by EMRAN FEROZ
PHOTO/Pankaj Mishra/Flickr/Palfest
Interview: None of the violence or dysfunction we are currently witnessing around the world is new and can be repeatedly found in history, Pankaj Mishra told Emran Feroz.
Emran Feroz: One of your central arguments in your recent book “Age of Anger” is that many aspects of today’s violence are connected to the violence that took place in Europe in the 19th century. Why is that the case?
Pankaj Mishra: I think the book essentially steps away from the foolish arguments we have heard over and again – that social or economic problems, religious fundamentalism and militancy are all connected to a country’s culture or religion.
This is what we heard in so many analyses coming out of Western Europe and the United States. What I am trying to do is show that crises like the kind we are witnessing today form part of a very long history.
These problems don’t really have to do much with religion, tradition or philosophy. They are rather connected to our political and economic structures, whether that is the nation-state or industrial capitalism.
The latter is an exploitative and destructing process, and we have seen the effects of these institutions and ideologies in one country after another.
An “Age of Anger” has arisen in almost every country as an attempt to broaden our analytical frameworks.
These had been incredibly narrow and ended in some very stupid and counterproductive conclusions of many current problems.
Europe should see a lot of these young people who embrace violence as part of a longer tradition of violence and dissection
You say that Muslim fundamentalism is some kind of heir to earlier European revolts and that many of these fundamentalists respond to contemporary conditions. Many people in Europe would ask why these extremists are connected to “us”. What would you say to them?
I would say that if you look at your own history, you would find similar fundamentalism, militancy and terrorists – people who respond similarly to experiences of deprivation, the denial of rights, injustice, invasion and imperialism.
We have seen this often in modern history. Europe should see a lot of these young people who embrace violence as part of a longer tradition of violence and dissection in Europe, rather than blame everything on Islam or on some particular region in the world.
It is wrong to say that “these people are coming to us with their problems”. These problems are central to the modern world right from the time it came into being. That is the correct way to understand these problems.
Otherwise you end up offering all kinds of diagnoses which make the problem worse. One of these outcomes is that many people start to think that Islam should be reformed.
According to this foolish idea, the entire Islamic religion should be reformed and with that, Muslims should be brought into modern times. Nevertheless, many factions – and even governments – support this idea.
Why do you think such attempts are still so popular? Why do many people continue to believe in the “clash of civilization” thesis?
The cynical interpretation of this is that it suits people who are in a position of power.
There is a whole intellectual-industrial complex devoted to turning out this kind of analysis. It is very well funded, they are always looking for more money and there is a huge network of right-wing organizations which fund people who think along these lines and have these positions.
Some of this analysis come from genuine ignorance and that is what I am trying to address. If we look at history in this way, we would understand a lot of today’s problems.
A lot of men feel inadequate; they feel failure in the goals that have been prescribed for them.
You say that violence is a “male vocation”. If you take a look at current events and see people like Trump, Erdogan, Putin or Modi or leading figures on the side of extremists groups like ISIS or right-wing groups, all are male. Is it a male problem?
Since the beginning of the modern age, we have been witnessing a crisis of masculinity. A lot of men feel inadequate; they feel failure in the goals that have been prescribed for them.
These men want strong men like Modi, Trump or Erdogan to represent them and control everything. Out of a feeling of frustration, many essentially turn their anger, rage and frustration onto some of the weakest people around them – and women obviously become a target.
That is why we have seen an enormous increase in misogyny. Men feel deeply threatened by the rights of women, how they take jobs and how they have emerged in the public sphere.
These men also feel threatened by the rise of minorities in society and how they take public positions, even though we know these minorities are still very poorly represented. Even the smallest sign of emergence is enough to enrage these men, all over the globe.
Al Araby for more