January 13, 2007: Hosni Mubarek, the Muslim Brotherhood and American aggressive war

Mubarek and other modern heads-of-state pursue today’s mythical notions of progress, while falling prey to all the usual terrified anticipations of being left behind, of becoming isolated. Hence these leaders have understandably-little mental or emotional energy left to ask the Chestertonian question, “progress to what?”: a query they leave generously at the doorstep of economists, scientists and engineers, in this region too often supply-chain-managers mostly of poverty and war. Presidents and prime ministers inhabiting a progress-bubble eons away from the basically-timeless world of the Muslim Brotherhood: a groundswell which by contrast shares a sense of eternity with the sand dunes of the Arabian Desert, while nonetheless living and moving with all the calm ease of a Dromedary in a high-tech world. The Brotherhood being a popularly-rooted force only remotely responsive to the hysteria of herd-marketing, and a poor source of those divided loyalties upon which the modern world-system most thrives. An organic movement all the more capable of providing the massive footings, like those of the Pyramids, upon which a nation like Egypt could resume an ancient stature and prosperity. Potentially embodying the resurgence of the irreducible strength of mankind—of workmen, villagers, families, co-workers—a constructive force alone capable of surmounting today’s economic and military landscape-of-chaos. Among the latter of whose routine housekeeping chores are included black ops provocateur deeds that for five years now have metronomically touched off sectarian violence in Iraq and elsewhere around the globe, often just when peace seemed about to be secured. In a modern world bristling not only with high-level deceit and high-tech weapons but also with productive means: a globe which should by all accounts be a cornucopia of wealth being obsessed rather with a super-state aggressive warfare of whose scale and scope an eighth or eleventh century Sultan could hardly have dreamed. From out of a worldview full of abortion, “mercy killing” and a pathologically-violent, blood-and-guts-policy-vindictive TV, a world by inescapable elitist policies allowed to till only a scant two percent or less of its arable soil. Even as the same elites “cover the world over with concrete”—to paraphrase Pasternak—with new and eco/economic-destructive “developments” by the day. While in a final non sequitur this New World Order “global policeman” stores food in gigantic warehouses: wasting, spoiling, eaten by rats, while billions around the globe starve or live in grinding malnutrition.

There hasn’t been anything aggressive about Muslim military arms since at least the late seventeenth century: Islamic land rather having become a lustily-sought-after spoil to Westerners, eager to manufacture Muslim “aggressions” since the discovery of Porte vulnerabilities during those same distant times. A lack which, “not to worry”, the herd-marketing Hollywood/geo-corporate imagination quickly supplied: this by way of the handy invention of a laboriously-sustained caricature of Jihad, beginning in earnest with the fantasy-based terrorist-hijacker movies of the ‘70s and ‘80s. Jihad being a term which, in a modern Islam far different from the Caliphates of medieval times, means most often something reminiscent of the inner violence spoken of in the Christian Gospels. To wit: “the kingdom of Heaven suffereth violence, and only the violent bear it away”. True, there are extremes in Islam: as in an abominable execution over changing ones religion, or over seeking to marry someone disapproved of by ones relatives: abuses however not at all accepted by all Muslims, and countered effectively by the likes of “tyrants” like Saddam Hussein. Granted too, even among Christians such an inner purgation or asceticism, with its resulting and inseparable virility of soul—an interior commodity however almost unknown among vitiated Vatican-II Catholics of today—can be motivated to bear arms. But just as certainly, in the modern Islamic context, it is a parallel interior definition which most accurately captures the much-abused term.

But in the policy sphere in Egypt and across the Middle East what is needed is the popularly-micro-managed progress of the farmer, the family man, the co-op, the neighborhood: that which alone can properly dispose of the prodigal potential of the region, and adequately anticipate and accommodate the welfare of its inhabitants. That human capacity which the Muslim Brotherhood promises to generously represent, if given the chance. The realization of which all-encompassing human good must be both means and end of government, industry and finance: or these have little valid meaning at all. A void seen in a modern secularist geo-system which commoditizes an entire globe, gleaning mere marginal profits “off the top” of bar-coded goods of questionable quality, dividends divided among a limited few. A hoard of squandered, miniscule size compared to the abundance which could have been realized. Goods and services which by contrast qualitatively and quantitatively multiply under the warm and neighborly human hand, this in a ready social analogy to the loving multiplication of loaves and fishes of Our Lord Jesus Christ. While under the modern global system the most critical element of all, human agency, is reduced to a tiny pinpoint, with vast resources necessarily macro-managed in a ham-handedly-inefficient and largely-irrelevant way. Giving regional children “a stone instead of a loaf”. The vast riches of the human Garden rather requiring for their full fruition the interplay of the whole community of human hearts and intelligences. Embodying that reciprocity, that mutuality which in regional terms the Muslim Brotherhood could vigorously bring into play.

The main excuse of ruling forces for the rejection of the Brotherhood is its inclusion of religious belief into political life: a course held to be ignorant and backward in the extreme. Indeed, the truly religious government is basically thought of by Bush America as an “axis of evil”, to be razed and hunted down without remorse, wherever it is found. Furthermore and true to form, this “separation of church and state” aggressive-warfare battle-cry is a constant historical motif of two centuries: with the celebrated Enlightenment paradigm, the very central dogma of modern times, having typically-enough and with highest-irony had to be imposed by force of arms. Often indeed by way of the same sort of invasion across international boundary lines that Bush so doughtily and atavistically brings to the world of today. It wasn’t, after all, among the New England colonists that anyone feared the establishment of a theocracy back in ’76, but rather to a French Quebec that “crusading” American arms forthwith deployed. Depriving Catholic matrons and school-children of their dangerous holy day parades. While even with mammoth paradoxes of modern-day “democracy” to one side, the Muslim Brotherhood plainly represents an accurate embodiment of regional popular convictions and political ideals, a worldview which can only partially and with grave moral violence be modified by domestic persecution or foreign military power.

Furthermore, history teaches—the beefy diatribes of Neo Con ideologues notwithstanding—that to abolish the institution-building, law-and-order-sustaining influence of religion on government—and this in any global venue—is to introduce chaos and anarchy, as we ourselves are learning in an ever-more-radically-secular USA. Purely-verbal, highly-commercialized “born-again” pretenses to one side. An increasingly-degenerate, crime-and-imprisonment-ridden institutionalized godlessness we nonetheless threaten to impose upon an entire globe. Advanced through a blank-faced aggressive warfare upon which is neatly tacked the same old incredible saw, a residue of the still-unsettled dust-of-treachery of 9/11: “otherwise we will be required to fight the same battle here at home”. A bully’s fable much like that of the mid-twentieth century regarding Lilliputian forces of a tiny Japan: which for decades had meekly accepted a strangling, mortifying, Anglo/American-circumscribed sphere-of-trade. Much-feared foes who were anticipated in the ‘40s, “any day now”, to invade the West Coast, and from there no doubt to march (by easy stages) into Washington D.C. While the penchant of U.S. policymakers—in dealings with Indians, Japanese, Quebecans, Spaniards and a host of others—toward the invention of war-inducing incidents is just too broad and heavily-trampled a historical trail to ignore when evaluating today’s highly-relevant, ominously-gathering geo-military doom. Our trusty agents provocateurs now being equipped with state-of-the-art means that put to shame such rude forays as the uncannily-blonde-haired depredations of the Creek Red Stick band during the War of 1812. That struggle during which an enlightened England loosely joined forces briefly with Catholic Spain to valiantly attempt to save brutally-beset Indians of many tribes, fled to vast and verdant reaches of La Florida, from the exterminating rigors of a doughty fife and drum. Much the same sort of aggressive-warfare propaganda-motivation that sent World War II Yugoslav Partisans raping and burning, donning Croat Ustasha uniforms in disguise. Even as a crudely-conducted sinking of the Maine would heroically add Cuba to La Florida in the finally finishing-off of Spanish possessions in the Western Hemisphere which had been going on steadily for a century. Distant-past events many of which, just like 9/11 and its secret prisons and tribunals, are still glibly glossed over or dutifully shrouded in “national security related” silence. In this the land of the free and the brave.

Indeed the noted secularization-related order-breakdown—that less-adverted-to salient of today’s globalist crusade—is likewise illustrated by the reintroduction, and probable augmentation, of the Opium Trade in Afghanistan. That early-nineteenth-century Skull and Bones, Bush-family-street-corner standby finding new life close upon the heels of secular-regime-installing American troops. A military presence which likewise quickly augured new vigor along the drug route which meanders from Afghan poppy fields to the burgeoning numbers of Western European and American heroin addicts. A path which makes its way easily through a Caucasus-region with leaders toppled or weakened by the insidious activities of George Soros, a chief if-ever-disingenuous prop of U.S. policies across vast reaches of Eastern Europe and West Asia. And one of the world’s chief opponents of the institutionalization of religion in public life.

But there is another America that I have known since earliest childhood, a mild, good-humored, own-business-minding, pious and truly-productive America that has sought vainly, for two centuries and more, much like the Muslim Brotherhood itself, for its day in the sun. That is the America I love, and whose ascendancy I advance. To me, there is no other.

This modern system stigmatizes the native, indigenous community—unless it be of cannibals or animists—as backward, as spawning a host of sicknesses social, economic, psychological, criminological—but actually such disadvantages thrive most under modern systems in which people are rendered artificially idle and unproductive, endlessly tampered with and experimented upon by manipulating social, medical and psychiatric professionals, made mere inert spectators to a marketplace entirely dominated by elitist brokers. The sort of frustrated, tormented existence which the American poor share at least as much as the Afghanis, and in escape from which they often voluntarily take up arms in foreign wars. American soldiers from whom one can indeed not-frequently hear the most eloquent tributes to Iraqi and other regional peoples, their virtues, character and way of life. Bearing sane contrasting witness that when mankind is allowed fully and properly to engage, to locally mesh, to personally grow and gathers its own productive fruits, if within an enlightened world international trading system—a sanguine reality still very much alive in the social memory of Middle Eastern Muslims—it flowers with safe, healthy and self-monitoring social forms. Thus the rich popular existence the Muslim Brotherhood is capable of reviving is closely-akin to the guilds of the immemorial Muslim past. Villages and urban neighborhoods alike having been built politically and economically, at least until the time of Napoleon, around the trades and professions, so that representation was embodied in the very socioeconomic fabric of nation and town. This is a weave extremely difficult to tear at will, or to tax into the ground: one which in substance I propose, in my distributive FRP or Frankpledge Party, for this land as well. This is self-government of the only authentic and truly-forward-looking kind: needing the least encouragement to become so deeply rooted as to resist any threat or upheaval from any source, at any time.

Thus do nations like Iraq—generations after earlier sanguine forms were forcibly compromised—still evince a nobility-of-character which is the admiration of the very soldiers come to place them in further chains. Indeed, the same was so among American-Revolutionary troops who defeated Quebec, after which a great many of these “deliverers from Papism” embraced the very same Catholicism, married French maidens, and resolutely refused to come home. Indeed a dangerously-large number were actually said to have been ready to restart the same war they had just concluded from the other end, after once having become acquainted with the true character of their “enemies”.