Mahmood Fundamentalism Essay
Fundamentalism is an absurdly broad term. The term can best be described as a movement that is opposed to the modernization or secularization of a nation, and desires a call back to a stricter and more religious way of life. In terms of the Middle East John Voll describes fundamentalism as the call back to the path of Islam (Voll 347). Saba Mahmood makes several strong arguments on why the term fundamentalist is often inaccurate in its usage. Her first argument is that the term fundamentalism categorizes many contrasting ideas as one. Another argument she presents is the hypocritical view that the West has on fundamentalism. A major issue with the term fundamentalism is the range in which the term can be used. It includes ideological terrorist
…show more content…
Mahmood brings about the question as to why secularization is not seen as odd despite the fact that more people practice a religion than not. Mahmood states, “The experience of modernity, furthermore, has rarely been one of ‘tolerance, civility and reason’ for large numbers of people around the world,” (Mahmood 1). She also claims that fundamentalism is essentially the delayed response to European colonialism in the region, and that fundamentalism is used to move the region back to a more authentic regional culture. Finally, despite the West’s negative interpretation of fundamentalism, the West is actually a key contributor. Fanatical groups in Pakistan received a plethora of money in aid in order to fight in Afghanistan. Also when certain groups are opposed to modernity they are considered fundamentalist by the West but when Western allies such as Saudi Arabia replicate these same beliefs they are still viewed as friends. Mahmood argues that this double standard as well as the broad term of the word makes the term fundamentalism unreliable, despite the intensive work and research by other authors such as John
Mahmood brings about the question as to why secularization is not seen as odd despite the fact that more people practice a religion than not. Mahmood states, “The experience of modernity, furthermore, has rarely been one of ‘tolerance, civility and reason’ for large numbers of people around the world,” (Mahmood 1). She also claims that fundamentalism is essentially the delayed response to European colonialism in the region, and that fundamentalism is used to move the region back to a more authentic regional culture. Finally, despite the West’s negative interpretation of fundamentalism, the West is actually a key contributor. Fanatical groups in Pakistan received a plethora of money in aid in order to fight in Afghanistan. Also when certain groups are opposed to modernity they are considered fundamentalist by the West but when Western allies such as Saudi Arabia replicate these same beliefs they are still viewed as friends. Mahmood argues that this double standard as well as the broad term of the word makes the term fundamentalism unreliable, despite the intensive work and research by other authors such as John