Zionism and Robots: the rhetoric of Muslim anti-realist arguments

According to relativists, "Death" and "Furniture" (pdf link) arguments represent a 'theology of the bottom line':

"When relativists talk about the social construction of reality, truth, cognition, scientific knowledge, technical capacity, social structure, and so on, their realist opponents sooner or later start hitting the furniture, invoking the Holocaust, talking about rocks, guns, killings, human misery, tables and chairs. The force of these objections is to introduce a bottom line, a bedrock of reality that places limits on what may be treated as epistemologically constructed or deconstructible. There are two related kinds of moves: Furniture (tables, rocks, stones, etc. -- the reality that cannot be denied), and Death (misery, genocide, poverty, power -- the reality that should not be denied)."

My point of citing the paper is not to refute or support relativism, but as an example of the rhetorical battle between different groups to establish truths.

Similarly, I wish to propose my own, quite speculative, theory of rhetoric amongst Muslims when it comes analysing Muslim politics in the last century. To me, "Zionism" and "Robots" are the symbols for some of the most common objections to what I shall call more 'realist' analyses of Muslim politics  in the last century or so, which also represent a 'theology of the bottom line'. For the sake of this argument, I shall call this latter group Muslim Realists (even if the people who comprise this group may not take realist stances in philosophy, science and so on). The protagonists of the Zionism and Robots rhetoric I shall call Anti-Realists.

The most glaring examples of Zionism and Robots rhetoric can be found in discussions on Arabs and the Ottoman caliphate in the late 19th- and early 20th-centuries and the various ills and problems that Muslims found themselves in due to their actions (and continue to do so today). When it is pointed out by Muslim Realists that these people, Muslims, acted (rightly or wrongly) either according to their own self-interest or what they perceived was the also the interest of Muslims as a whole (and the two are not mutually exclusive), and that the outcome of Muslim failures may just be a combination of internal failings as well as the oft-cited external factors, the anti-realists object by invoking Zionism and Robots. Zionism here is being used as a symbol to denote a dominant, powerful and exclusive group which has the ability to control or greatly influence world affairs (whether or not it involves real Zionists, who shall, for this argument, be called Actual Zionists); political players, global institutions and NGOs, academies, even powerful individuals -- their ability to do anything they wish cannot be denied. Almost always this Zionism targets Muslims just for being Muslims, and is always involved in whatever ills befall Muslims, directly or indirectly. In other words, when the Arabs rose up against the Ottoman caliphate, they did so because the "Zionists" made them do it. In weaker forms of this argument, the Arabs who revolted are partly to blame; in stronger forms all the blame rests squarely on the "Zionists".

The Robots rhetorical manoeuvre is often the handmaiden of the Zionism argument, because it also posits an external, powerful, agent. Robots here are those (primarily) Muslim actors  The Robots rhetoric demands that all and any such actions by Muslims were not carried out by humans, but by unthinking, souless, inhuman agents. In other words, they were robots who were simply programmed by malevolent external agents to hurt Muslims; these agents may or may not be the Zionists or Actual Zionists. So, the emergence of a secular Turkish republic has nothing to do with Ottoman and/or Turkish policies and failures, but with external agents who programmed robots to carry out malevolent deeds against Muslims and instill secularism in the heart of the old Caliphate. In some forms of the Zionism and Robots rhetoric, all and any actions by Muslims do indeed benefit Actual Zionists. Not only that, but the policies of all the world powers, past and present, is conducted by and for them; in such instances even these powerful world actors are merely robots programmed for Actual Zionism.

Disagreement with the Anti-Realists will bring about accusations that one is either denying the suffering of Palestinians (who are always mentioned explicitly) and Muslims the world over, or that one has no interest in their suffering (which goes against the brotherly nature of being part of the ummah), to claims that one is actually a covert Zionist and probably not even Muslim. Indeed, to disagree with the anti-realists means one is clearly supporting occupation, torture and killing of Muslim by Zionists, or other external agents, and their robots (which includes every single ruling family or political party from the Maghrib to South East Asia).

(The post has been inspired by my interactions with some Muslims on an internet forum in recent days, and also with various "political Muslims" throughout my adult life.)

Comments

[Yakoub/Julaybib]

It's amazing how so many otherwise intelligent Muslims feel uninhibited in drivelling on about Zionist conspiracies and Freemasons and all sorts of whacky nonsense, who it seems have influenced everything from the flood to 9/11. I actually use to find this quite embarrassing, until I discovered my daughter's boyfriend''s non-Muslim mother actually thinks the moon landings were faked.

Yes, her and many others believe in such utter twaddle, and lets not forget all those credulous folks of every faith and none who are convinced soap operas are real, the earth is flat and Elvis lives. Hoorah! It's not just Muslims that are mad, but the entire human race!!!

And that's good news?

Wasalaam

TMA

[Thomas Green]

As the American press has apparently never heard of Gaza the the ethnic cleansing going on there an arguement that we are not under Zionist media control is rediculous or perhaps incredulous or, probably a plain old lie.
George W. Bush, while at Yale University wasting his father's ill-gotten gains, entered a "Society" which his father also was a member of. This was the Society of the Skull and Bones. As an initiate, Bush had to take an oath of fealty to this Society, its members and to "the Jewish Nation".
Further to any discussion of Zionist influence (as to matters at least in the Middle East substitute the word "control" for influence) a peek must be made of the persons Bush has chosen to surround himself with. I'll just name two: Chernoff (head of Homeland Security!!!) and Ari Fleischer. This suffices to whet at least the minimal curiosity about who really owns and operates the USA.

[thabet]

There's a difference between saying "American media is biased towards Israel", or "American foreign policy favours Israel", and saying "Zionists control the world". The last statement, from an Islamic pov, is close to disbelief.

[bdr]

So where does this place 9/11 conspiracy theorists?

[eteraz]

while i have no idea what you just said, i will defend to death your right to say it

[thabet]

Don't worry. Neither do I.