I know you edited it but Islam isn't the reason that Pakistan isn't growing. A country like UAE is the epitome of growth. Pakistan won't grow because of conservatives. The country is filled with Wahabi's. Wahabi's give the religion a bad name. Hell, they even hate other Muslims like there's no tomorrow. Also, I remember a great post by a Pakastani on this board. He cited education as the problem. They made Urdu the national language and don't teach English like they should. I think this assertion is spot on.
Would there have been any growth without oil? So it's not Islam, but a particular brand of Islam that is the problem. Isn't it a problem, though, that it is still a brand of Islam and as such, they move the goalposts for Islam as a whole? I remember that Mathloom posted a few times that almost all Islamic literature is "sponsored" by Saudis (who are Wahhabis/Salafis).
Every religion has bad examples or apples. Wahabi's reflect Islam in the most backward way. That's for sure. Not allowing women to drive in Saudi is an easy example to cite. Different people use different texts. I grew up in a Shia (Twelvers) household. Shia's follow the texts of the Prophet and his lineage (12 Imams). Wahabi's will say that there is no lineage...you should see what they have done to the grave (Jannatul Baqi) of Fatima, the only daughter of the Prophet...but that's another discussion. When a question arises concerning Fikh (jurisprudence), they're supposed to rely on the teachings of their Ayatollah (Sistani, Khamenei, etc).
* By sheer quantity, most Islamic literature is Wahabi/Salafi. They are just constantly producing materials to give away for free, and I'm not even including the Qurans, which are also almost always biased, via "mini characters", towards the views of Wahhabis and Salafis. I never knew how significant those minicharacters were until I realized they just so happen to change the meanings of words in critical parts of the Quran. The original Quran did not have any of these characters, nor does the oldest copy we know of. Wahabist is not a brand of Islam unless you ask someone from the same school of thought (Wahabism is not a school of thought). To everyone else, they're basically a deviation from Islam, because they believe in a quasi-prophet called Abdul Wahhab to whom they attributes super human characteristics and qualities, and they are virtually identical (religiously and culturally) to typical Arabs the day before Muhammad announced his prophethood. Forcing women to stay home as much as possible, male dominance, separation of genders, focus on trvial things such as alcohol and pork, etc. I recommend reading about Arabs before Islam, you'll find that their behavior is mimicked in the Gulf Arab countries today perfectly. They share very few principles with the original Muslims. Keep in mind that the region was in human rights constant regression, so in fact what we refer to as "conservative" Islamic rules today were in fact progressive back then and aimed at increasing rights, though the movement did not apply to all forms of human rights as we know them today. In that context, Muhammad increased the rights of women, non-Muslims, foreigners, deceased, orphans, businesses, etc from what they were before he announced his prophethood. The point was to establish absolute principles which engender eternal progress, beginning with the socio-political movements he supported and created. vs Wahhabists operate in exactly the opposite way, which makes it difficult to define them as traditional Muslims. They are opposite because they establish the final stage of progress, and couple it with eternal morphing of principles (must have long beard, principle may change though). They are deviants from the principle form of Islam IMO, and the only reason this group of people has grown is that the group has a lot of money and was able to acquire power by forging alliances with enemies of enemies, and this results in media interest. In fact, you'll find that they have a lot in common with nazis, just replace the supreme race with the supreme religion. Until the most powerful countries stop lining the pockets of wahabists and salafis, we're going to have to keep watching them grow out of ME and towards the West.
That is scary. I actually agree with that. But that makes the fact that they produce most Islamic literature even scarier.
Don't you see it as a pretty strong argument though that lineage means nothing, especially in light of the fact that the Quran is constantly insisting that Muhammad is just a man? What exactly is the significance of the prophet's genetic background?
Really insightful posts on this topic as usual, Mathloom. Having read this post and the one of yours above it could you give some additional insight as to why more is not made of the distinctions you've noted between Islam (Muslims) and Wahaabists? Is this the media being lazy and disingenuous or is there more to it? I lived next door to a Muslim family for over a decade and still keep in contact today. My family moved in next to them when I was 10 years old and I didn't even know what a Muslim or Islam was at the time, but they were always happy to tell me about their religion, show me their Qur'an, etc. You remind me of that family.
I'd say it's probably because they probably have the most ardent followers, and because they're radical, so they naturally appeal. It's the same reason that most Christian literature seems to be written by millenial groups, they have a strong and devoted following willing to do whatever it takes to spread their message, plus a radical message (hate liberals, hate America, hate the Jews etc.) resonates with a troubled person more than a mainstream message.
