Decolonising Our Vision

We have to be able to discuss our issues, discuss our governments, you know, our governmental structures, our economic models, our political theories, and so on. We have to be able to discuss all of that without any reference to the West, without any reference to their paradigms, to their definitions, to their labels, and their categories, and so forth. For some reason, this seems a lot harder than it than it should be. Because look at look at Syria, for example. Everyone is saying, everyone is asking, is the government going to be Islamic or is it going to be secular?

Look. This dichotomy is itself a western dichotomy. It has nothing to do with us. This has nothing to do with the Muslims. Has nothing to do with Islam.

This theocracy versus secularism binary. This is based exclusively on on Europe's dysfunctional history. It's got nothing to do with us. It's not informative for the Muslim world. There's no reason at all why we should apply their reductive terms to our societies.

They don't fit. I mean, are actual historical reasons for in the West why they created this dichotomy. First, they were ruled by the church even though Christianity has no laws and Christianity doesn't provide a framework for managing society, for administration and so forth. Meaning, when they were ruled by the church they were ruled by an authoritarian institution that claimed divine right. So they eventually rejected that and then they created what they called secular government.

Those secular governments were also authoritarian and they were also treated as if they're sacred until now. But they're not the church. So, in other words, they went in the West, in Europe, they went from unqualified rulers with religious authority who were making up laws from their own imagination. They went from that to then having unqualified rulers making up laws from their own imagination with secular state authority. So I mean really the whole thing is a bit of a fraud anyway.

The concept is that you can either have a government that's based on rules that are derived from religious law, or you can have rules that are man made law. You can either have a government where the ruler is regarded as a representative of God, this is their concept, or a government where the ruler is a representative of the nation state. You know, representative of the people or what have you. That's the idea. And this is an idea that has nothing to do with us.

This has nothing to do with the Islamic Muslims or anything. Our approach to governance is neither theocratic nor secular by Western definitions. We approach governance according to our principles as Muslims, according to our values as Muslims, according to our priorities as Muslims, our understanding of right and wrong, and so on. That's how we approach government. We don't have a fixed system or a fixed governmental model.

We can apply our approach to any model, to any system according to whatever best suits the needs of our societies. That's how it's supposed to work. When you start trying to impose western misunderstandings, then you complicate and confuse what should otherwise be a perfectly organic approach. You know, the so called Islamists are among the worst offenders in this regard, in my opinion. They have a very westernized, you know, it's counterintuitive for people to hear this, but they have a very westernized colonized mentality.

A colonized westernized misunderstanding about government in Islam. Because they have bought into this whole secular theocratic dichotomy. So for instance, they want Julani in Syria to declare that Syria is gonna be an Islamic state or what have you. And they're gonna object to it if he calls say Syria secular. But none of this means anything in reality.

What you're going to have in Syria is a government which is comprised of religious Muslims who care about Islam and who care about the people of Syria. Their decisions and their policies will be based upon their religious morality, their religious principles, and their religious duty to secure the general welfare for the population. That is an Islamic government, if you need to call it that. With regards to Sharia, I'm sure that it will probably be enshrined in Syria as the foundation of the law, just as it is in most Muslim countries. But with relatively flexible implementation.

Again, that will be according to what suits the needs and the interests of the society, and that's the way it's supposed to be. You really need to get out of your head all of these western ideas about what Islamic government is and what Islamic government isn't. A lot of these jihadis and these Islamist types are really basically Muslim orientalists Who think Muslim countries are supposed to be like some kind of a Rudyard Kipling novel or something. Like Julani is supposed to have a harem and supposed to be chopping heads off in the public square. That the Quran is supposed to be blasting from loudspeakers twenty four seven.

It's supposed to throw people in jail if they don't attend the congregational salah in the masjid. This is this is their concept. But I'm sorry, this is a very western in fact, it's a it's a western Islamophobe's fantasy. Their fantasy idea about what Muslim society is like. This is not what Syria is gonna be.

And it's not what it should be. I'm sure according to the western definitions, the western definitions that are embraced by the Islamists, according to those definitions, Syria will probably be secular. Because it's not going to be their weird fantasy version of Islamic government. But according to any intelligent Muslim with a decolonized understanding, the government in Syria will be Islamic. If you understand it according to actual fiqh.

I mean, will be Sharia and there will be man made legislation. Just as there always has been through the entirety of our history. I've said it so many times. There is no divinely mandated governmental system in Islam. There are principles and there are divinely mandated, a small set of divinely mandated rules that pertain to governance.

And then we have now the obviously the historical precedence of how Muslims throughout history have actualized those rules and have actualized those principles in terms of how they governed. But implementation and enforcement of rules always comes down to the discretion of the rulers in accordance with the conditions of the society. So the manifestation of the rules in a society may vary. But that doesn't change the Islamic categorization of the government any more than your own categorization as a Muslim, as an individual Muslim. That doesn't change when the manifestation of the rules of Islam in your own life and in your own behavior might vary.

You know, sometimes you're more strict and you're more outwardly apparent in your practice than you are at other times, but you're always Muslim. It's the same with our governments. So, example, maybe you if you're living in the West, for example, you maybe have a job or even if you don't live in the West, you have a job and you pray only during scheduled break times. Okay. That is within the period of the salah, but you don't fully write at the time when the Adhan calls when you're at work.

You you you schedule that according to your break times. Okay. Does that mean you're secular? Or you're just doing your best as a Muslim to comply with your religion while also operating in the real world? Well, the same applies to the Muslims who administer the affairs of our states.

And this is exactly what Islam calls us to do, and exactly what Islam calls them to do. And everyone has always understood that in the Muslim world. But this is just one example of how we impose Western confusion on our own societies and on on our own concepts. The same happens in the economic sphere, you know. We inevitably talk about our economic models in terms of Western theories.

Western approaches. Like, do we want capitalism or do we want socialism or do we want communism or what have you. I'm saying we have no need for any of these labels. You know, they give you a category and then you're supposed to conform with that category with everything, all the specificities of that category. Instead of just taking a realistic approach to your own country's situation, adapting to your conditions and managing your economy according to the realities that you're dealing with, the realities of your society.

Because look, this is actually what everyone does. This is what every country does, what every economy does. There is no economic model followed by any state that actually conforms with the strict orthodox definitions of that model. There are free market aspects, there are socialist aspects, command economy aspects, price controls, etcetera etcetera. But the West is obsessed with labels.

They're obsessed with categorization. So no matter what any government implements, they will assign a label to it. And they'll use those labels to either demonize you or praise you. Because the fact of the matter is the West has only ever had one approach to economics. No matter what other names they came up with, all they ever believed in was feudalism, slavery, exploitation, pillage, looting, and extortion.

All they ever had was the belief that the poor have too much money and the rich have too little money. So we need to stop thinking in their terms about anything and everything. They're just incredibly confused and incredibly dishonest and their history and experience is not our history and experience. And their solutions to their problems have not solved their problems. So they most certainly will not solve ours.

I mean, how are you even gonna take any sort of advice from the very people and from the very systems that have been oppressing and have been exploiting you for centuries. No. We have to do what makes sense for ourselves, not theoretically, but realistically. And we're living at a time when this can be done. We're living at a time when the colonizing nations are getting frail.

They're getting old. And they've developed dementia. So for example, again, with Syria. All the countries in the region, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, Jordan, everyone is coming together for Syria. Everyone is coming together to help establish that new government and to try to stabilize that country.

Money is pouring in. Aid is pouring in. Consultations are taking place between all of the higher ups in in the governments. This is exactly what I've been talking about. The creation of regional cohesion, regional cooperation, and a and a a a shared sphere of influence between the GCC and Turkey.

The gradual creation of a soft empire spanning the whole Mediterranean. Well, lucky we're taking the region back. And this includes the development of new political and economic models, indigenous to us. I mean, did you see the Germans? When they visited Syria the other day, the woman said, we're not gonna give our money.

We're not gonna provide money. We're not gonna fund the Islamization of Syria. Syria is almost 90% Muslim, you delusional woman. Nobody needs your money. In fact, your statement says it all.

You know? That statement says it all. Your money always comes with social and cultural and political conditions. You never give money except to buy sovereignty. Your money is always a bribe.

Nobody wants your money. I think that what's probably going to happen in Gaza is going to be similar to Syria. Gaza and the West Bank, a Palestinian state, is going to be similar to the Syrian situation. There's gonna be combined coordinated economic and political control between Turkey and the GCC. All the way from Morocco to Turkey.

The whole corridor along the Mediterranean. In fact, in sha Allah, it's gonna also include the Red Sea as well. This is all coming together in our lifetime, and it's gonna include a Palestinian state. And yes, that corridor that corridor of influence, that corridor of control ultimately is going to absorb Israel too. But what they're doing right now is just outflanking Israel, shoring up control of the surrounding states and the trade routes, While Israel just continues to bleed out their economy, bleed out their industry, bleed out their own credibility on the world stage, their own sources of external support and so on, and and continuing to hollow out their own population.

The Israelis are surely aware of what's happening and they're desperate to try to secure some leverage for themselves and that's probably why they've seized those water resources, those water supplies in Syria. But in my opinion, they're playing an old version of the game. They don't understand the rules of the game being played in 2024. The Zionists and the Neocons are out of date and out of touch. In my opinion, and I've said this many times before, the a national OCGFC are the ascendant, unipolar private sector superpower, not the nationalistic OCGFC, who are basically the military industrial complex of The United States, and they're politically represented by the neocons, and by the Zionists.

The Zionists are sort of a sub brand of the neo cons. But the a national OCGFC, which means the owners and controllers of global financialized capital, whose interests are not exclusively tied to the American economy. The a national OCGFC are interested in stabilizing the Middle East, working alongside BRICS. They're working together with BRICS. And that means that they're interested in diffusing Zionism.

They're interested in cutting Israel loose from The United States, and The United States loose from Israel. In my opinion, that was the whole motive behind the Abraham Accords to begin with. That's the whole motive behind the western push for normalization. Basically, facilitate the breakup of America from its crazy girlfriend. Because it's a tricky business, you know, to extract yourself from a toxic relationship with a crazy person.

And the safest way to do that is to set that crazy person up with someone else, you know. Palm her off on someone else to buy her Gucci handbags, so she won't make problems for you. I think that's what normalization is, in my opinion. It's a transfer of Israeli dependency from America and the military industrial complex over to the Arabs. That's what normalization actually means.

With what's coming together in the region, the soft empire that they're building, stretching all the way across North Africa, all the way to Turkey, this is gonna be a juggernaut. And Israel will be absorbed. It's inevitable. I mean, okay, look at the water resources in Syria. Extraction of water from Syria is eventually gonna have to be negotiated.

You can't just take it. Okay? Even if even if you don't negotiate it, which isn't really realistic. But even if it isn't, and Israel just steals the water. Even in that case, look, the water management company for Israel is called Mecorot, and it's currently state owned, but it's on track to privatization, which means that the water management of Israel or the water management company of Israel is gonna belong to whoever invests in it and who buys shares in it, which means it can easily become a Dubai company or a Saudi company.

It could even become a Syrian company. You see? Territorial conquest is rendered irrelevant in the era of economic conquest. And after the conflict ends, Israel is gonna become a neoliberal auction block. Everything is gonna be privatized.

Everything is gonna be for sale. There are already plans to privatize several key state owned sectors in Israel. The Israeli Electric Corporation, Mecavoth, the water management company, Israeli Israel Railways, Israel Aerospace Industries, even Israel Military Industries, not to mention the ports. Okay. The GCC, Turkey, the a national OC GFC are gonna be able to basically buy the whole state.

Okay. So what political model is that? What economic model is that? This is a kind of collective sovereignty being built. Political and economic coordination that's that's taking place between all of these countries.

Solidarity and power sharing. It's not isolationist per se because there is cooperation with foreigners, there is cooperation with multinationals, cooperation with BlackRock, etcetera. They are utilizing some elements of the neoliberal formula, you know, even even some elements from the formula of disaster capitalism and the shock doctrine that was discussed by Naomi Klein. But they're flipping the script on it, just like the GCC did with Egypt. You know, The US forced IMF reforms on Egypt with the intention of being able to take over Egypt.

But instead, the GCC took over Egypt. The US and Israel wanted the the war in Syria to go on indefinitely with the intention of being able to take over economically, take over Syria economically. But the GCC in Turkey took over. So they're flipping the script on them. All the foreign troops are being kicked out of the Sahel, out of Mali, out of Burkina Faso, out of Niger, out of Senegal, out of Chad.

You know, right now Turkey is mediating a resolution, in sha'Allah, to the Sudan conflict. I'm personally confident that The Gulf and that Turkey will reach an understanding about Libya as well. So that means that this entire region in Africa is also going to be incorporated into the Muslim soft empire, working together with BRICS, particularly working with Russia and working with China. And as for The US, well, in my opinion, they're withdrawing. They're withdrawing from the world, and the military industrial complex is going to be focusing on conflict in Europe.

Because frankly western populations have failed to keep themselves relevant because they're not even reproducing. The most that they can do to try to keep their economy moving is to try to bring in immigrants. But the anti immigration sentiments that are being pushed by people like Trump and people like Elon Musk, in my opinion, are actually part and parcel of the a national OCGFC's desire to let the West go extinct and to keep the global South populations in the global South. So that they can be workers there, they can be consumers there, you know. Even this policy of trying to bring in tech professionals from India and from China with the h one b visa program, that doesn't really contradict this.

Because, you know, you don't want your own people to have those tech skills. You don't want your own people to have those skills. You want your own people to do low skilled labor. Because why would you invest in in in a population that's going extinct? And improving technology just means AI and robotics anyway, which just makes more people superfluous.

So the American empire is receding, in my opinion. And as for Iran, well, you know, they have traditionally played along with the neocons. They played along with the Zionists. They played along with the colonizers. And they kept up this pretense of conflict.

But now, BRICS and the a national OCGFC are offering them a better future. And the neocons in order to stay alive, the Zionists in order to stay alive have no ideas except to have a war with Iran. So these are their choices. This is Iran's choices. Either you accept to cooperate with the region, which means to reduce your influence and give up your proxies and give up your militias and so forth.

But you can, in exchange for that, enjoy prosperity in your country or you can continue to play along with Washington and see your country go up in flames. So it's not a particularly difficult choice for Iran. So these are the things that are actually happening in the world, in our region. This is the political and economic situation or the political and economic reality that's taking shape. It isn't secular, it isn't theocratic, it isn't capitalist, it isn't socialist, it isn't any theory or any moral that the West might come up with.

It just is what it is. And what form of government eventually takes shape in Syria, or in Lebanon, or Palestinian state, or in Libya, or in Sudan, and so on. Whatever form of government they establish in those countries, in my opinion, is not particularly important. It's not particularly important to me because they will be independent from the West. They will be independent from western economic subjugation and western military coercion, and they'll have economic sovereignty.

Even if that is through collective sovereignty, meaning they will be to one to one extent or another, to one degree or another, there will be dependencies. There'll be dependencies of the regional powers like Saudi Arabia and Turkey. But they will have sovereignty through being a part of that soft empire. And the only way you can ever have an Islamic government, the only way that you can ever have an Islamic state is if it is sovereign and independent, economically, politically, culturally, socially, educationally, and in every other kind of way. You have to have independence.

If you're not independent, you can never be truly Islamic. And if you're not economically sovereign, if you don't have economic sovereignty, then you cannot truly be Islamic because you will be dominated and you will be subjugated, and your real rulers won't even be Muslims. So for me personally, I don't care what anybody thinks about Erdogan or what anybody thinks about MBS or Bin Zayed or Sisi or about the Palestinian Authority or what anybody thinks about Julani or or their form of government, or what have you. If you think that they're Islamic or not, if you think that they're good or not, if you think that they're so called secular or what have you, I don't care what you think about normalization, it really doesn't matter. The reality is that these men are building an empire that is going to stabilize the region all the way from Africa to West Asia.

And they are developing a methodology of collective, collaborative governance that we have not seen in our lands since the Khilafa. I'm not saying that they're doing it for the sake of Islam. And I'm not saying that they're doing it because they're pious or wonderful or righteous or what have you. I'm saying that they're doing it. It's something that they are achieving and it is objectively a good and beneficial thing for the ummah.

And if you can't see it, well that's a shame. And if you see it but you dislike it, well then you're the last person who needs to be talking about what's good for the Muslims or about what is or is not Islamic. Because most likely your version or your vision of what's good for the Muslims or or what's Islamic is most likely just a recipe for maintaining the status quo of western domination through endless strife and conflict in our countries. And you're probably one of those western tools that they use to try to incite rebellion against the very governments who are building that empire that I'm talking about. And that just makes you not only naive, it makes you a liability.

And yes, it makes you a thoroughly westernized and colonized tool of the West. Psychologically colonized, intellectually colonized, and colonized in your understanding of religion. So you should do everyone a favor and just go watch Aladdin, you know, or go play Prince of Persia or something and leave politics for the grown ups.