One ideological danger of the modern jihadi movement is the influence of leftist rhetoric in asymmetric warfare.
Many of the successful challenges to Western hegemony over the last century have come from leftists or communists.
In the context of modern warfare, it's easy to see why Muslims would seek to learn from this example. However, these doctrines often come with ideological baggage.
One prominent example is the idea of "revolution." This is actually rooted in Hegelian dialects which were...
...formalized in Karl Marx's theory of historical materialism. It envisions history as a continuous class struggle of oppressed against oppressors. Some scholars have described Hegel's theory of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis (which influenced Marx) as being influenced...
...by the Christian trinity.
Discussing the ideological problems with this worldview would require a long discussion, but to summarize, it is an "Enlightenment" philosophy with a fundamentally negative view of authority (ie. egalitarianism) which is incompatible with Islam.
This is actually strongly linked to feminism, which challenges the idea that the subordination of women to men is natural and beneficial.
The correct approach is to emphasize the concept of jihad as a continuous struggle which continues until the arrival of the Dajjal...
..., rather than a cyclical idea of revolution and class struggle. There is nothing inherently good or bad about being wealthy or being a laborer; superiority is only by taqwa. The obsession with equality is also related to democracy— the idea that distributing power to...
...everyone equally will result in a more just and equitable society.
An important aspect of the influence of this intellectual tradition is the idea of popular support in guerilla war. Modern asymmetric warfare doctrine (heavily influenced by leftist theory)...
emphasizes popular support above tactical victories in order to wear down a larger and more powerful opponent. This theory mobilizes the masses by giving them a sense of class identity and rallying them against oppressive ruling classes.
This is very tactically effective.
In rural insurgencies, for example, if local people support the insurgent force they will supply them with food and hide their movements. This allows the guerilla force to blend into the local population, and also gives them more mobility and operational flexibility than...
...a conventional army with extended supply lines.
This is no problem for a communist insurgency which relies purely on material interests. Both rural peasantry and urban working classes respond very well to the idea of seizing land from elites and redistributing it to the...
...lower classes. For an Islamic insurgency, however, creed is much more important. Adopting leftist doctrines of guerilla warfare with their focus on gaining popular support from lower classes can leads to ideological deviations, because truly implementing Islam comes with...
...more trials than ideologies that prioritize materialistic concerns over all else.
"And We will surely test you with something of fear and hunger and a loss of wealth and lives and fruits, but give good tidings to the patient." [2:155]
The Prophet ﷺ said:
يبتلى العبد على حسب دينه فإن كان في دينه صلبا اشتدّ بلاؤه وإِن كان في دينه رِقّة ابتلي على حسب دينه
"A person is tested according to his religious commitment. If he is steadfast in his religious commitment, he will be tested more severely, and if he is frail in his religious commitment, his test will be according to his commitment." [Sunan ibn Majah, 4023]
Western counter-insurgency doctrine works on the assumption that "winning the hearts and minds" of the population is the key to undermining insurgencies. They win hearts and minds by bringing increases in standard of living...
..., education and entertainment which instills Western values, and propaganda campaigns that characterize Muslim mujahideen as terrorists who are religiously deviant and don't care about the wellbeing of common Muslims.
In other words, the awliya of Shaitan call the people to pursue the dunya and seek to instill love of it in their hearts.
"Satan threatens you with poverty and orders you to immorality, while Allah promises you forgiveness from Him and bounty. And Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing." [2:268]
This doctrine is broadly successful in most Muslim countries.
Most Muslims today have Western education which has instilled them with a materialistic worldview. They think that the right thing for Muslim countries to do is to develop modern infrastructure (which requires the aforesaid materialistic education).
They believe that those who fight against Western colonization and occupation are extremists and deviants who recklessly spill the blood of Muslims and are holding the Muslims back from the development we need to fulfill our religious obligations.
They believe that this development is so important that pursuing it justifies and excuses kufr upon kufr upon kufr by political leaders, and that this is the right way. And Western militaries have spent billions of dollars to spread this worldview among the Muslim masses.
Islamic insurgency is fundamentally different from the leftist insurgency, then, in terms of its overall orientation. An authentic Islamic insurgency cannot mobilize people on the basis of ideas like homeland or nationality. In fact, losing your homeland is from the sunnah...
...and one of the highest acts of worship in Islam. Islam was established on the basis of brotherhood that transcended tribal affiliation, race, or native language.
Nor can Islam mobilize people on the basis of material interests, like collectivizing land ownership.
Following the authentic guidance of Islam is a path of sacrifice and loss. Although the role models of our ummah obtained great wealth, they lived in what would be considered extreme poverty by modern standards.
Rather, focus on the akhira is what must drive any truly successful Islamic military effort. This is why attempting to replicate the models of mobilizing rural peasantry or urban working classes inevitably leads to deviance and watering down of authentic principles.
This does not mean that Islamic insurgencies should disregard popular support, but rather that their public relations must be focused on calling to the akhira. With jihad, the journey is the destination— unlike leftist rhetoric...
...Islamic insurgencies do not call the people to fight with empty promises of social utopias. Instead, Islam calls us to seek the mercy of our Lord through sacrifice and struggle.
This means that it's much more difficult for Muslim insurgents to move through the population...
as Mao described it: "like fish in water." Rather, Islamic state building follows the template of the sunnah, which is migration to localities where the elite unconditionally support Islam, as was the case with Aws and Khazraj.
Rural guerilla warfare, along the template of Abu Jandal (radhi Allahu anhu), is complimentary to this methodology, but not the sole means of establishing Islamic political authority.
So Islamic guerilla warfare is not a grassroots, national, popular struggle...
...but a path of hijra for spiritual elite from both elite and slave classes. The result is formation not of an egalitarian society, but of a society where the class structure draws all those living under sharia closer to the truth and to worship of al Ahad, subhanahu wa ta'ala.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Every cohesive national identity in the world was established through a process of homogenization that involved mass killing.
Historically, Islamic government was much more tolerant of ethnic and linguistic diversity than Western nation-states.
France and French identity...
...were constructed by suppressing Breton, Basque, and Occitan cultures.
British identity was constructed by suppressing Welsh, Irish, and other Gaelic cultures.
Spanish identity was constructed by suppressing Catalans, Basques, and Galicians.
These processes were...
...replicated in Australia and North America in constructing American, Canadian, and Australian national identity. Natives had their children taken away and put into boarding schools where they were forced to adopt European clothing, language, and customs.
Great replacement theory is real to a large extent.
Jews who themselves would never consider marrying a non-Jew directly and indirectly back media promoting interracial and intercultural marriages/relationships.
This fits with the general trend of modernity which started...
...under the medieval Church of atomizing and individualizing society by breaking down ties of kinship.
The Church gained a lot of power from this, and when the Reformation started, Jews jumped at the opportunity and started financially backing reformers.
The process of breaking down kinship ties to amplify the power of the Church didn't stop, but with secularization it transferred from the Church to the state, and of course Jews were tightly enmeshed with the development of the modern state.
The US's support for Israel while withdrawing support from Ukraine may actually be an indication that the Muslim ummah is more powerful than Russia.
US support for Israel is not only due to the power of the Zionist lobby...
and Jewish control over media and finance. It's also about the West having a forward base to maintain an acceptable status quo in Middle East.
There several reasons Israel is better suited to this job than the West.
1) Jews from poor backgrounds such as Mizrahi, Eastern...
...European, or Abysinnian Jews can easily be conditioned to believe they have nowhere else to go. With this mindset, they fight harder than an occupying army and can sustain more casualties. They also have a lower cost of deployment.
This is why we are trapped in a cycle of repetitive, disappointing attempts to use the nation-state paradigm to establish Islamic governance - because this is the only legal paradigm compatible with the global markets governed by liberal hegemony.
Interestingly, entire populations in liberal, neo-colonial power centers are turning in large numbers toward local autonomy. This applies to both the left and the right - the left, for ecological reasons, and the right for nationalist, populist reasons.