "Nomad" and "Infidel."
End of forwarded message from P. R.
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.