|
Defining
Traditionalism
Q.
Your major project at present is writing a trilogy of three volumes
for the Earhart Foundation to be entitled Traditionalism: Force of
the Future. This title might strike most people as an oxymoron or
contradiction in terms. Does not traditionalism mean retreating into
the past?
A.
Perhaps I can best answer your question by stating first that I
consider myself to be an American Islamist and that traditionalism
as I use the term refers to the Islamist movement now taking shape
in America. This necessarily is unlike any other Islamist movement
in the world, though it could become a model for others.
The
term "traditionalism" as a force for the future indeed
would be an oxymoron for Muslims if they translate it as a movement
of the muhaddithin or experts in the Hadiths or
"traditions" of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon
him. Such a translation might indicate that I am promoting the
teachings of the contemporary Salafis, who in their extreme form
want to revive the externals of Islamic law to the exclusion of its
inner core of wisdom, and to retreat into a utopian dream of the
past instead of engaging constructively with the pressing issues of
conscience in the present and future.
In
fact, I mean the precise opposite of backward-looking
superficiality. The best translation into Arabic of
"traditionalism," as I use the term, would be al tamkinu
lil haqqi wa al `adala, which, translated back into English, would
mean "to empower people in their pursuit of truth and
justice." Some day I would like to found an English-language
journal to be called simply Tamkin, which comes from tamakana and
means simply "empowerment."
The
question is, what is to be empowered. The Qur'an, as always, gives
the best answer. In Surah al An`am 6:115, Allah tells us that,
"The Message of Allah is perfected in truth and justice" (tamaat
kalimatu Rabika sidqan wa `adlan). Further, we read, "And among
them we have created a community that judges by truth and, by
applying it, practices justice" (wa minma khalaqna ummatan
yahduna bil haqqi wa bihi ya`adilun). This makes clear that the task
of a Muslim, or anyone else, is to become aware of Allah and to
carry out the resulting responsibilities, that is, to pursue truth
and justice and thereby transform the world. This is the core
meaning of traditionalism.
Q.
If the word "traditionalism" is so misleading, why do you
use it?
A.
My writings are designed for an American audience that of course
does not mean excluding others. However, it's For the cognoscenti or
well-informed American intellectuals, traditionalism has a very
specific meaning dating back three hundred years to the movement
that gave rise to the American Revolution and the U. S.
constitution.
This
movement originated in England toward the end of the 1600's, when
King James II threatened to re-impose centralized monarchical
control, including the restoration of Roman Catholic hegemony. This
would have abrogated the ancient English traditions of responsible
freedom based on the higher law of God, which transcends all human
political power. In order to submit to the Sovereignty of God, a
movement, which became known as the Whigs, carried out the Glorious
Revolution of 1688. During the 1700's, both in England and in the
American colonies, a battle took shape between the Whigs, who wanted
creative change by devolving power in the pursuit of a higher
justice, and the Tories, who wanted to maintain the privileged
status of the nobles at the expense of the new urban classes.
The
Whigs, in turn, developed along two diverging lines. The new
industrialists became more like the reactionary conservatives of
modern-day America. They wanted representative government but
primarily so that they could control the system in pursuit of their
economic bottom line. The traditionalists among the Whigs, led by
Edmund Burke in England, were like the paleo-conservatives of modern
America, who want to maintain the principles of good governance and
economic justice as the framework for all public policy. They are
called principled conservatives, and their movement differs little,
if at all, from the classical liberalism of 19th century America and
from enlightened Islam.
Although
Edmund Burke was the principal champion in Parliament for American
autonomy, he supported the colonists against the imperialistic
proclivities of the England parliament only in order to avoid a
revolution and to maintain the traditional rights of Englishmen
wherever they might be. The colonists supported all the arguments of
Edmund Burke, but concluded that the only way to support his
traditionalist movement in America was to declare complete
independence from England.
I
use the term "traditionalism" because it has the least
baggage in American political parlance. Conservativism is a bad
word, because it smacks of reaction. And classical liberalism,
nowadays, has come to denote either intrusive governmental control
of all life or else libertarian anarchism.
Q.
How does traditionalism relate to the existing party structure in
America? As a traditionalist, are you a Republican or a Democrat?
A.
The traditionalists who produced the American constitution opposed
all Political parties, because they considered that parties
necessarily would be a divisive influence. Public leaders and the
citizens of the republic, they thought, should advocate substantive
policies, assuming that everyone would agree on the basic principles
that made up the American consensus on what is good and bad in
public policy. Political parties, they thought, would pursue power,
not principle, and would sell out principle in order to survive in a
political jungle. The result would be the disintegration of the
traditionalist consensus and perhaps even revolution and war.
Political parties did not arise in America until some decades after
the American republic was founded.
Traditionalism,
as a movement, would seek to bring the wisdom of America's founders
back into all the current parties in America. One could argue that
the Republicans have maintained traditionalism better than any other
parties, simply because they emphasize religion and a transcendent
source of right and wrong. But one could equally argue that the
economic and social justice that lies at the heart of old-fashioned
Whiggism is best represented by the Democratic Party.
So-called
"third parties," such as the Libertarian Party, at least
one wing of which emphasizes the revival of religion as a basis for
public policy, the New Party, which is the nearest America has to a
labor party, and the Reform Party, which is up for grabs, all
support some aspects of traditionalism. None of the existing
parties, however, see traditionalism, in the sense of commitment to
a higher sense of truth and justice, as a paradigmatic framework of
thought and action.
Traditionalism
therefore exists only as a movement, and probably should remain in
this mode for the foreseeable future. For Muslims, traditionalism
could be the name for an Islamist movement in America. But it would
be an unusual Islamism because its goal would not be direct
political power but rather the transformation of thought and
imagination.
Traditionalism
really is a vision of the future based on restoration and creative
renewal of the wisdom of the past. It is a vision of justice, order,
and freedom based on a transcendent source of values. This would
contrast with any vision not so based.
a. Positivism: The Root of Chaos
b. Traditionalism: The Root of Cosmos
c. Culture War
|
