[Marxism] Morsi and Muslim Brotherhood

dan d.koechlin at wanadoo.fr
Sat Sep 1 16:37:17 MDT 2012

Morsi deeply believes in capitalist accumulation and free enterprise, as 
long as the relevant usury laws are in place and Sharia social laws prevail.

The Bazaar capitalists, local capital espousing Islamist views, is seen 
as the petty bourgeois foundation of Islamic Egyptian society. 
God-fearing bosses give work to workers, there exists an artificial 
distinction between "usury" and "investment" and all is fine.

In this simplistic Islamist scheme, typical of petty bourgeois thought, 
the bad guy is the "mliddle-man" who lends money to poor guys and brings 
them into debt. In the economic thinking of early Islam, that made sense 
as most freemen (AND NOT SLAVES OR WIVES) could theoretically have 
access to the means of production. If they fell on hard times they could 
lose their status as freeman and become bondage workers. And so the 
Prophet (hallowed be his name), who was himself a well-off freeman, saw 
to it that sharia law would protect the interests of freemen by 
forbidding debt and making bondage-labourers (i.e. non-Muslims) and 
women subservient.

Nowadays, Islamic apologists are required to go through all sorts of 
hoops to get pre-Capitalist sharia to conform to present-day society 
while still being relevant to the majority of Sunnites (even though the 
majority of them are no longer "freemen" but wage-labourers !).

But Christians must also ignore all the passages in Acts that describe 
the primitive communism of the Apostles ("they held all things in 
common" and whenever one needed something the communal purse sufficed + 
God punishing greedy primitive Christians who sought to embezzle the 
funds of the primitive ecclesia by ...death).
Utopian Christian Communists sects have continuously emerged throughout 
the last 2000 years basing their teachings on the state of affairs in 
the primitive church as described in Acts. And yet the Catholic Church 
or all the subsequent Protestant Churches could scarcely be regarded as 

In Islam, the situation is even worse, as Mahomet's message is clearly 
one of territorial conquest and total exploitation of the whole world by 
the believers ("freemen" from the Arab peninsula), including the right 
to rape the wives of captured prisoners, capture and subsequent selling 
of non-Muslim slaves and the preroragitve to extract "protective fines" 
from non-Muslims. Regarding the systematic, and indeed obligatory, rape 
of captive females as explained in the Hadiths : this is the part of 
Islam all modern Islamic apologists are the most desperate to wriggle 
out of (and they can't, which makes them angry), as nowadays (since the 
18th century) rape is regarded as a big no-no.

  This state of affairs is indicative of a mode of production known as 
"the razia" or "cattle-driving" pastoral mode of production, in which 
powerful clans must expand their domination over resources until they 
reach mercantile cities in which cattle is not an indication of wealth 
and then affirm their suzerainty over such cities through dhimmi 
payments. But the whole primitive Islamist system was TOO successful, 
and rapidly half of the Mediterranean world became Islamic (the exact 
reason why is still a fascinating venue for research).

The mode of production envisioned in the Quran and Hadiths (nomad cattle 
drivers) thus became totally obsolete, and modern efforts to return to 
"primitive islam" (Salafists) are problematic. The greatest "official" 
Salafist country is Saudi Arabia and yet its current mode of production 
is completely centered on Capitalist accumulation. The edicts of the 
Quran and Hadiths make no sense in such a culture, and most are ignored, 
appart, of course, from those sharia laws that enhance the domination of 
an urban (non nomad), oligarchical (non "freeman"), elite, far removed 
from the what Mahomet primitively envisaged.

More information about the Marxism mailing list