What do you think?
Rate this book
The Flight of the Intellectuals: The Controversy Over Islamism and the Press
Paperback edition of the widely reviewed book, called "important and devastating in its conclusions" by the New York Times , now with a new afterword by the author
Twenty years ago, Ayatollah Khomeini called for the assassination of Salman Rushdie—and writers around the world instinctively rallied to Rushdie’s defense. Today, according to writer Paul Berman, “Rushdie has metastasized into an entire social class”—an ever-growing group of sharp-tongued critics of Islamist extremism, especially critics from Muslim backgrounds, who survive only because of pseudonyms and police protection. And yet, instead of being applauded, the Rushdies of today (people like Ayan Hirsi Ali and Ibn Warraq) often find themselves dismissed as “strident” or as no better than fundamentalist themselves, and contrasted unfavorably with representatives of the Islamist movement who falsely claim to be “moderates.”
How did this happen? In THE FLIGHT OF THE INTELLECTUALS, Berman—“one of America’s leading public intellectuals” ( Foreign Affairs )—conducts a searing examination into the intellectual atmosphere of the moment and shows how some of the West’s best thinkers and journalists have fumbled badly in their efforts to grapple with Islamist ideas and violence.
Berman’s investigation of the history and nature of the Islamist movement includes some surprising revelations. In examining Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, he shows the rise of an immense and often violent worldview, elements of which survives today in the brigades of al-Qaeda and Hamas. Berman also unearths the shocking story of al-Banna’s associate, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who collaborated personally with Adolf Hitler to incite Arab support of the Nazis’ North African campaign. Echoes of the Grand Mufti’s Nazified Islam can be heard among the followers of al-Banna even today.
In a gripping and stylish narrative Berman also shows the legacy of these political traditions, most importantly by focusing on a single philosopher, who happens to be Hassan al-Banna’s grandson, Oxford professor Tariq Ramadan—a figure widely celebrated in the West as a “moderate” despite his troubling ties to the Islamist movement. Looking closely into what Ramadan has actually written and said, Berman contrasts the reality of Ramadan with his image in the press.
In doing so, THE FLIGHT OF THE INTELLECTUALS sheds light on a number of modern issues—on the massively reinvigorated anti-Semitism of our own time, on a newly fashionable turn against women’s rights, and on the difficulties we have in discussing terrorism—and presents a stunning commentary about the modern media’s peculiar inability to detect and analyze some of the most dangerous ideas in contemporary society.
Twenty years ago, Ayatollah Khomeini called for the assassination of Salman Rushdie—and writers around the world instinctively rallied to Rushdie’s defense. Today, according to writer Paul Berman, “Rushdie has metastasized into an entire social class”—an ever-growing group of sharp-tongued critics of Islamist extremism, especially critics from Muslim backgrounds, who survive only because of pseudonyms and police protection. And yet, instead of being applauded, the Rushdies of today (people like Ayan Hirsi Ali and Ibn Warraq) often find themselves dismissed as “strident” or as no better than fundamentalist themselves, and contrasted unfavorably with representatives of the Islamist movement who falsely claim to be “moderates.”
How did this happen? In THE FLIGHT OF THE INTELLECTUALS, Berman—“one of America’s leading public intellectuals” ( Foreign Affairs )—conducts a searing examination into the intellectual atmosphere of the moment and shows how some of the West’s best thinkers and journalists have fumbled badly in their efforts to grapple with Islamist ideas and violence.
Berman’s investigation of the history and nature of the Islamist movement includes some surprising revelations. In examining Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, he shows the rise of an immense and often violent worldview, elements of which survives today in the brigades of al-Qaeda and Hamas. Berman also unearths the shocking story of al-Banna’s associate, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who collaborated personally with Adolf Hitler to incite Arab support of the Nazis’ North African campaign. Echoes of the Grand Mufti’s Nazified Islam can be heard among the followers of al-Banna even today.
In a gripping and stylish narrative Berman also shows the legacy of these political traditions, most importantly by focusing on a single philosopher, who happens to be Hassan al-Banna’s grandson, Oxford professor Tariq Ramadan—a figure widely celebrated in the West as a “moderate” despite his troubling ties to the Islamist movement. Looking closely into what Ramadan has actually written and said, Berman contrasts the reality of Ramadan with his image in the press.
In doing so, THE FLIGHT OF THE INTELLECTUALS sheds light on a number of modern issues—on the massively reinvigorated anti-Semitism of our own time, on a newly fashionable turn against women’s rights, and on the difficulties we have in discussing terrorism—and presents a stunning commentary about the modern media’s peculiar inability to detect and analyze some of the most dangerous ideas in contemporary society.
320 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2010
8 people are currently reading
665 people want to read
About the author
Paul Berman
76 books62 followersPaul Lawrence Berman is an American author and journalist who writes on politics and literature. His articles have been published in The New Republic, The New York Times Book Review and Slate, and he is the author of several books, including A Tale of Two Utopias and Terror and Liberalism.
Berman received his undergraduate education from Columbia University, from which he graduated in 1971 with a BA and MA in American history. He has reported on Nicaragua's civil wars, Mexico's elections, and the Czech Republic's Velvet Revolution. Currently he is a senior fellow at the World Policy Institute, a professor of journalism and distinguished writer in residence at New York University, and a member of the editorial board of Dissent. Berman's influence has seen him described as a 'Philosopher King' of the liberal hawks."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Berman
"Paul Berman is a writer on politics and literature whose articles and reviews have appeared in The New York Times, the New Republic (where he is a contributing editor), the New Yorker, Slate, the Village Voice, Dissent, and various other American, European and Latin American journals. He has reported at length from Europe and Latin America. He has written or edited eight books, including, most recently, Power and the Idealists: Or, the Passion of Joschka Fischer and Its Aftermath, with a new preface by Richard Holbrooke for the 2007 paperback edition; Carl Sandburg: Selected Poems, edited with an introduction, published in 2006 by the American Poets Project of the Library of America; and Terror and Liberalism, a New York Times best-seller in 2003. His writings have been translated into fifteen languages. Berman received a B.A. and M.A. in American History from Columbia University and has been awarded a MacArthur, a Guggenheim, the Bosch Berlin Prize, a fellowship at the New York Public Library’s Center for Writers & Scholars, and other honors.
Berman received his undergraduate education from Columbia University, from which he graduated in 1971 with a BA and MA in American history. He has reported on Nicaragua's civil wars, Mexico's elections, and the Czech Republic's Velvet Revolution. Currently he is a senior fellow at the World Policy Institute, a professor of journalism and distinguished writer in residence at New York University, and a member of the editorial board of Dissent. Berman's influence has seen him described as a 'Philosopher King' of the liberal hawks."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Berman
"Paul Berman is a writer on politics and literature whose articles and reviews have appeared in The New York Times, the New Republic (where he is a contributing editor), the New Yorker, Slate, the Village Voice, Dissent, and various other American, European and Latin American journals. He has reported at length from Europe and Latin America. He has written or edited eight books, including, most recently, Power and the Idealists: Or, the Passion of Joschka Fischer and Its Aftermath, with a new preface by Richard Holbrooke for the 2007 paperback edition; Carl Sandburg: Selected Poems, edited with an introduction, published in 2006 by the American Poets Project of the Library of America; and Terror and Liberalism, a New York Times best-seller in 2003. His writings have been translated into fifteen languages. Berman received a B.A. and M.A. in American History from Columbia University and has been awarded a MacArthur, a Guggenheim, the Bosch Berlin Prize, a fellowship at the New York Public Library’s Center for Writers & Scholars, and other honors.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews
January 7, 2011
Extremely well written, but the title's very misleading. 75% of the book is about Tariq Ramadan and the history of the philosophy of terrorism. It's not until the last 50 pages that you get an analysis of the "flight of the intellectuals."
January 7, 2012
Insanely well-written piece of polemicism. This is not one of those scathing attacks in our Manichean world where you are either on our side or theirs. Rather, it is an examination of why some well-meaning people have a tendency to overlook facts that are inconvenient to their narrative. No, that's not right. That's giving Berman too little credit. It's more about asking the question of why they require this narrative in the first place.
In the end, the book serves several purposes. 1) It is an exposure of Tariq Ramadan's relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood and the meaning of the anti-Semitism from which Ramadan emerged. 2) It is an exposure of Ian Buruma's glossing over of the Nazi-MB link. 3) It is a spirited defense of Ayaan Ali Hirsi against Buruma and Timothy Garton Ash [who has admitted that his language was a bit inappropriate.]
Berman's arguments are everything that I expect from a Liberal, capital "L". He may not have won over the leftists who tend to side with Islamists like Ramadan in any argument, but he should make them squirm.
In the end, the book serves several purposes. 1) It is an exposure of Tariq Ramadan's relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood and the meaning of the anti-Semitism from which Ramadan emerged. 2) It is an exposure of Ian Buruma's glossing over of the Nazi-MB link. 3) It is a spirited defense of Ayaan Ali Hirsi against Buruma and Timothy Garton Ash [who has admitted that his language was a bit inappropriate.]
Berman's arguments are everything that I expect from a Liberal, capital "L". He may not have won over the leftists who tend to side with Islamists like Ramadan in any argument, but he should make them squirm.
May 9, 2010
A fourth volume in Paul Berman's exhilarating series on the history of totalitarian and anti-totalitarian ideas. Most valuable here is Berman's extremely close reading of the vile Mr. Tariq Ramadan, who seems to have bamboozled an entire swath of Western intellectuals.
Ramadan confuses people: is he a genuine reformer and moderate? is he really trying to build a bridge from Islam to Western modernity? is he trying to lull us all into false sense of security while forging a greater Eurabia?
Berman shows us, in excruciating detail, how Ramadan's live and work is part of a constellation of Islamic philosophers, theologians and politicians, that includes his grandfather Hassan al-Banna (founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is known as Hamas in Palestine), Yusuf al-Qaradawi, his father Said Ramadan, and the unproscuted Nazi war criminal Amin al-Husayni. Rather than an admirable moderate, Berman shows us a Ramadan that is a hair-gelled smooth talking fascist.
This is a must read for anyone concerned about the threat of Islamism to the Western world.
Ramadan confuses people: is he a genuine reformer and moderate? is he really trying to build a bridge from Islam to Western modernity? is he trying to lull us all into false sense of security while forging a greater Eurabia?
Berman shows us, in excruciating detail, how Ramadan's live and work is part of a constellation of Islamic philosophers, theologians and politicians, that includes his grandfather Hassan al-Banna (founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is known as Hamas in Palestine), Yusuf al-Qaradawi, his father Said Ramadan, and the unproscuted Nazi war criminal Amin al-Husayni. Rather than an admirable moderate, Berman shows us a Ramadan that is a hair-gelled smooth talking fascist.
This is a must read for anyone concerned about the threat of Islamism to the Western world.
February 18, 2008
"One of America's best exponents of recent intellectual history." -- The Economist
May 28, 2011
Not bad. It came across, at first, a hit piece on Tariq Ramadan (a person I am unfamiliar with, which is understandable as he is a primarily writes in French. My ignorance of him is something I will rectify though. That’s the wonderful thing about ignorance, its curable – sort of like virginity ;). It is for that reason, being an obvious attack on Mr. Ramadan (and much, though it follows a logical course, pure supposition) that I give it only a 3.
The reason I was interested in the book was for its noting the lapses of western journalists in regards to issues pertaining to Islam, a job it does adequately. It has been obvious to me, a non scholarly layman, that many in the Islamic world say one or imply one thing in English (or French, or whatever) and the opposite in Arabic (or Farsi, or whatever). And while I find this hypocrisy and duplicity foul, I find the journalists who allow this deception to be near criminal.
Journalists usually espouse their objectivity and lack of bias (both of which are impossible for a human – I prefer an honest bias to a dishonest objectivity), yet they time and time again show their biases and lack of objectivity – and in some cases their cowardice. Criticizing a Preacher is considered brave and laudable; but Criticizing a Imam is considered racists and culturally insensitive. Frankly anyone espousing violence against the non-believers is suspect to me and deserves to have the baleful eye of the world and civilization turned upon them with scorn!
The book excelled in it an easy read (or I found it so – I could fly through 50 pages in an hour with no desire to put it aside); it gave me a list of people I need to read (amongst them Tariq Ramadan, al-Ghazali, Boualem Sansal, Abedewahab Meddeb, Tahar Ben Jelloun, Pascal Bruckner, and (of course ) Ayaan Hirsi Ali [who I have meant to read in the past, this book just reminded me to put her on my Goodreads list]); and it indicated some modern exegesis tests on the Koran (something I was under the impression was forbidden in Islam) and thus gives me a whole new class of text to peruse – Thank God ;)
Not a bad book if you can get past the character-assassination feel of the first few chapters.
The reason I was interested in the book was for its noting the lapses of western journalists in regards to issues pertaining to Islam, a job it does adequately. It has been obvious to me, a non scholarly layman, that many in the Islamic world say one or imply one thing in English (or French, or whatever) and the opposite in Arabic (or Farsi, or whatever). And while I find this hypocrisy and duplicity foul, I find the journalists who allow this deception to be near criminal.
Journalists usually espouse their objectivity and lack of bias (both of which are impossible for a human – I prefer an honest bias to a dishonest objectivity), yet they time and time again show their biases and lack of objectivity – and in some cases their cowardice. Criticizing a Preacher is considered brave and laudable; but Criticizing a Imam is considered racists and culturally insensitive. Frankly anyone espousing violence against the non-believers is suspect to me and deserves to have the baleful eye of the world and civilization turned upon them with scorn!
The book excelled in it an easy read (or I found it so – I could fly through 50 pages in an hour with no desire to put it aside); it gave me a list of people I need to read (amongst them Tariq Ramadan, al-Ghazali, Boualem Sansal, Abedewahab Meddeb, Tahar Ben Jelloun, Pascal Bruckner, and (of course ) Ayaan Hirsi Ali [who I have meant to read in the past, this book just reminded me to put her on my Goodreads list]); and it indicated some modern exegesis tests on the Koran (something I was under the impression was forbidden in Islam) and thus gives me a whole new class of text to peruse – Thank God ;)
Not a bad book if you can get past the character-assassination feel of the first few chapters.
March 20, 2011
Twenty years after a death sentence was laid upon Salman Rushdie's head, an entire class of thinkers and writers who have dared to speak out on the threats of Islamic fascism find themselves living in safe houses and traveling with a small cadre of bodyguards, in genuine fear for their lives. And yet, many of these courageous intellectuals are pilloried by the liberal press, while a new generation of purportedly moderate Islamic leaders who fail to condemn misogyny, bigotry, and terrorism are feted. How did this backwards-seeming dichotomy develop?
Paul Berman expands his long essay from the June 2007 issue of "The New Republic" into an erudite and sadly quite damning exploration of this phenomenon. It comes across as surprisingly fair, well-reasoned, and meticulously researched. He tracks back to the 1930's and the alliance between Nazi Germany and the Mufti of Jerusalem, and targets this foul union as the seed which has grown into the poisonous ideology of hate that drives both the worst excesses of Islamic terrorism and the cold-hearted tolerance for violent anti-semitism which seems ubiquitous in the Arab world, even among the ostensibly progressive branches of modern Islam. From there he issues a challenge to those same moderate Islamic leaders. If their oft-stated intentions are truly benign and benevolent, then it is time for a greater level of intellectual honesty, not to mention courage, on all sides.
Less of a warning than a wake-up call, it is an important little book, and establishes a clear marker for this moment in time that future scholars and political scientists can measure against. One hopes it reaches the right eyes, and that Mr. Berman doesn't himself join the ranks of the existentially condemned.
Paul Berman expands his long essay from the June 2007 issue of "The New Republic" into an erudite and sadly quite damning exploration of this phenomenon. It comes across as surprisingly fair, well-reasoned, and meticulously researched. He tracks back to the 1930's and the alliance between Nazi Germany and the Mufti of Jerusalem, and targets this foul union as the seed which has grown into the poisonous ideology of hate that drives both the worst excesses of Islamic terrorism and the cold-hearted tolerance for violent anti-semitism which seems ubiquitous in the Arab world, even among the ostensibly progressive branches of modern Islam. From there he issues a challenge to those same moderate Islamic leaders. If their oft-stated intentions are truly benign and benevolent, then it is time for a greater level of intellectual honesty, not to mention courage, on all sides.
Less of a warning than a wake-up call, it is an important little book, and establishes a clear marker for this moment in time that future scholars and political scientists can measure against. One hopes it reaches the right eyes, and that Mr. Berman doesn't himself join the ranks of the existentially condemned.
July 13, 2010
Berman wonders why some public intellectuals, i.e., respected journalists, not only distort Islamism and Islamists, but go on to attack those with high credibility who are clear about the philosophy and endgoals (not to mention results) of Islamism. The journey Berman takes is detailed but quite informative. He answers at the end that it's due to cowardice, but the case he actually makes up to that point is laziness, irresponsibility, perhaps even malfeasance and sexism. Short book, well worth the read.
October 19, 2024
I absolutely loved Berman's Terror and LIberalism, and I wanted to read this because I'm very interested in the intellectual history of the War on Terror period. It's not as good, but it's still interesting. The heart of the book is an examination of Tariq Ramadan, a Swiss born professor and theologian who is the grandson of Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. Ramadan was controversially denied a visa when he received a faculty position at Notre Dame because he had said some things that seemed sympathetic with second intifada terrorism against Israel. TR was often held up by liberals as an example of a modernizing, pluralistic Islam.
Berman opposed the barring of TR from US soil, and he eventually sued and won against the Bush admin. However, Berman's purpose of this book is to critique fellow liberals who seem overly defensive of TR, as well as selective in the way they present his ideas. I admire that Berman didn't pick left-wing nut jobs to criticize but serious liberal writers like Ian Buruma and Timothy Garton Ash. His argument is that TR is not really a moderate at all, or that if his views represent "moderate Islam," then we still have a major gulf between liberalism and moderate Islam. He shows TR's controversial views on things like the role of women (including the beating of women by their husbands), his endorsement of terrorism against Islam, his opposition to secular government, and other views that are incompatible with liberalism. He also shows Ramadan idolizes Islamic leaders like Banna, Qaradawi, and others who are full-on theocrats who support violence in the name of spreading Islam and toppling secular governments. He then points out the absurdity of many liberals attacking or condescending to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who embraced much more liberal positions than TR.
This book fits with Berman's larger theme that in the age of the War on Terror, there is a larger ideological enemy for liberalism: Islamism, a fundamentally authoritarian and illiberal ideology. This doesn't mean we have to spread democracy by force, that we can't have productive relations with Islamic nations, or that there's some clash of civilizations going on. But, he argues persuasively, there is not much room for liberals to remain liberals while endorsing people like Ramadan. After all, liberals soft-pedal people like TR but treat the Christian right in the US as a fundamental enemy.
This isn't a must-read, but it's a solid book. Terror and LIberalism, however, is one of the most interesting books of the GWOT period, imo.
Berman opposed the barring of TR from US soil, and he eventually sued and won against the Bush admin. However, Berman's purpose of this book is to critique fellow liberals who seem overly defensive of TR, as well as selective in the way they present his ideas. I admire that Berman didn't pick left-wing nut jobs to criticize but serious liberal writers like Ian Buruma and Timothy Garton Ash. His argument is that TR is not really a moderate at all, or that if his views represent "moderate Islam," then we still have a major gulf between liberalism and moderate Islam. He shows TR's controversial views on things like the role of women (including the beating of women by their husbands), his endorsement of terrorism against Islam, his opposition to secular government, and other views that are incompatible with liberalism. He also shows Ramadan idolizes Islamic leaders like Banna, Qaradawi, and others who are full-on theocrats who support violence in the name of spreading Islam and toppling secular governments. He then points out the absurdity of many liberals attacking or condescending to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who embraced much more liberal positions than TR.
This book fits with Berman's larger theme that in the age of the War on Terror, there is a larger ideological enemy for liberalism: Islamism, a fundamentally authoritarian and illiberal ideology. This doesn't mean we have to spread democracy by force, that we can't have productive relations with Islamic nations, or that there's some clash of civilizations going on. But, he argues persuasively, there is not much room for liberals to remain liberals while endorsing people like Ramadan. After all, liberals soft-pedal people like TR but treat the Christian right in the US as a fundamental enemy.
This isn't a must-read, but it's a solid book. Terror and LIberalism, however, is one of the most interesting books of the GWOT period, imo.
September 25, 2025
Berman’s The Flight of the Intellectuals hit me as part history lesson, part gut-check. He’s taking aim at the way a lot of Western thinkers basically sidestepped the hard work of confronting Islamism by wrapping themselves in a kind of multicultural guilt blanket.
What really stuck with me is his use of Pascal Bruckner, who nails the way elite anti-Western Westerners tokenize people from formerly colonized societies. That line of his, “ The critical spirit rises up against itself and consumes its form. But instead of coming out of this process greater and purified, it devours itself in a kind of self-cannibalism and takes a morose pleasure in annihilating itself. Hyper-criticism eventuates in self-hatred, leaving behind it only ruins. A new dogma of demolition is born out of the rejection of dogmas. Thus we Euro-Americans are supposed to have only one obligation: endlessly atoning for what we have inflicted on other parts of humanity. How can we fail to see that this leads us to live off self-denunciation while taking a strange pride in being the worst? Self-denigration is all too clearly a form of indirect self-glorification. Evil can come only from us; other people are motivated by sympathy, good will, candor. This is the paternalism of the guilty conscience: seeing ourselves as the kings of infamy is still a way of staying on the crest of history”, is brutal and true. Bruckner’s take that Western self-hatred is really just self-glorification: we cast ourselves as both the cause and the cure. It’s hard not to see echoes of that everywhere today.
Berman does spend a lot of time on Ramadan, but I think it pays off, it grounds the whole argument in a real, complicated case. And yes, I’m up way too late reading this stuff.
What really stuck with me is his use of Pascal Bruckner, who nails the way elite anti-Western Westerners tokenize people from formerly colonized societies. That line of his, “ The critical spirit rises up against itself and consumes its form. But instead of coming out of this process greater and purified, it devours itself in a kind of self-cannibalism and takes a morose pleasure in annihilating itself. Hyper-criticism eventuates in self-hatred, leaving behind it only ruins. A new dogma of demolition is born out of the rejection of dogmas. Thus we Euro-Americans are supposed to have only one obligation: endlessly atoning for what we have inflicted on other parts of humanity. How can we fail to see that this leads us to live off self-denunciation while taking a strange pride in being the worst? Self-denigration is all too clearly a form of indirect self-glorification. Evil can come only from us; other people are motivated by sympathy, good will, candor. This is the paternalism of the guilty conscience: seeing ourselves as the kings of infamy is still a way of staying on the crest of history”, is brutal and true. Bruckner’s take that Western self-hatred is really just self-glorification: we cast ourselves as both the cause and the cure. It’s hard not to see echoes of that everywhere today.
Berman does spend a lot of time on Ramadan, but I think it pays off, it grounds the whole argument in a real, complicated case. And yes, I’m up way too late reading this stuff.
June 19, 2024
4.5/5
- islamism vs islam
- islamism taking over as the face of islam
- Tariq Ramadan and his patriarchal line of fanatics
- selective interpretations from Western minds, when “credible journalists” take on other people’s judgment as fact and disregard people (women) who have actually experienced the oppression they speak against
- “intellectuals” of the field who speak from theories but ignore reality and how their word are ALWAYS open to interpretation by all. so what does it mean when people who are theoretically well-versed in X decide to be overly diplomatic about condemning issues that they also label as religious rather than moral? fundamentalists 😀
- the rise of islamism giving way to terrorism and a muddled depiction of islam as a religion
- women’s rights? throwing them a bone but fake throwing there’s not even a bone in sight
- “modesty as liberation from male consideration” and separate but equal regarding gender. ❌
-Tariq had the keys to reshaping modern perception of islam but he fucked up so bad bc he doesn’t think for himself and now we have terrorists
- in group thinking, religious independent state, sacred duty to kill X from both sides, perhaps religion and politics should not mix at all
- islamism vs islam
- islamism taking over as the face of islam
- Tariq Ramadan and his patriarchal line of fanatics
- selective interpretations from Western minds, when “credible journalists” take on other people’s judgment as fact and disregard people (women) who have actually experienced the oppression they speak against
- “intellectuals” of the field who speak from theories but ignore reality and how their word are ALWAYS open to interpretation by all. so what does it mean when people who are theoretically well-versed in X decide to be overly diplomatic about condemning issues that they also label as religious rather than moral? fundamentalists 😀
- the rise of islamism giving way to terrorism and a muddled depiction of islam as a religion
- women’s rights? throwing them a bone but fake throwing there’s not even a bone in sight
- “modesty as liberation from male consideration” and separate but equal regarding gender. ❌
-Tariq had the keys to reshaping modern perception of islam but he fucked up so bad bc he doesn’t think for himself and now we have terrorists
- in group thinking, religious independent state, sacred duty to kill X from both sides, perhaps religion and politics should not mix at all
January 20, 2020
Paul Burman obviously has a personal grudge against islam and Tariq Ramadan, The whole book is just trash talking Ramadan, stating that he should somehow turn against all his ideals and his community in a harsher way, He describes how Tariq Ramadan is trying to reform the Islamic community through "fatwa" panels yet Burman continuously badgers and picks apart Ramadan for trying to actually do something about the issues. Burman is ignorant and can't seem to grasp that Ramadan is playing the part that he has to in order to actually make changes. The whole book is a poorly guilded attempt to analyze Ramadan, yet clearly it is more of a personal issue for Paul Burman. There were at least 50 times I had to stop reading and just thought to myself, this guy is such an idiot.
If your racist or Islamophic this will be a perfect read for you! Enjoy lol.
He is literally just discrediting everything Tariq Ramadan is trying to do to solve the problem, which makes the problem worse!? Like why would anyone clal this a good book, it's literally just him complaining without offering any real solutions that would actually cause any effect.
0/5
If your racist or Islamophic this will be a perfect read for you! Enjoy lol.
He is literally just discrediting everything Tariq Ramadan is trying to do to solve the problem, which makes the problem worse!? Like why would anyone clal this a good book, it's literally just him complaining without offering any real solutions that would actually cause any effect.
0/5
May 7, 2017
The book is a very enjoyable read. I think if it were to be republished, it should acquire a different title because The Flight of the Intellectuals is a misleading one, as many others have noted here.
It takes a brave person like Paul Berman to objectively analyze the current intellectual atmosphere, and bring to focus its critical flaws. This book talks about the cowardice and self-hatred of Western intellectuals today. Berman harshly condemns in particular Ian Buruma and Timothy Garton Ash for taking sides with an Islamist con artist like Tariq Ramadan.
I was surprised though to find that Berman, though he provided a long and persuasive analysis on Tariq Ramadan, he never delved into his notorious technique of changing his message as he switches languages. I am Arabic speaking and I'm well aware that when he speaks Arabic, that is to his Arab followers, his message is not as tolerant and liberal as the one he delivers to a European audience.
It takes a brave person like Paul Berman to objectively analyze the current intellectual atmosphere, and bring to focus its critical flaws. This book talks about the cowardice and self-hatred of Western intellectuals today. Berman harshly condemns in particular Ian Buruma and Timothy Garton Ash for taking sides with an Islamist con artist like Tariq Ramadan.
I was surprised though to find that Berman, though he provided a long and persuasive analysis on Tariq Ramadan, he never delved into his notorious technique of changing his message as he switches languages. I am Arabic speaking and I'm well aware that when he speaks Arabic, that is to his Arab followers, his message is not as tolerant and liberal as the one he delivers to a European audience.
May 4, 2019
I did not know what to expect when I started reading this book, except that it was about Islamism and Western intellectuals' reactions to it. The book offers insight into more subjects than just Ramadan's own ideas though, as one might expect from reading the introduction, plus the writing is engaging and it would be hard to get bored at any part of the book.
The only flaw is that the author does not use references as footnotes to each claim, but often just cites the reference in the main text and elaborates on what he's discussing in these sources, so at times you're not really sure whether the author is giving documented facts or his own view/interpretation on them.
The only flaw is that the author does not use references as footnotes to each claim, but often just cites the reference in the main text and elaborates on what he's discussing in these sources, so at times you're not really sure whether the author is giving documented facts or his own view/interpretation on them.
December 10, 2018
Paul Berman's extended essay serves as both an analysis of the works and family history of Islamic scholar, Tariq Ramadan, and a critique of many of Berman’s intellectual journalistic peers who hold Ramadan in misplaced high esteem. Berman focuses in particular on the journalists, Ian Buruma and Timothy Garton Ash, and accuses them of abandoning their principles and of being complacent towards Islamism, anti-Semitism and human rights abuses (particularly towards women). Berman's argument is particularly strong when he contrasts the appeasement of Ramadan with the contemptuous vilification of Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Those with an interest in how the Left has gone wrong and the rise of Islamism in the West will appreciate how brilliantly written and well-researched this book is. Unfortunately, things have gotten far worse since the book was published about 10 years ago with the only source of good news being that Ramadan is currently locked up in a Paris prison cell.
August 25, 2018
Really a 4.5, but that's not a choice.
It is hard (for me) to imagine the amount of work that went into writing this book, but it is clear and concise. Well worth the time and, because it is so well written, surprisingly easy to read.
Not for people who want bumper-sticker answers.
It is hard (for me) to imagine the amount of work that went into writing this book, but it is clear and concise. Well worth the time and, because it is so well written, surprisingly easy to read.
Not for people who want bumper-sticker answers.
October 15, 2012
Paul Berman sounds amiable throughout the book and that's to his credit, given the emotionally charged subject that he has sat down to write about. He discusses the rise of Hassan-al-Banna and his Muslim Brotherhood, the heritage that the famed apologist Tariq Ramadan(the protagonist of the book, by the way)looks up to, the discomforting alliance between the Islamists and the Nazis(united by their shared conception of the Jews as some cosmic evil which wants to wipe out everybody else)and last but not least, a tendency among certain liberal European intellectuals to downplay the threat of political Islam and demonize anyone who dares to point out this threat at the expense of their lives. This small but influential European intelligentsia treats people like Tariq Ramadan as some sort of "reformers" who sincerely believe in a universal set of values distinct from medieval theocratic perversion. No, they don't. What Tariq Ramadan and his coterie do is speak in the language of the 21st century a message that belongs in the trashcan of the seventh century. We need people who would confront political Islam at point-blank range and make the Muslim world realize that morality is too complex for religious scriptures to define. Faith should be the last thing to define and settle moral questions. If the once-Christian West can snap out of this delusion, the Muslim world can too. Muslims are not children who need to be babysitted by pseudo-intellectuals like Tariq Ramadan; they need their own Voltaire, Thomas Paine, Bertrand Russel, David Hume who can incite them to think outside the religious paradigm.
Tariq Ramadan seems to have a knack for clouding his philosophy in ambiguity, which personally puts me off. If ambiguity is your shield, you've got nothing to defend. I don't even care what Tariq Ramadan actually believes, all I care is that he is intentionally/unintentionally fanning the flame of Islamism and that's gonna hurt, not just Europe but those of us in Asia as well; We already have our hands full with Islamic supremacists like Jamaat Islam and Hizbut tahrir. However well-intentioned Paul Berman might be, he does not need to be so soft-spoken about a subject that needs to be vocally discussed. I'd give this book 2 stars for being so timid, but I'm feeling generous at the moment.
Tariq Ramadan seems to have a knack for clouding his philosophy in ambiguity, which personally puts me off. If ambiguity is your shield, you've got nothing to defend. I don't even care what Tariq Ramadan actually believes, all I care is that he is intentionally/unintentionally fanning the flame of Islamism and that's gonna hurt, not just Europe but those of us in Asia as well; We already have our hands full with Islamic supremacists like Jamaat Islam and Hizbut tahrir. However well-intentioned Paul Berman might be, he does not need to be so soft-spoken about a subject that needs to be vocally discussed. I'd give this book 2 stars for being so timid, but I'm feeling generous at the moment.
August 21, 2016
In the Flight of the Intellectuals, Paul Berman examines how intellectuals in the West seem to have conveniently glossed over facts concerning Islamism. He does this by examining the treatment meted out to Tariq Ramadan by the intelligentsia. While Ramadan does not present himself as an Islamist, he professes admiration for his grandfather Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Berman quotes Ramadan liberally, and examines in great detail the relationship between the Nazis, Amin al-Husseini - the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem during the second world war, and al-Banna's reverence for the Mufti. In doing so, he seems to have found a reluctance on Ramadan's part to discuss al-Banna's ties with Amin al-Husseini. However, this specific point leads the reader to other ideas that Ramadan similarly seems to have disregarded, or phrased in ambiguous terms. Tariq Ramadan's idea of imposing a moratorium in order to discuss the validity of stoning women to death comes to mind.
However, this book is not an examination of Tariq Ramadan per se. Rather it tries to show through this case study how the press has failed to press Tariq Ramadan on these matters. This is conducted chiefly through Ian Buruma's profile of Tariq Ramadan published by The New York Times Magazine.
The book also discusses Ayaan Hirsi Ali in the second half. However, I will say nothing on the matter. This is a fantastic read. Give it a go.
Berman quotes Ramadan liberally, and examines in great detail the relationship between the Nazis, Amin al-Husseini - the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem during the second world war, and al-Banna's reverence for the Mufti. In doing so, he seems to have found a reluctance on Ramadan's part to discuss al-Banna's ties with Amin al-Husseini. However, this specific point leads the reader to other ideas that Ramadan similarly seems to have disregarded, or phrased in ambiguous terms. Tariq Ramadan's idea of imposing a moratorium in order to discuss the validity of stoning women to death comes to mind.
However, this book is not an examination of Tariq Ramadan per se. Rather it tries to show through this case study how the press has failed to press Tariq Ramadan on these matters. This is conducted chiefly through Ian Buruma's profile of Tariq Ramadan published by The New York Times Magazine.
The book also discusses Ayaan Hirsi Ali in the second half. However, I will say nothing on the matter. This is a fantastic read. Give it a go.
April 4, 2012
Well-investigated dissection of Tariq Ramadan's ideology and mediated persona as well as an interesting look into the journalism of Ian Buruma. I can't say I was a fan of Berman's invocation of Pascal Bruckner's "racism of the anti-racists" terminology toward the end to explain why journalists such as Buruma and Timothy Garton Ash favor Ramadanian liberalism of Islam to a Hirsi Ali liberalism, but that is only because I am not familiar with Bruckner's work and thought Berman did a poor job of using his ideology to smooth out the edges of his own argument.
Other than that, I enjoyed it very much. I have yet to read as in-depth an analysis as Berman offers from many other writers or reporters. He doesn't allow the opaqueness of Ramadan's position on stoning women to pass, leaving a lot for his Western apologists to answer for.
Other than that, I enjoyed it very much. I have yet to read as in-depth an analysis as Berman offers from many other writers or reporters. He doesn't allow the opaqueness of Ramadan's position on stoning women to pass, leaving a lot for his Western apologists to answer for.
August 23, 2010
Want to know who coined the term 'Islamo-fascism' and why? Start with this polemic, which is essentially a New York Times article sans editing. Berman has been taken to task by the predicable array of liberal critics who simply refuse to wag an accusatory finger in the face of Islam. The fascinating connection between National Socialism and muscular Islamism should not be so lightly dismissed (as many of Berman's detractors and critics have) by those seeking real insight into contemporary political Islam and its assault against the West.
October 13, 2012
I wasn't really sure what this book was about when I started it, and now that I am finished I am not sure what the point was. Okay, I get it, Paul Berman has a problem with Tariq Ramadan. This is understandable, as Ramadan sounds like first-rate jerk and complete nut-job. But it shouldn't take a couple hundred pages to make that point, although the role played by Nazism was interesting. The last part was fairly enjoyable, if only because it brought a few more players into the story.
October 20, 2014
Required reading. It's not an easy read, in several ways. One, there are uncomfortable truths, and two, it's intellectually rigorous. Like many others, I was a bit puzzled by the emphasis on Tariq Ramadan, but the reason for this becomes clear. His discussion on the disgraceful treatment of Ayaan Hirsi Ali by the so called "liberal left" is both troubling and enlightening. The review of this book by a Kurdish professor - quoted extensively in the Afterword - is remarkably apposite today.
February 9, 2015
The title of the book doesn't fully describe it, as a lot of it is spent in looking into some current Islamic philosophers, but the last 2-3 chapters definitely answer to the title. The whole book is well thought-out and researched, and even though there are some underhanded digs here and there, it rings very true.
(also, what it really told me is that I should look into Pascal Bruckner, and that this is history repeating itself, like with the communist fellow-travellers)
(also, what it really told me is that I should look into Pascal Bruckner, and that this is history repeating itself, like with the communist fellow-travellers)
January 31, 2016
Plain words are the constitution of this book, but they arouse a terrible fury in me. I found myself reflected in some of the reactions to Hirsi Ali. I also failed to see the emotional content in her writings that trumps the all-too-clever considerations of "Well, what would you have us do?" The more pertinent question was and remains, "What have they done?" Hopefully, others with my flawed inclinations will reach for this book, and this conclusion, with a heart ready to repent.
August 9, 2016
"Nazi Sheikhs: Joel Whitney interviews Paul Berman" - On #TariqRamadan’s doublespeak, islamism’s ties to #nazism and the intellectual confusion of some liberal journalists http://www.guernicamag.com/interviews... #totalitarianism #fascism #AyaanHirsiAli #history #CarolineFourest #PascalBruckner #islam #islamism #AlBanna #MuslimBrotherhood #history #liberalism
May 25, 2010
What I learned from this? Paul Berman is a good writer. I don't always agree with him and sometimes I saw shadows of hyperbole, but he makes a compelling case for his p.o.v. Then I interviewed him for a podcast and that was enjoyable.
August 9, 2011
Briljant geschreven, heldere uiteenzetting van een gedurfde stellingname. Een mustread voor iedere al dan niet zelfbenoemde Midden Oostenkenner. Met name zijn filering van Tariq Ramadan's intellectuele bronnen en het blootleggen van de kunst van het weglaten door Ramadan verdient aanbeveling.
October 22, 2012
A bit lengthy and thin in places, but a very good follow-up for Berman's mammoth essay published on the Sign and Sight website. However, the Islam in Europe debate on that website is even more insightful as all sides get to weigh in.
April 6, 2016
Well informed,bold essay on Tariq Ramadan - and by definition Islam - with an interesting sidebar on Ayaan Hirsi Ali.An extended essay about the failure of Western journalists to understand and challenge Islamic thinkers.
August 15, 2010
I am reading this in conjunction with "Taming the Gods: Religion and Democracy on Three Continents" by Buruma.
April 19, 2011
Excellent book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews