CNN’s Lou Dobbs has come in for criticism for saying something sensible and insightful. It is too vague and too politically correct to call America’s post-September 11th conflict a “war against terrorism.” He observes that “the enemies in this war are radical Islamists who argue all non-believers in their faith must be killed. They are called Islamists.” He emphasizes that “this is not a war against Muslims or Islam. It is a war against Islamists and all who support them.”
“Islam” is the name of the religion founded by Mohammad, and believers are called “Muslims,” but “Islamism” is the name for the political-religious ideology of Osama bin Laden and others like him in many countries.
What are the goals of the Islamist jihad? Some commentators maintain that the conflict is between Islam and the West as civilizations, each of them united by a shared history, religion, and way of life.
Fourteen centuries ago, armies inspired by Mohammad created an Islamic empire stretching from Spain to Afghanistan. Christendom was its only enduring enemy and rival. For nearly a millennium, Islam was the stronger civilization: wealthier, more powerful, and more advanced culturally.
"a jihad…should be waged against modernity..." —Sayyid Qutb
By the seventeenth century, however, the tide turned. The scientific and industrial revolutions vastly increased the wealth and the military power of the West. After the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I, the Middle East was taken over by European nations and broken up into colonies and protectorates. Today, despite decolonization, the countries of this region remain poor and backward by comparison not only with the West but also with the booming economies of East Asia. The result, say many observers, is a feeling of humiliation at the rise of what many Muslims see as an inferior culture.
This certainly represents part of the truth, but not the fundamental truth. The current war is not against the United States or even the West per se but against the culture of modernity. Modernity was born in the Renaissance and Enlightenment in the West but it is not inherently tied to any one society. Modernity is based on the theses that reason, not revelation, is the instrument of knowledge and arbiter of truth; that science, not religion, gives us the truth about nature; that the pursuit of happiness in this life, not suffering in preparation for the next, is the cardinal value; that reason can and should be used to increase human well-being through economic and technological progress; that the individual person is an end in himself with the capacity to direct his own life, and thus deserves rights to freedom of thought, speech, and action; and that religious belief should be a private affair, tolerance a social virtue, and church and state kept separate.
Islamists are clear that they hate this worldview. Sayyid Qutb, a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, insisted that “a jihad…should be waged against modernity…The ultimate objective is to re-establish the Kingdom of Allah upon earth.” Bin Laden himself says, "The love of this world is wrong. You should love the other world...die in the right cause and go to the other world." Islamist Mawlana Abu'l-A’la Mawdudi wrote, “no one can regard any field of his affairs as personal and private. Considered from this aspect the Islamic state bears a kind of resemblance to the Fascist and Communist states."
Anti-modernism is not unique to the Islamic world. In the eighteenth century, Jean-Jacques Rousseau held that feeling, not reason, is the essential human capacity, that civilization is the chief cause of human woe, and that people should be forced to submerge their individuality in collective life. In the nineteenth century, the Romantic movement elevated feeling over reason and “unspoiled” nature over the new industrial economy. Socialists wanted to restore a communal society, as did many conservatives. On the other hand, many leaders in Islamic lands have sought to bring the benefits of modernity to their own countries—most notably Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder modern Turkey.
At the deepest level, the war on terrorism is the latest phase of a continuing struggle to achieve the promise of modern civilization. The threat posed by the Islamists comes not from their Islamic background but from their anti-modernist creed. This is a profoundly anti-human outlook, and there can be no compromise with it. As we take aim at the terrorists who have attacked us, we must also take intellectual aim at the ideas that inspire them—wherever those ideas are put forward.
David Kelley ist der Gründer von The Atlas Society. Als professioneller Philosoph, Lehrer und Bestsellerautor ist er seit mehr als 25 Jahren ein führender Verfechter des Objektivismus.
David Kelley fundó The Atlas Society (TAS) en 1990 y se desempeñó como director ejecutivo hasta 2016. Además, como director intelectual, era responsable de supervisar el contenido producido por la organización: artículos, vídeos, charlas en conferencias, etc. Se retiró del TAS en 2018, permanece activo en los proyectos del TAS y continúa formando parte del Consejo Directivo.
Kelley es filósofa, profesora y escritora profesional. Tras obtener un doctorado en filosofía en la Universidad de Princeton en 1975, se incorporó al departamento de filosofía del Vassar College, donde impartió una amplia variedad de cursos en todos los niveles. También ha enseñado filosofía en la Universidad de Brandeis y ha dado conferencias con frecuencia en otros campus.
Los escritos filosóficos de Kelley incluyen obras originales sobre ética, epistemología y política, muchas de las cuales desarrollan ideas objetivistas con nueva profundidad y nuevas direcciones. Es el autor de La evidencia de los sentidos, un tratado de epistemología; Verdad y tolerancia en el objetivismo, sobre temas del movimiento objetivista; Individualismo desenfrenado: la base egoísta de la benevolencia; y El arte de razonar, un libro de texto ampliamente utilizado para la introducción a la lógica, ahora en su quinta edición.
Kelley ha dado conferencias y ha publicado sobre una amplia gama de temas políticos y culturales. Sus artículos sobre temas sociales y políticas públicas han aparecido en Harpers, The Sciences, Reason, Harvard Business Review, The Freeman, On Principle, y en otros lugares. Durante la década de 1980, escribió con frecuencia para Revista financiera y empresarial Barrons en temas como el igualitarismo, la inmigración, las leyes de salario mínimo y la Seguridad Social.
Su libro Una vida propia: derechos individuales y estado de bienestar es una crítica de las premisas morales del estado de bienestar y la defensa de las alternativas privadas que preservan la autonomía, la responsabilidad y la dignidad individuales. Su aparición en el especial de ABC y TV de John Stossel «Greed» en 1998 provocó un debate nacional sobre la ética del capitalismo.
Un experto en objetivismo reconocido internacionalmente, ha dado numerosas conferencias sobre Ayn Rand, sus ideas y sus obras. Fue consultor en la adaptación cinematográfica de La rebelión de Atlas, y editor de La rebelión de Atlas: la novela, las películas, la filosofía.
»Conceptos y naturalezas: un comentario sobre El giro realista (de Douglas B. Rasmussen y Douglas J. Den Uyl)», Reason Papers 42, núm. 1, (verano de 2021); esta reseña de un libro reciente incluye una inmersión profunda en la ontología y la epistemología de los conceptos.
Los fundamentos del conocimiento. Seis conferencias sobre la epistemología objetivista.
»La primacía de la existencia» y»La epistemología de la percepción», The Jefferson School, San Diego, julio de 1985
»Universales e inducción», dos conferencias en las conferencias de GKRH, Dallas y Ann Arbor, marzo de 1989
»Escepticismo», Universidad de York, Toronto, 1987
»La naturaleza del libre albedrío», dos conferencias en el Instituto de Portland, octubre de 1986
»El Partido de la Modernidad», Informe sobre políticas de Cato, mayo/junio de 2003; y Navegante, noviembre de 2003; un artículo ampliamente citado sobre las divisiones culturales entre los puntos de vista premodernos, modernos (Ilustración) y posmodernos.
«No tengo que hacerlo«(Diario IOS, volumen 6, número 1, abril de 1996) y»Puedo y lo haré» (El nuevo individualista, otoño/invierno 2011); artículos complementarios sobre cómo hacer realidad el control que tenemos sobre nuestras vidas como individuos.