The book having been written in the aftermath of the year 2001 September, Mahmood’s book of Good and Bad Muslim provides a chronological history of violence and terrorism. The act disentangles from the morality arising from the emergence of national interests alongside ethnic convergence, which instead locates to violence and terrorism “first and foremost as unfinished business of the Cold War” (P. 13). The two footings, the good and the bad were borrowed from the former United States President George W. Bush (p. 15). He used the words as description of the utility to America’s foreign policy and not adherence to religion, as he stated that today’s ally can be tomorrow’s antagonist and these changes the labels to morally disparage American foes. In his book, Mahmood tries to argue that a deeply considering must look into terrorism and its beginning, which he believes is from the American foreign policy, which portrayed inequality in race. The book is a timely reminder of the critical need of equality.
The introduction of violence in the history of states or rather nations; Mahmood’s book commences by drawing the wider outlines of the relation between violence and the nation-states modernity. In the book, he rejects violence as communal but rather an inextricable relation between modernity and the violence itself. (p. 5). The idea expressed in the whole book is that violence is not cultural as people always say but rather political in real sense. They political run fights that are funded by politicians within and outside a nation.
The first chapter of the book gives an account of political Islam building tentatively on the history of violence in relation to modernity. The chapter exposes how the travesties of Muslims including the Islam are deployed to deliver ethical veneer for the expansionist imperialism. The following three chapters of the book gives an account of the violence the American’s imperialist policies starting right from the support they offered to the post-Vietnam anti-nationalist militia all through to the invasion of Afghanistan and the Republic of Iran. The book asserts the current terrorism, war and violence as a direct consequence of the imperialist policy used by the United States. The last chapter of the books gives an exhorting remark of the United States that “consistently seem to erode the support generate opposition” (p. 26).
Despite the books, push for retreat from the moralized attack is unfortunately unheeded just from the academy as it happens in the popular dissertation. Even though the way to go is through political and historical analysis of terrorism, state policy however, has been legitimized by academic inquiry much more than sustained the neutral inquiry. The September 2001 terrorism attack inflicted another level of terrorism attack. It exposed the level of terrorism of expertise in terrorism attack according to Mahmood’s writing on the book. Terrorism is located from the theological outlines of the Islamic to the mass structural poverty experienced in most of the Muslim countries and to the rapid increase in the youth population of these countries.
From the authoritative assessment of conflation in the supremacy policies and its critical examination, concretion with Mahmood’s book portrays the term terrorist is ascribed to the unwelcoming actors and under defined intellects including political hype-bound academic subject built around the whole idea. Ahmed the author did also underscored the logical negligence: “the contemporary environment is extremely inhospitable to reasoned discussion of terrorism, its forms, and the compulsions which produce them.” (Ahmed, p 2).
Terrorist violence in his writing is rendered as phenomenon devoid of political pernicious virus and history as well. He says the eradication of this violence has only one way out and that is cultural renaissance and economic alleviation. However, this looks impossible because the only formula used is power relations and political relations with other nations.
Dr. Mamdani cites the beginning of political modernity in the ongoing violence, which is a clearly different opinion where people believe these two aspects are not related. He believes that the expulsion of both the Jews plus the Muslims away from Spain in 1492 and the concurrent subjugation of Grenada is what cemented the whole idea of racism and violence and a beginning of the so-called modernity. He says in his book that the modern state had two parties of victims and those are, “the internal victims of the state building and the external victims of imperial expansion” (p. 5). He says that the same concept applies to the European imperialism, which he claims is also race centered. He thus claims that all these colonization epistemological violence where other countries refers to other as uncivilized hence coming to civilize them is the source all the violence we see now.
In summary, Mahmood’s book of Good and Bad Muslim is written in niche of political violence being associated with race and culture. However, in his writing he believes the proclaimed violence arises from politics both locally and internationally. He believes that the powerful countries like the United States who always intervene with a notion of peace keeping always make the condition worse with their imperial policies. Actually, he believes that imperialism is the source of all the ongoing violence. He refers to the Spain eviction of 1492 was a clear indication that these powers are not actually fighting racial differences but are fighting with particular interest when they intervene in violence of other nations.
Work Cited
Mamdani, Mahmood. Good Muslim, bad Muslim: America, the Cold War, and the roots of terror. Harmony, 2005.
