Western Resistance

One of my favorite books is The Socialist Phenomenon, by former Soviet dissident and world-class mathematician Igor Shafarevich. The Socialist Phenomenon is a historical survey and analysis of Socialism, broadly understood. The book is recommended without reserve.

As one often does with favorite books, I recently reread it, and was captivated--again--by Shafarevich's insightful description of Socialism. According to him, socialism is the phenomenon manifesting the following characteristics (The Socialist Phenomenon, pp. 194-197):

1. The abolition of Private Property.

"This proposition, in its negative form, is inherent in all socialist doctrines without exception.... But in its positive form.... appears in two distinct variants... the commonality of property... [and] state property."

2. The abolition of the Family.

"The majority of socialist doctrines proclaim the abolition of the family. In other doctrines, as well as in certain socialist states, this proposition is not proclaimed in such radical form, but the principle appears as a de-emphasis of the role of the family, the weakening of the family ties, the abolition of certain functions of the family...."

3. The abolition of Religion.

"It is especially easy for us to observe socialism's hostility to religion, for this is inherent, with few exceptions, in all contemporary socialist states and doctrines.... This same principle has been repeatedly proclaimed in socialist doctrines, beginning with the end of the seventeenth century....

Finally, in Plato's socialist system, religion is conceived as an element in the state's ideology. Its role amounts to education, the shaping of citizens' opinions into the forms necessary to the state...."

4. Communality or Equality.

"This demand is encountered in almost all socialist doctrines. Its negative form is seen in the striving to destroy the hierarchy of the surrounding society and in calls "to humble the proud, the rich and the powerful," to abolish privilege...."

Reading those passages, enjoying the sheer beauty of an argument well crafted, I made a connection. It was one of those moments when 'something clicks' in your mind, and you just have to go back and check your reasoning, just to make sure you are not fooling yourself. It was a good thing I wasn't in a bathtub naked, or I might have 'pulled an Archimedes' on an unsuspecting, already-sorrowful world: it struck me that Islam and socialism are highly compatible doctrines.

But don't take my word for it--you shouldn't. Let's examine Shafarevich's four basic principles fo Socialism and see how they relate to Islam. (Caveat emptor: it should be clear that if Shafarevich's description of socialism is incorrect my argument should be discarded.)

1. The abolition of Private Property.

Islam does not call for the complete abolition of private property, as the most radical socialist doctrines do, but it places severe restrictions on the use of said private property. Beginning with the absolute prohibition of "usury", as well as many Islamic prohibitions, it severely distorts the scope and power of commerce and industry. Historically, Islamic States strived to become highly-centralized bureaucracies where the State controlled the economy, the very lives of its citizens--with predictable results in lower economic output and technological backwardness in Islamic societies. This state of affairs was facilitated by Islamic teachings emphasizing the communality of property. War booty, for example, belongs to 'the Ummah', and there are many rules in how to divide it. The state, in the person of the Caliph, keeps the highest cut. The statist socialism developed by Islam should be pronounced 'good enough' for leftists hungry for power or consumed by hatred of their host societies.

2. The abolition of the Family.

Islam presents itself in the West as a "pro-family" doctrine, but what is in fact promoted is the subordination of the family to the needs of Islam. That's how Palestinian "mother of martyrs" Mariam Farahat sends away three of her sons to their deaths, and her reward is not public opprobrium, but election to the Palestinian Parliament. Family members in Islamic societies can only keep good standing in the family by remaining good servants of Allah. The so-called honor killings of girls who stray or appear to stray from proper Islamic behavior is a manifestation of this subordination of the interests of the family to the interests of the religion. These priorities can be properly described as many things--monstrosity comes to mind--but 'family values' surely they are not.

3. The abolition of Religion.

It is counterintuitive to affirm Islam represents an abolition of religion. Islam is all religion! But that's not the whole story. Just as the family subordinates itself to Islam, Islam subordinates itself to the needs of the state. To be precise; Islam is a religion designed to serve the needs of a centralized, militaristic, conquering state. Islam's emphasis on external obedience, rituals and actions, betrays its statist nature. If you are a good servant of the Islamic state, then almost certainly you are a good Muslim. (Other religions, such as Christianity and Buddhism, emphasize the inner life.) Also notice; in the ideal Islamic state, authority rests with the Caliph, the "secular" ruler, and not with the religious teachers.

4. Communality or Equality.

Islam not only emphasizes community; it is community--the 'Ummah', the community of believers. As for equality, consider this: when Islamic supremacists such as Usama bin Laden and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad repeat the drivel of Western leftists, we have assumed this is a tactical maneuver designed to divide the West. But we need not assume such comprehensive cynicism in our enemies. More likely, they do believe that our (semi) capitalistic system is rapacious and unjust, and that only Islam can remedy such an abominable state of affairs. Islam is also attractive to nihilistic leftists in a different way; the many Islamic regulations of life create another type of equality--equality in appearance and behavior. (Think the infamous burqa and 'Islamic' haircuts imposed by the Taliban.) Socialist states of all stripes--Mao's China, the Inca Empire, ancient Sparta--all valued this kind equality; equality through regimentation and squalor.

After considering the underlying compatibilities shared by Islam and Socialism, we conclude that the growing alliance between the movements should not be considered 'a marriage of convenience.' More accurately, the alliance should be considered an arranged marriage, where the partners's underlying compatibilities might lead to a lasting union, to the chagrin of lovers of liberty everywhere.