Something Really Puzzles Me.

[Audiogen]

Sam Harris: Islam Is Not a Religion of Peace

[Meliai]

Sam Harris: Islam Is Not a Religion of Peace

I was going to mention the political component of radicalization in response to your other post and then I took note that Sam Harris completely glossed over it when mentioning Bin Laden

I've read a bit about Afghanistan's path from a fairly secular, modern country in the 1950s to one of the most brutal, violent Islamic regimes under the Taliban, and its impossible to remove the political from the equation. I would argue that the Mujahideen of Afghanistan formed almost entirely out of reaction to Soviet occupation, rather than from a deep rooted belief in Islam. But Islam was a convenient rallying cry and a way to reclaim cultural ties in a country where those ties had been severed by invading forces.

I havent read up much on Bin Laden's involvement but it's curious how a millionaire Saudi ended up funding terrorist cells in Afghanistan where a lot of these men who answered the call to jihad had grown up very poor and very acclimated to violence due to Soviet occupation. If I were to guess, I would say he was using religion more as a tool to act as a call to jihad, moreso than any real fundamentalist belief and conviction of his own. We see wealthy politicians in the US use Christianity in a ...uh, somewhat similar manner

[Meliai]

It's also interesting to note Iraq and Syria were both pretty secular before the US invasion of Iraq completely destabilized the region

There are a lot of layers here. And lots of wealthy people both in the west and in the middle east playing with people's lives for their own monetary interests

[Din Djarin]

Secular in name but both ruled by an overly authoritarian president in a bogus democracy. Before the civil war in Syria the shi-ite minority was favored under Assads rule, which is an important reason why a big part of the population rebelled against Assad. But its not blatantly shi-ite vs. sunni there either, as there are sunni muslims fighting for Assad as well..

[Audiogen]

I was going to mention the political component of radicalization in response to your other post and then I took note that Sam Harris completely glossed over it when mentioning Bin Laden

I've read a bit about Afghanistan's path from a fairly secular, modern country in the 1950s to one of the most brutal, violent Islamic regimes under the Taliban, and its impossible to remove the political from the equation. I would argue that the Mujahideen of Afghanistan formed almost entirely out of reaction to Soviet occupation, rather than from a deep rooted belief in Islam. But Islam was a convenient rallying cry and a way to reclaim cultural ties in a country where those ties had been severed by invading forces.

I havent read up much on Bin Laden's involvement but it's curious how a millionaire Saudi ended up funding terrorist cells in Afghanistan where a lot of these men who answered the call to jihad had grown up very poor and very acclimated to violence due to Soviet occupation. If I were to guess, I would say he was using religion more as a tool to act as a call to jihad, moreso than any real fundamentalist belief and conviction of his own. We see wealthy politicians in the US use Christianity in a ...uh, somewhat similar manner

The notion that someone like Bin Laden can faithfully utilize Islam to serve political terrorism makes Islam all the more scary.

[Dax]

I thought my meaning would be clear.
Your view comes from the expectation that all Muslims are fundamentalists who take their holy book literally.
People generally understand that Christians who take their Bible literally are a loony minority, but for some reason seem to think that ALL Muslims are crazy fundamentalists.

I actually read something really interesting last night. There was a survey conducted on radicalized jihadists who moved to Syria between 2013 and 2014. It was found that most respondents of the poll didn't know much about Islam at all. Some of the respondents had bought The Koran for Dummies before leaving lol. They didn't radicalize because of religion, they radicalized because all of their friends were doing it and it made them feel like part of something greater and gave them a sense of brotherhood.
Source: Humankind, a Hopeful History by Rutger Bregman
The source he cites is The Power of Others. Peer Pressure, Group Think, and how the People Around us Shape Everything We Do by Michael Bond.

I've often wondered what causes people to radicalize so I found that super interesting!

Guess I'm thick but i fail to connect with the meaning ... sorry.

[Din Djarin]

The notion that someone like Bin Laden can faithfully utilize Islam to serve political terrorism makes Islam all the more scary.

It's not limited to islam.

But when other people in the muslim world militantly aided Afghanistan against the soviets it was hard to see them as political terrorists. They weren't the agressors there at first. And supported by the US

[Audiogen]

It's not limited to islam.

But when other people in the muslim world militantly aided Afghanistan against the soviets it was hard to see them as political terrorists. They weren't the agressors there at first. And supported by the US

A notable distinction when comparing Christianity to Islam is that The Bible was written over millennia by many different authors and rewritten many times over as where the Quran was written in a couple decades, remained essentially intact and is supposedly the direct word of God.

So I don't see politicians leveraging Christianity for political aim as a parallel comparison.

[Audiogen]

That said, if we roll with Harris' sports analogy, if Islam is Boxing and Jainism is badminton, Christianity is perhaps something like American Football. Meaning violence might not be as tightly coupled with the faith as Islam but it's an undeniable aspect.