Rating: 
Summary: Finally, Someone on the Left Gets it Right.
Review: I am on the Left of the American political spectrum, an unrepentant liberal. I am also an admirer of Howard Dean, both before and after the Democratic primary, but I agree with Paul Berman that President Bush is absolutely correct about the seriousness of the terrorist threat -- and he is right to identify a key source of that threat with all fundamentalisms and fanaticisms, political or religious, wherever they arise. In recent years, the threat has come primarily from Islamic fundamentalists, but we have our share of fanatics as well.
Neither one of us is a great admirer of all aspects of the President's policies, yet we cannot claim that Mr. Bush is wrong about EVERYTHING, only some things. He may be wrong about tax cuts, perhaps, but he sure is right about the gravity of the terrorist menace.
This is a well-written and shrewd assessment of Mr. Bush and the problem of terrorism -- which should be required reading for liberals, who are too often blinded by considerations of "political correctness" and fail to admit what is staring them in the face: Terrorism in our world is evil and it is coming, primarily, from a small number of people in the world who are unwilling to compromise.
Terrorism will require drastic action from the free world to crush it; and it will not be a pleasant or fun experience waging this war upon international terror that is hurting everyone, including many good and decent Muslims who also wish for peace for their children -- a war in which intelligence services will play a crucial role and in which, right-wingers should note this, civil liberties must be protected.
Berman's recent book about the intellectual legacy of the sixties and even his introduction years ago to the collection of materials on the debate over political correctness with respect to the academic curriculum, "Debating P.C.," are excellent too.
My advice: Read everything by this guy.
Rating:
Summary: The Most Important Book of the Year
Review: I am serious. This is in my opinion the most important book I have read in a long, long time. Berman's book examines the symmetries between the World War II fascists and our present day threat: middle eastern totalitarian regimes. Enlightening and well researched. There are important comments on Islamic religious scholars. A must read.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliantly Done
Review: In a world where college students unflinchingly were Che Guevara shirts, with no knowledge of the atrocities he committed, where Noam Chomsky and left-wing socialists "justify" terrorism as a measured response to Western "oppression," it's about time that someone denounced the insanity. Luckily for humanity, Paul Berman has done that in his book "Terror and Liberalism." Besides presenting a brilliant attack on the pretentious left-wing crowd, Berman provocatively likens Islamism to Nazism and communism, in that it is a violent reaction to Western idealism and modernism. "Thinkers" like Chomsky would have you believe that Western culture, with its embrace of individualism and sweeping freedom, deserves such an attack, that civil rights and liberties merit a radical's killing of nearly 3,000 people. Berman rallies agains this viewpoint, and condemns Islamism for what it is: an irrational, incensed reaction to a system that threatens a series antiquated codes posing as "laws" and "customs." Chomsky and his politically correct brethren, on the other hand, would have you believe that relegating women to sub-human status, slaughtering thousands of innocent civlians, and transforming democracy into theocracy is a defensible way of life. No victory will come out of the struggle with Islamism if we continue to cowtow to mystical, left-wing ideas of "culture" and our own so-called "oppression" of the world; worship at the altars of Chomsky, Guevara, and Marx, and the totalitarians they condone, will only lead to greater strife and misery, as Berman implies.
Rating: 
Summary: Pure screed, no argument
Review: It is all too obvious: Berman tags Muslim fundamentalist movements as "Communist" and "Nazi" and uses that to justify the brutal invasion and occupation of defenseless countries like Afganistan and Iraq.
While Saddam's regime in Iraq was certainly brutal, it was not nearly as brutal as the USA/UN sponsored sanctions regime or the two Bushes' criminal wars. Berman does not once mention either the sanctions or the Allied war crimes in Iraq. The war, as predicted, has fueled anti-Americanism and bolstered fundamentalist movements, and terrorist attacks against United States citizens are at a 20-year high. So then, why does Berman ignore the facts, that the Iraq War is bad for the Iraqis, and bad for the Americans? Simply because the facts point in the wrong direction. So he prefers to confine himself to the lofty areas of intellectual thought, and support war based on the shortcomings of leading Arab scholars.
But ignoring the facts still is not enough, Berman needs to rely on unnamed sources (there are no footnotes) and distort the arguments of others to support his cause. His discussion of the Israel-Palestine conflict is heavily biased in favour of Israel and relies on slight-of-hand and outright deception. He claims that Arafat terminated negotiations, but it was in fact Barak (in Taba 2001). Like every pro-war intellectual he slanders Chomsky by claiming that Chomsky ignores the evils of 9/11, Milosevic, Osama bin Laden, and Saddam Hussein. Whereas in fact Chomsky has repeatedly condemned the 9/11 attacks, Milosevic, bin Laden and Saddam. He also completely misrepresents the writings of Saramago and Breytenbach, and basically anyone he quotes in this book.
If you really want to know the real story of the Iraq War, look up Tariq Ali's book. This one is just a waste of money.
Rating:
Summary: Qutb? How do you say that in English?
Review: Of the customer reviews I have read thus far on this little gem, I tend to agree. This is a worthwhile read. Berman cites the notion that the 20th century began in 1914 and ended in 1989. He disagrees with the notion and goes on the assert that the 20th century continues unabated. I interpret the larger part of his point to be that humankind continues to hanker after the "final solution", and that the more massive the notion and the more all-inclusive it may be, the better. Marxist-Leninist communism, Hitler-Mussolini-Franco fascism have bit the dust and now Islamism as interpreted by Sayyid Qutb represents the final, final solution solution. I am reminded of the only memorable and useful remark the Nazi Goebbels ever made, "Every time I hear the word "culture", I instinctly reach for my pistol." Cynical though it may be, he has a good point. Do avail yourself of this slender book. It is a worthwhile read and may provoke genuine serious thought.
Rating: 
Summary: Good work, lousy reasoning, flawed execution
Review: Okay, let me get this straight. We're right to fight against Islam, just not the way we're doing it? We should reason with them while we kill them? They're beyond reason and want us dead, but we should at least articulate our message? This is a good book, in that it examines Islamofascism and realizes that something has to be done about it. But it doesn't go far enough out of its inordinate dislike of the Bush Administration. The author seems to be saying that we at least need someone more palatable to liberals to make the case that this war on Terrorism needs to be fought. How noble. I can see his point, but I disagree. The hard left will always be opposed to war, and much of this book's reasoning seems to be an intellectual way to get the left on board. I.E. We can support the war as long as "we're waging it," that is, we being liberalism. But he spends part of the book showing how liberals are incapable of recognizing threats, much less responding to them. Lots of luck. I doubt there is a liberal alive who could have accomplished the defeat of Iraq the way George W. Bush has, with as little loss of life on our side. Let me put it this way, this book has a rather petty point. As far as the Islamic world is concerned, I don't care if they're mad at us. I want them to fear us. Then maybe they'll leave us alone.
Rating:
Summary: Terror and Liberalism
Review: Paul Berman is a cultural critic on the left of the political spectrum. In his "Terror and Liberalism" he presents a cogent argument as to why liberal democracies need to fight Islamic terrorism more with arguments than swords. Human rights, women's rights, separation of church and state, a politics against racism and anti-semitism, a politics to fight oppression and poverty, a strong advocacy of freedom--these are the weapons (i.e., the liberal faith) needed to defeat totalitarianism whether from the right or the left. He calls this a "new radicalism." This is a worthy cause and it is stated in limpid prose. Unfortunately, he says little about internal societal changes that need redressing and for which Western culture is criticized: rampant technology at odds with human values, pornography, militarism, racism, crass materialism, unilateralism, political corruption, etc. In short, he gives a masterful analysis regarding America's role in the international arena, but says little about America's need to put its own house in order. We need to be respected around the world, not only for our military power, but also for our ethical and moral values, including those related to liberalism. We should not be seen by the world as a barbaric nation, yet, for example, our continued use of capital punishment for murder smacks of the Middle Ages. Even our neighbors to the north, Canada, have moved beyond that antiquated moral position. In any case "Terror and Liberalism" is a well-written, thought-provoking book and well worth the time it takes to read it.
Rating:
Summary: How to fight terrorism and remain on the left
Review: Paul Berman is a gift to those liberals like me who are opposed to the war in Iraq, yet know that it has to potential to be a great event and blessing for the people of Iraq and the Middle East. Throughout the book Mr. Berman, a liberal who does not like George W. Bush at all, details the history of caring, good, intelligent men and women, who, in their desire to oppose war have actually allowed evil dictators and countries to gain power and spread their evil to other countries. -Those on the left who supported Stalin until he finally turned on them.
-The Socialists in France who tried to ignore Hitler and the evil growing in Germany
- Those who now oppose war in Iraq Berman does not say that opposing war in Iraq is a bad thing. Instead, he feels that the energy used to opposed the war should instead be used to support the people of Iraq and helping them spread liberal democracy across the Middle East. I am no fan of the Bush administration, and I think its attempt at diplomacy was embarrassing and will have negative repercussions in the future. Removing Saddam Hussein will benefit the entire World, but through shear incompetence and inability to articualte a coherent message, Bush managed to turn almost everyone against the idea. A sad time in history. Highly Recommended!
Rating:
Summary: Thoughtful Examination of Contemporary Islamic Terrorism!
Review: Paul Berman is what one could fairly describe as a thinking man's pundit, unafraid of alienating either his more sympathetic supporters from the left, and sometimes drawing praise and agreement from the conservative right. The author of many provocative and thought-inspiring essays, Berman found himself surprised and befuddled by the turn of events on 911, which he watched with dismay from his perch on his apartment house roof in Manhattan. Quite quickly he became much more aware of the radical threats pulsing through the city as, for example, a Yemeni cleric was indicted and subsequently convicted of laundering and forwarded tens of millions of dollars to Al Quaida. In "Terror And Liberalism " he turns his penetrating wit and intellectual powers to a consideration of the nature of, and threats emanating from, what he has come to describe as "Islamic Totalitarianism" Far from flying with the angels of either the right or the left, Berman indicates understanding the rise of such radical organizations requires abandoning these kinds of simple dichotomous paradigms, and in examining the ways in which the terrorism of the 21st century finds its roots in the violent and reactionary movements of the 20th century. Berman shows how the recent episodes of terror committed by such Islamic groups finds its origins in a continuation of the historical struggle between reactionary fascist and totalitarian groups such as the Nazis on the one hand, and the Soviet, Chinese and Cuban communists on the other against the entrenched liberal cultures of the Western democracies. Seen in this perspective, self-described Islamic fundamentalist groups like Al Quaida and Hamas are less the exclusively pure religious rejections of the Christian West as they are a violent and ultimately secular ideology camping under the tent of a highly bastardized Islamic fundamentalism that finds its rage and purpose by rebelling against what they see as the "hideous schizophrenia" of modern society. This is all documented in a relatively obscure set of voluminous texts written by Egyptian scholar and intellectual Sayyid Qutb and entitled "In The Shade of the Qur'an", which Berman believes provides the theoretical underpinnings of the Islamic totalitarian movements now assailing the West.
So, while Berman admits the philosophical musings of Outb to be sophisticated, intellectually profound, heartfelt and deeply nuanced, he also finds reason to criticize the more radical interpretation which spokespersons for radical Muslim fundamentalism such as Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden approach the kind of crypto-fascist critique of post-modern Western societies, and indeed now constitute the same sort of grave threat to the continuation of our culture. Arguing quite persuasively, Berman posits that the radical forms of Islamism and Baathism (which is the variation of Islamic thought that ideologically propels Saddam Hussein's former ruling party) stem from the same kind of reactionary counter-revolution against the rising forces of liberalism that a century ago created the conditions for the First World War. Therefore, he argues, we must marshal our resources to combat this ideological challenge that such violent ideologies arising within the Muslim world today.
This makes great sense in trying to piece together a workable strategy for working through the issues and concerns being raised by our interventions in Afghanistan and in Iraq, and will give rise, Berman believes, to a more sophisticated and comprehensive world view than those offered in the overly simplistic liberal or conservative frames of reference in current vogue. He suggest perhaps amore enlightened liberalism will recognize, just as FDR did at the outset of World War Two, that there is great merit in rising to the international challenge and combating the tyrannical forces of radical Islamic totalitarianism. This is a terrific book, and one that will stretch and prod those old brain cells into active work. Enjoy!
Rating:
Summary: The naked truth about fundamentalist terrorism...
Review: Paul Berman's "Terror and Liberalism" is an excellent attempt at finding common ground between America's political Left and Right, at least when it comes to the current "War on Terror." Berman painstakingly shows Islamic fundamentalism for what it is, a mass political movement, actually the combining of two mass political movements - pan-Arabism (ie. the Baath party) and pan-Islamacism (ie. al Qaeda and the Islamic Jihad) that are both devoted to violence and diametrically opposed to the Western Liberal tradition. Berman also argues that the Left in America has as much at stake in the "War on Terror" as do those on the Right. Paul Berman's historical research is excellent, following the path of the modern pan-Islamic movement to its roots with Sayyid Qutb (ku-tab) author of "In the Shade of the Qur'an," "Social Justice in Islam" and other works. Qutb attended the Colorado State College of Education in the late 1940's and earned a Masters Degree, but came away thoroughly disgusted with what he saw as "the barbarous West." He was especially disgusted by what the West hailed as "the emancipation of women" and "sexual liberation." At the same time that pan-Islamacism was growing, pan-Arabism was coming into political prominence behind such figures as Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt. Though the differences between the two camps were subtle - pan-Arabists wanted a return of the old Ottoman Empire, while pan-Islamacists envisioned a world under shariah (the legal code of Islam) - they were also volatile. Berman describes the differences between the two groups as akin to the differences between the Italian fascists under Mussolini who sought to rebuild the Roman Empire and the German Nazis who sought a return to the Roman Empire in a Germanic form. Indeed the Arab world sided with the Axis powers during World War II, which led to England and the U.S. setting up the state of Israel in what was then the Palestine territories. In 1966 shortly after Colonel Nasser took power in Egypt, several attempts were made on his life. He blamed them on his alienating Qutb's group, the Islamic Brotherhood and had Sayyid Qutb hung in retribution. Still, despite their differences, the two factions have been bound by a hatred of Israel and the West that ignites their common passions. After delving into the history of pan-Arabism and pan-Islam, Berman takes on what he sees as a misguided view among many Western Leftists like Noam Chomsky, who've rationalized terrorism as the only possible response to Western oppression by less technologically advanced nations. People like Ramsey Clark and Noam Chomsky have defined Islamic fundamentalist terrorism as an appropriate response by a smaller opponent to a bully, while Berman sees it as a cataclysmic struggle between two conflicting ideologies, one rooted in individual liberty, the separation of Church and State, a love of technology and women's suffrage and the other one diametrically opposed to all of these things on virtually every level. "Terror and Liberalism" is an excellent book that not only gives the reader a broader understanding of the roots of fundamentalist Islam, but an insight into why so many on the American Left reflexively support any movement willing to take on the bully they see as America's "Military-Industrial Complex," and why that view is not only wrong-headed, but dangerous as well.
|
