Tea Party candidates made a strong showing in primary elections yesterday, and as a conservative sort myself I can’t say I was sorry to see it happen. The American people are roused to righteous anger, and by all indications, there are going to be an awful lot of wigs on the green come November.
Of course, Islam, another terribly polarizing topic, has lately been front and center too.
Here’s something I’ve been thinking about:
As the power and range of the Caliphate began to decline after its apex in the late Middle Ages, and an ascendant West began to push back against the Islamic empire with growing vigor and success, a great debate arose within the ummah. How could this be happening? How could mere infidels prevail against God’s mighty armies? How could people living in darkness and ignorance vanquish the Light of the World?
The crisis produced two opposing factions. One held the view, however distasteful, that in order to restore the power and glory of the Islamic enterprise, it was necessary for the ummah to humble itself a bit — to study the infidels’ ways and methods, and to adopt those ideas, technologies, and arts of war that had lately, and increasingly, given the unbelievers the upper hand at Islam’s bloody borders. Yes, it was shocking to imagine that civilized Muslims have anything to learn from unwashed heathens, but the plain fact was that the heathens were getting on top, and if the ummah would not learn from its defeats, all would likely be lost.
Nonsense, said the other side. All that the Caliphate needed to regain its former glory, they argued, had already been given to its people by God’s last Messenger. In the Koran and the hadith lay the answer. The problem was not that the Muslim world had been too inwardly directed, too withdrawn into tradition, to learn needed lessons from the infidels, but rather that it had not been faithful enough, and so had grown apart from God’s sheltering heart, from His wise guidance, and from His mighty hand. The faith needed no increased exposure to, and contamination by, the damnable ways of the infidel — instead, what it needed was purification.
Long ago, when a youthful, vigorous ummah had been rightly guided by the Prophet and his companions, it had been invincible, but over time Islam had become distorted, diluted, and dissipated by the meddling, shortsighted leadership of lesser men. Only by returning to the true source of Islam’s strength could things be put right — and that meant paring away hundreds of years of doctrinary accretion, and bringing every aspect of Muslim life back into congruence with the only sources of guidance known to be perfect and complete: the literal words of God, as revealed in the sacred text of the Holy Koran, and the ideal model of the perfect Muslim life, as exemplified by the words and deeds of the Prophet and his companions.
This latter view, known as Salafism (from the word salaf, referring to the Prophet’s inner circle) generally prevailed, and Islam — its face turned backward toward its long-dead founders and its immutable, sacred Book — entered a long, slow decline, as Western civilization gradually, and then explosively, created the modern world.
* * *
The nation that in time rose above all others to dominate that modern world was the United States. By the late twentieth century it had achieved prosperity and military power far beyond anything imaginable in the ancient world.
But things have begun to change. By key measures of health, wealth, and power, America’s pre-eminence is fading, while the strength and influence of other nations has grown. Once the leader of the world by almost any standard, America now, it seems to many, is at best primus inter pares. In global affairs, we are mired in endless and unproductive wars. At home there is ennui, disharmony, sloth, and economic, moral and cultural decay.
The crisis has produced two opposing factions. On one view, the answer is to humble ourselves a bit: to approach the rest of the world not as leaders, but as equals; to talk less and listen more — and, softening our traditional American pride, to learn to act less individually, and more collectively; to become more like Europe, say, and less like the Wild West.
Nonsense, says the other side. All that America needs to regain its former glory, they argue, has already been given to its people by by the Founding Fathers. The problem is not with our core ideals and principles of individual liberty, limited government, free enterprise, personal responsibility, and English-speaking, Judeo-Christian culture; it is that we have failed to live by them. What is needed to restore America to its lost glory is not to surrender our political and social culture, but to purify them.
Long ago, when a youthful, vigorous America was rightly guided by its founding ideals, it had been invincible, but over time the American system has become distorted, diluted, and dissipated by the meddling, shortsighted leadership of lesser men. Only by returning to the true source of America’s strength can things be put right — and that means paring away at least a century of governmental accretion, and bringing every aspect of American life back into congruence with the best source of guidance available to us in these troubled times: our sacred Constitution, and the correct understanding of its meaning, as exemplified for us by the words and deeds of the Founding Fathers.
The Tea Party, then, is essentially an American Salafist movement. The comparison may seem unkind, but it needn’t be seen that way, for there is no general truth as to whether rededication to founding principles is wise or foolish. It depends on the quality of the principles themselves, as well as the historical context — and, as is true always and in everything, it depends on one’s aim.
