This is Theodore Dalrymple I'm talking about, not our old friend William (of White Mughals fame), in a piece written in the New York City Journal last Autumn which Marcus at Harry's Place noticed yesterday and decided to blog. The Suicide Bombers Among Us makes a few sweeping generalisations about the young Muslims in this country, which are in my opinion unjustifed. In particular, it offers no evidence that the four young men who were involved in the 7 July attacks in London were connected with this criminal sub-culture - the most likely reason being that they quite simply were not. (More: Fightin' with Grabes.)
Technorati Tags: muslim+converts, muslim+youth, terrorism, theodore+dalrymple
Dalrymple claims that "those who died in the London bombings were sacrificial victims to the need of four young men to resolve a conflict deep within themselves (and within many young Muslims), and they imagined they could do so only by the most extreme possible interpretation of their ancestral religion". Dalrymple is aware that one of the four was of Carribean origin, which reduces the relevance of his observations still further. Although there are other Muslims in his family, all evidence suggests that they did not approve of his action; this includes his widow, who had no advance knowledge of what he was doing.
Militant Islamists are well-known not to draw their suicide bombers from the criminal underworld, even if the converts who join them had previously been involved in it. Evidence suggests that militants feign irreligiosity in order to fool outsiders that they are secularised, not the sort of religious fanatics who should attract the attention of the security forces, but if these same forces were doing their job, they should notice who among the criminal classes is who. (The phenomenon of "Salafi burn-out" has been noted by some observers, in which people tire of the life of the militant "Salafi" and lose interest and become irreligious; this may be what the militants imitate.)
Dalrymple goes on at length about what seems to be the general scumminess of young Muslim men in the UK:
Young Muslim men in Britain—as in France and elsewhere in the West—have a problem of personal, cultural, and national identity. They are deeply secularized, with little religious faith, even if most will admit to a belief in God. Their interest in Islam is slight. They do not pray or keep Ramadan (except if it brings them some practical advantage, such as the postponement of a court appearance). Their tastes are for the most part those of non-Muslim lower-class young men. They dress indistinguishably from their white and black contemporaries, and affect the same hairstyles and mannerisms, including the vulpine lope of the slums. Gold chains, the heavier the better, and gold front teeth, without dental justification, are symbols of their success in the streets, which is to say of illicit enrichment.Many young Muslims, unlike the sons of Hindus and Sikhs who immigrated into Britain at the same time as their parents, take drugs, including heroin. They drink, indulge in casual sex, and make nightclubs the focus of their lives. Work and careers are at best a painful necessity, a slow and inferior means of obtaining the money for their distractions.
But what differentiates them from other lower-class young men is their "residual" Islam. They do not mix, he says, with white men, and would be horrified if their sisters joined them. They themselves satisfy their lusts with prostitutes and women they call "white sluts", and he tells us that his female patients (he is a psychiatrist) complain of being called this in the streets by Asian men, but should one of their womenfolk attempt to choose her own boyfriend or try and have a social life of her own, she is "likely to suffer a beating, followed by surveillance of Stasi-like thoroughness". These same men are provided, via forced marriage, with a means of continuing these adventures after marriage as well as a lawful means of satisfying his lusts at home.
His basic premise in this essay is that Islam, however residual, provides its adherents (or inheritors) with a sense of moral superiority over everyone else and a kind of get-out in dealing with their (our) social problems. Thus, Muslims' failure to thrive in education and employment can only be attributed to discrimination, and not, for example, to their (our) "refusal to educate females to their full capacity", "a terrible handicap in a society in which, perhaps regrettably, prosperity requires two household incomes". As ever, the BBC is attacked, this time for repeating the same line since 1997 that Muslims "continue to face discrimination", on the grounds that Muslims are three times as likely to be unemployed long-term as West Indians. He observes that a quarter of all medical students are of Indian subcontinental origin; indeed, I know two qualified doctors who are Muslims of Pakistani origin (one of them a GP and the other a GP in training). I can confirm that there are Muslim female doctors in this country, and when I underwent dental treatment at Guy's several years ago, the students in attendance included at least one in hijab. I can also assure anyone that plenty of female students in hijab or otherwise of Muslim appearance are to be found at any London university, whether a former Polytechnic like London Metropolitan or a prestigious "red brick" like King's College. The practice of refusing to educate girls and the practice of sending them abroad may be facts, but they are not the whole story, by any means. (What may well be true, however, is that girls are told to choose a college nearby, rather than travel to a distant town. If "nearby" means London, that still offers plenty of choice.)
Dalrymple also contends that the extremists cannot free themselves mentally from "the West", and are thus "engaged in a losing and impossible inner jihad, or struggle, to expunge everything that is not Muslim from their breasts". As examples he offers Jermaine Lindsey, who had been into rap music, which he calls "full of inchoate rage, hatred, and intemperance", before he accepted Islam. (Again, this is a huge generalisation.) Osama bin Laden is, he says, "utterly dependent upon the West for his weaponry, his communications, his travel, and his funds", whether by his use of western technology or by his use of money which can ultimately be traced to western purchase of Saudi oil. And there is the fact that all these people do not really want to rid themselves of "the appurtenances of Western life" such as its technologies and conveniences:
They therefore have at least a nagging intimation that their chosen utopia is not really a utopia at all: that deep within themselves there exists something that makes it unachievable and even undesirable. How to persuade themselves and others that their lack of faith, their vacillation, is really the strongest possible faith? What more convincing evidence of faith could there be than to die for its sake? How can a person be really attached or attracted to rap music and cricket and Mercedes cars if he is prepared to blow himself up as a means of destroying the society that produces them? Death will be the end of the illicit attachment that he cannot entirely eliminate from his heart.
I find this to be an extremely shallow conclusion; in my experience, Muslims of all hues are perfectly happy to use western inventions to further their cause, whether it be the use of western printing methods to print jihadist literature or the use of TrueType fonts and publishing software to beautify mainstream Islamic textbooks. Political Islamists, are not, in general, anti-technological. They are against non-Islamic methods of ruling and judging, a significant difference.
Dalrymple also does converts to Islam a huge injustice in this piece. Most converts do not end up as suicide bombers within a few years; rather, they end up in a variety of different groups and movements. Some are more religious than others. In the case of Afro-Carribean converts especially, jihadists are very much a minority - in South London, there are very substantial communities of pro-Saudi and "Suroorist" Salafis. In both South and West London, there are also black converts who are members of Sufi orders. Without any reference whatsoever, he offers a percentage of female converts as 17%, and of these, he would "bet that the 17 percent of converts who were women converted in the course of a love affair" rather than because they were convinced. By contrast, what I read of female converts' actual writings suggests otherwise.
Dalrymple accepts elsewhere that western culture does indeed let women down; in a piece on Muslim girls' lack of education published in the Spectator in October 2001, he says this about what western education actually does for girls (you can read the whole piece at Free Republic):
I concede that the white girls who remain in the schools from which the Muslim parents illegally withdraw their daughters learn little after a certain age except how to be a lumpen slut, of the kind with which this country is so exceedingly well endowed: but the law is the law, and the subsequent fate of so many Muslim daughters is far from enviable.
I should add that if the girls are removed from the country, and travel without being forced to, there is really nothing illegal about it. For a British family to relocate, in whole or in part, is perfectly lawful whether the destination is Karachi or the Costa del Sol. But the fact remains that Dalrymple censures the criminal, residually-Muslim youth for calling young working-class white women "white sluts", while doing similarly himself in a magazine anyone can buy at Smith's! What hypocrisy this is; almost as much as censuring young Muslim men for their sense of moral superiority while displaying a similar attitude to his patients whose secrets he divulges in his own books and articles, for which he is admired by a lot of people and, no doubt, paid handsomely.
I concede that the white girls who remain in the schools from which the Muslim parents illegally withdraw their daughters learn little after a certain age except how to be a lumpen slut
What a funny attitude he has towards women, or specifically working class women. I'm not too sure as to whether he has experience any experience of the outside world, let alone muslims or Islam.
Political Islamists, are not, in general, anti-technological. They are against non-Islamic methods of ruling and judging, a significant difference.
There's the rub. It is western freedom that fosters the creativity necessary to invent technology, which is why the Islamic world - with its legal and social straitjacket - has not invented anything for hundreds of years.
Theodore Dalrymple has plenty of experience of "the outside world", having worked as a prison doctor for so long. He correctly and compassionately highlights the plight of Muslim girls forced (effectively) or "persuaded" into marrying a peasant from the "home country", with all the dangers that implies. He is every bit as critical of non-Muslim socieity. The difference is that non-Muslims can take criticism in their stride.
OP wrote: "There's the rub. It is western freedom that fosters the creativity necessary to invent technology, which is why the Islamic world - with its legal and social straitjacket - has not invented anything for hundreds of years."
Playing the fool again, eh? I thought we had discussed this issue before, back in August, but I see that the lesson went in one ear and out the other. To refresh your memory, read this.
And do try to take this criticism in stride, will you?
Old Pickler, I think that the social straitjacket you talk about was largely imposed by the Ottoman Turks (it certainly fits with the timing of the Islamic world's decline relative to the West). The Ottomans were much better at running an empire than any of the Arab dynasties had been, but they were also hopelessly un-innovative. They were in effect the "Romans" to the Arab "Greeks".
The problem with the Ottomans (and the Turks in general) was that they were a warrior society, which looked to get rich by conquest and plunder, rather than by production. In this respect, they were rather like their Christian opposite numbers the Spanish. Fortunately for the West, the Spanish never achieved the kind of dominance in Christendom that the Turks had over the dar al-Islam.
I do believe though that there are more fundamental problems with the Muslim world, particularly the Middle East. Except for oil, it has almost no natural resources. It doesn't even have a friendly climate and soil capable of supporting a large population (such was crucial to the rise of Imperial Japan - once they learned that adopting Western technology was a good idea, they had the surplus population necessary to implement it). The climate issue may be why Malaysia is currently the best country in the Islamic world...
Oil can raise fabulous wealth for the ruling elite with only the tiniest of labour forces, thus preventing the rise of accountable government. The American Patriot slogan "No taxation without representation" also works in reverse. However, oil is not the only resource that can warp a society in this way. We also have the examples of Afghanistan (opium), Apartheid South Africa (gold, diamonds), Spanish Empire (gold, silver) and Colombia (cocaine).
Oil can raise fabulous wealth for the ruling elite with only the tiniest of labour forces, thus preventing the rise of accountable government. The American Patriot slogan "No taxation without representation" also works in reverse.
This is true. Taxation isn't necessarily a bad thing in societies where there is accountability. I'd also say that, since necessity is the mother of invention, oil wealth, by removing necessity, has been its enemy.
Assalaamu alaikum,
Is he saying that 17% of converts to Islam are women, and 83% are men? If so, I think that's way off. I don't have any statistics, but in my experience, there are many more women than men.
George, I'm not sure what you consider the "Middle East", but several of the coutries around the Gulf also have natural gas. Many of these countries have a lot of agricultural produce, and some have nice climates. Most of the fruits and vegetables that we get are from places like Syria, Turkey, and Iran.
"Without any reference whatsoever, he offers a percentage of female converts as 17%, and of these, he would "bet that the 17 percent of converts who were women converted in the course of a love affair" rather than because they were convinced. By contrast, what I read of female converts' actual writings suggests otherwise."
It could be argued that females who have come to Islam for reasons other than love are more prone to write about it or create a blog, whereas a female who converts for love will not be particularly interested in such activities. I know quite a few female converts, and I would say the majority came to Islam because of their marriage to Muslim men. Some stay aloof from Islam, some practice it, but the majority in my experience remain ambivalent and this feeling is passed on, for better or worse, to their children.
Yusef, I think you are being too harsh with Anthony Daniels in regards to converts. He has never written that the vast majority become suicide bombers, but I think he believes, and you might agree, that a large number do become very disagreeable people. I’ve met quite a few in my day, and I had a sense that many loathed their own cultures, societies and history and its not a stretch to speculate that if they had lived in the 60s or 70s they would have joined some leftist underground group like Baader-Meinhof or the French Direct Action.
“…and its not a stretch to speculate that if they had lived in the 60s or 70s they would have joined some leftist underground group like Baader-Meinhof or the French Direct Action.”
It’s a huge stretch because it’s baseless speculation to serve a contrived argument. The references to the "Baader-Meinhof" and "French Direct Action" are, frankly, absurd. And precisely what proportion of converts do you think are disagreeable, self-loathing and only in it for a cause?
George, I'm not sure what you consider the "Middle East", but several of the coutries around the Gulf also have natural gas.
Has similar problems to oil.
Many of these countries have a lot of agricultural produce, and some have nice climates. Most of the fruits and vegetables that we get are from places like Syria, Turkey, and Iran.
Fruits and vegetables are specialized products with high value/weight ratios, not staple foods.
*Fruits and vegetables are specialized products with high value/weight ratios, not staple foods.*
In many countries vegetables are used as staple foods, particularly potatoes and cassava.
*He has never written that the vast majority become suicide bombers, but I think he believes, and you might agree, that a large number do become very disagreeable people. I’ve met quite a few in my day, and I had a sense that many loathed their own cultures, societies and history ...*
Well, Direct Action and Baader-Meinhof were precisely the equivalent of the modern jihadi, not of the convert who merely dislikes aspects of the culture into which he or she was born. In fact, perhaps such people have seen aspects of that culture which you (or I) haven't.
If anything, among Muslim converts (white and black) there are major ethnocentric tendencies. I've met converts with a very low opinion of "ethnic" Muslims and a very high opinion of certain aspects of the European tradition (although a great disdain for others) - note the Murabitun with their fondness for Nietzsche and Heidegger, an enthusiasm not shared by most Muslims from Muslim countries.
Please stop making blanket observations about women who convert through marriage. I consider myself one of these women, have met a fair few who've come to Islam in the same wayand I can assure you that though I am not a perfect Muslim, it pains me and my attitude and theirs is not one of ambivalence. By spouting such drivel you're buying into the argument that women are less capable of religious committment than men.
"I've met converts with a very low opinion of "ethnic" Muslims and a very high opinion of certain aspects of the European tradition (although a great disdain for others) - note the Murabitun with their fondness for Nietzsche and Heidegger, an enthusiasm not shared by most Muslims from Muslim countries."
I think people take the Murabitun's "fondness" for European thinkers slightly out of context. They use European thinkers either to challenge other European ideas that muslims are adopting or in reference to areas which are islamically neutral (ie just a matter of individual opinion).
Technological progress for example is a European feature that has been spread to other parts of the world as is the concept of gender equality. Critiquing them or at least understanding them then is best done with reference to European scholarship.
This isn't something new for muslims. Chinese muslims in the past had quite close familiarity with historical Chinese scholarship and culture.
According to Tim Winter most Chinese muslims historically would tend to believe that Confucius was a prophet.
It's amazing to see how gullible and easily split muslims can be, someone calling himself "Muhammad Muahmmad" is most probably a troll, and from his posts, I'd say he is out to cause problems between born muslims and new muslims and see how easily people on this blog play to his tune. A few people here reply to him as though he were definitely muslim and even Yusuf falls for his trick by saying this:
*I've met converts with a very low opinion of "ethnic" Muslims and a very high opinion of certain aspects of the European tradition...*
If what Yusuf says about new white muslims prejudice is true then I'd say they perhaps need to re do their research on Islam and then convert again b/c they most probably missed something in their first research or just didn't take it seriously enough. May be they never saw our Prophet's summon on the mount:
About 1400 years ago, in his last sermon, Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) said:
“All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black nor a black has any superiority over a white — except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not therefore do injustice to yourselves. Remember one day you will meet Allah and answer your deeds. So beware: Do not stray from the path of righteousness after I am gone.”
'play to his tune'?
I think you say 'dance to his tune?'
...but English isn't my 1st, or 2nd, 3rd or 4th language and it's without doubt the most difficult I've had to learn.
As-Salaamu 'alaikum
I'm well aware that "Muhammad Muhammad" is a false name and that he is probably a troll. I'm not as gullible as this might look. I let his post through because it was not abusive or defamatory. And his comments about converts being disagreeable, etc., don't hold with my experience.