Michael Cook (1) (1940–)

Despite the fact that Cook does an exellent job of taking us through all of the myriad cultures of the world, and asking what happened there and why (much of the time the answer is 'geography'), I did not like this book. I did like his summary of one Arab ethnographer's reasoning behind differences in peoples: the dumb-blonde theory (northern lattitudes produce "blonde and stupid" people while southern lattitude light levels produce "black and foolish" peoples, explaining why peoples from show more the middle range lattitudes have moderate skin tones and the sciences.
I particularly disliked his use of Britain as a model country: why not one of the Scandinavian island nations, which by most measures does even better for lawfullness, stable government and economic well-being?

Turns out that Cook, like Armstrong, ( please read also: [b:Islam: A Short History|27306|Islam A Short History|Karen Armstrong|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1403181902s/27306.jpg|131885]
by Karen Armstrong ) is a scholar of Islamic history in particular. show less

Islam’s struggle with modernity. This is a comparative analysis of Islam, Hinduism and Catholicism and their role in politics. What is the reason for revival of fundamentalism in Islam? To answer this question he compares and contrasts with Hinduism and Catholicism in India and Latin America. All three of them third world cases. Arab world shares many similar problems with the other third world countries in Asia, Latin America and also Africa. But only in the Islamic world has religious show more fundamentalism become such a strong political contender. Rise of such fundamentalism didn’t happen in any other third world nations. Latin America with its strong anti – U.S element saw liberation theology with its Marxist and catholic syncretism. In India, there has been a rise of Hindu nationalism - a chauvinistic ethno-cultural nationalism. His answer to this it as it seems to me is that there might be many geopolitical reasons but there are religious reasons too which are a unique heritage of Islam that make it such a strong political force.

This book is structured into three parts.

Part one deals with identity as provided by a religion. Only in Islam is there a strong sense of a Muslim identity. An international Muslim solidarity that transcends any other nationalistic or ethnical boundaries. In Hindu case especially there is no such thing as a Hindu religious identity. Nationalistic organisations like RSS are trying to create a minimal form of Hinduism that can encompass everyone. With such diversification of sects and beliefs in Hinduism, the only way they can do this is by rallying against the common enemy – Muslims. An Aryan identity is one genuine possibility in the Hindu case, but it ends up alienating most of the population as only the twice – born are Aryans.
Part two deals with the values associated with the religion in the areas of Law, warfare and politics. While it is in the Hindu case that the religion is the most pervasive in all aspects of the daily life, the complete inegalitarian nature of a Hindu society and the archaic nature of its mainstream values compared to the modern western values make Hindu fundamentalism a political suicide. Whereas in the Islamic case, there is a strong overlap between its values and the modern values.
The third part deals with fundamentalism. All three cases are susceptible to fundamentalism but only in the Islamic case has it taken a root.

His ultimate conclusion is that the Islamic heritage has a lot to offer for the modern politics that no other religion can. One being their egalitarian heritage (even though the equality was never extended to women and infidels). The other being the close relation between politics and religion in Islam since its conception. The idea of warfare against infidels being endorsed by the religion also makes it a tempting political choice.

This is written by a historian and so is more of a historical analysis than a political one. But still provides a lot of insights into the case. Most of the Arab nations like the rest of the third world had strong communist parties, women’s rights movements etc. Marxism, Fascism, and the other kinds of nationalisms like that of Nasser have given them a sense of sovereignty, a sense of defying the west. It’s no coincidence that the rise of Islamism has taken steam after the collapse of Marxism. So perhaps the rise of a new ideology, preferably an indigenous one will once again mark the end of fundamentalism. show less

Originally published in Oxford's "Past Masters" series, it was re-issued as part of the successful "Very Short Introduction" series, in which form it quickly disappeared from circulation. Perhaps it was felt that a book titled "Muhammad" should be more focused on the titular persona and less on the problem of sources. But from Cook's perspective this is nearly unavoidable. "The usual practice is to accept whatever in the sources we lack specific reason to reject," he says. Cook would like to show more suggest the alternative, that "we are nearer the mark in rejecting whatever we do not have specific reason to accept." Lately the scholarly pendulum has swung back a ways from this radical skepticism; it will be interesting to see what sort of stance is taken by the replacement Very Short Introduction volume (by Jonathan A.C. Brown) when it is published in April 2011.

Tarif Khalidi says that Cook's tone in this volume is "supercilious," but I for one would love to see more work on religious origins that combines deep knowledge of the relevant sources with rigorous respect of the limits of our knowledge. A fine introduction to the problem of Islam's origins. show less

Despite the fact that Cook does an exellent job of taking us through all of the myriad cultures of the world, and asking what happened there and why (much of the time the answer is 'geography'), I did not like this book. I did like his summary of one Arab ethnographer's reasoning behind differences in peoples: the dumb-blonde theory (northern lattitudes produce "blonde and stupid" people while southern lattitude light levels produce "black and foolish" peoples, explaining why peoples from show more the middle range lattitudes have moderate skin tones and the sciences.
I particularly disliked his use of Britain as a model country: why not one of the Scandinavian island nations, which by most measures does even better for lawfullness, stable government and economic well-being?

Turns out that Cook, like Armstrong, ( please read also: [b:Islam: A Short History|27306|Islam A Short History|Karen Armstrong|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1403181902s/27306.jpg|131885]
by Karen Armstrong ) is a scholar of Islamic history in particular. show less