Elica argues that even if the acts of the IDF were as brutal or terroristic as Hamas we can still make no moral equivalencies. Because the IDF is protecting its people, whereas Hamas wants to kill everyone. The diff. is "INTENTION".
Let's explore this logic of liberal warfare 🧵
Liberalism warfare logic:
Kill as many civilians as you like so long as you express remorse & regret at the end. That's why Guantanamo Bay, the vast network of American torture cells in Europe, the brutal sanctions, etc., were legally and morally justified by liberals.
- Talal Asad, On Suicide Bombing
As Elica says, the intention is different. IDF can self-referentially justify its actions and claim moral superiority.
When we look at the history of western warfare we see how the lines between civilian and combatant was blurred deliberately sometimes.
"5000 years of history" is a myth that the British colonial historiography created where they divided the history of the region into 3 distinct phases: Ancient (Indic), Medieval (Islamic), Modern (British Colonialism).
This was parallel to how West's history was framed during 1/
the Enlightenment era in the West. This historiography justified the colonial rule as a just rule to liberate the "native Indians" from the despotism of the foreigners, i.e., Muslims.
2/
The narrative was further accepted by the Republic of India. Nehru wholeheartedly endorsed this fictitious colonial historiography churned up by British colonial officials who were part-time historians.
one of the biggest mathematical astronomers of his time. The topic of debate was the relationship between science and philosophy as distinct schools of thought.
The debate is long but the important point is this:
By this time, it was understood as a given that mathematical astronomy and scientific endeavours are not supposed to be under the authority of doctrines of natural philosophy such as Aristotelian physics and cosmology.
Aligarh was not pro-British except for Sir Syed. It produced some of the most vocal anti-colonial figures. The Muslim League leadership were grads of Aligarh.
The Deoband became politically active in the 1920s during the Khilafat movement, which was led mostly by modernists.
Kalam and Iqbal are also modernists in their theological and political orientations.
Figures like Mahmud Hasan & Ahmed Madani of Deoband were active in the Khilafat movement & had good relationships with modernists like Azad, Shaukat Ali Muhammad Ali and even Hindu figures.
2/
But even then, major figures of the Deoband movement like Ashraf Ali Thanawi were politically quietest.
For instance, he discouraged Muslims from participating in the Kashmir uprising in 1931. But figures like Ahmed Madani were politically active.
I always respond to counter-arguments when they are backed up by academic references. That's why I have decided to respond to this brother because he made a strong case. Let's begin. Bismillah.
🧵