What do you think?
Rate this book
Khadafy
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review
January 22, 2019
An old book, so the picture was not complete by the time of publishing.
It has an agenda, which makes the presented events doubtful factually, and their interpretations doubtful analytically.
Yet Khadafi was indeed a madman, drunk with power and hungry for the spotlight. So despite the doubts streaming from the clear political agenda of the book, one has to agree: these events may have not occurred or interpreted as written in this book, but again, they might have!
But there are definitive errors in the book.
The author fell into the same error, for example, that many other western authors writing about the Middle East, of not differentiating between political propaganda brainwashing or manipulating the masses, and the true colors of the politicians using this propaganda. The author believes that Khadafi had a deeply rooted fundamental Islamic set of values. This was a lie that Khadafi told and the author bought. Khadafi was a coup leader. In search of legitimacy, he claimed all sorts of lies about where his allegiances are seated. He claimed Islamism in a conservative yet apolitical society, that looked fondly at pious individuals and gave their transgressions a forgiving eye. He also claimed Pan-Arabism then Africanism, as flavors of the day, whenever it suited his political interest, gained him popular support in the streets, or gave him a chance at competing for attention from Western media.
We know now enough of his actions to call his "Islamic" bluff. I don't know if he started with Islamic thoughts, then "got high" on power, or if it was a facade all along. But I know he was not "driven" by Islamism, as the author claimed.
Khadafi was only driven by a narcissistic creed of "Khadafism".
I have however to give credit to the author for his attempts at balancing his strong convictions about Khadafi (however erroneous), with nuanced (albeit meek) statements of doubt such as (page 19): "The question then was the same as the question now. Was Khadafi capitalizing on [the supposed] Arab hatred [towards Israel] or was he reflecting it?".
It has an agenda, which makes the presented events doubtful factually, and their interpretations doubtful analytically.
Yet Khadafi was indeed a madman, drunk with power and hungry for the spotlight. So despite the doubts streaming from the clear political agenda of the book, one has to agree: these events may have not occurred or interpreted as written in this book, but again, they might have!
But there are definitive errors in the book.
The author fell into the same error, for example, that many other western authors writing about the Middle East, of not differentiating between political propaganda brainwashing or manipulating the masses, and the true colors of the politicians using this propaganda. The author believes that Khadafi had a deeply rooted fundamental Islamic set of values. This was a lie that Khadafi told and the author bought. Khadafi was a coup leader. In search of legitimacy, he claimed all sorts of lies about where his allegiances are seated. He claimed Islamism in a conservative yet apolitical society, that looked fondly at pious individuals and gave their transgressions a forgiving eye. He also claimed Pan-Arabism then Africanism, as flavors of the day, whenever it suited his political interest, gained him popular support in the streets, or gave him a chance at competing for attention from Western media.
We know now enough of his actions to call his "Islamic" bluff. I don't know if he started with Islamic thoughts, then "got high" on power, or if it was a facade all along. But I know he was not "driven" by Islamism, as the author claimed.
Khadafi was only driven by a narcissistic creed of "Khadafism".
I have however to give credit to the author for his attempts at balancing his strong convictions about Khadafi (however erroneous), with nuanced (albeit meek) statements of doubt such as (page 19): "The question then was the same as the question now. Was Khadafi capitalizing on [the supposed] Arab hatred [towards Israel] or was he reflecting it?".
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review