Muslims and the Collapse of the Political Class

Muslims and the Collapse of the Political Class
by Shaykh Dr. Abdalqadir as-Sufi

01/05/2010


When the first great European historian wrote ‘The Peloponnesian War’ around 400 BC he explained its purpose:

‘I shall be content if it is judged useful by those who will want to have a clear understanding of what happened – and such is the human condition, will happen again at some time in the same or a similar pattern.’

Now that we have arrived at the point where the collapse of the political class is not only visible but finally grasped by the ignorant masses, it is vital that the Muslim intellectual elite in whose hands the future is inevitable, coming as they do with a new nomos, that is post-capitalist and theistic, should base their actions on an understanding of why the old order collapsed.

When the Earl of Essex rose against the State of the aging Queen Elizabeth, it was not the personalised conflict of the ambitious favourite and the aged virgin Queen. It was the political crossroads between the two possible foundations of state power – the personal rule against the structuralist State. It was Essex versus the Cecils, but the latter represented the model of a State governed by a political class. Essex was executed, personal rule went under and the modern State was born. Blair, the last dictator of the British political system brought the Cecilian system to an end before sending the country to a war without benefit but which has brought him a personal fortune of millions of dollars of brokering Iraqi oil contracts. His abolition of the House of Lords saw its demise being at least delayed by Viscount Cranbourne, the last of the Cecils!

With Essex dead 400 years the issue has been reborn. With the disintegration of the capitalist wealth system, the political framework which upheld it is disgraced also.
In one of his most important letters Essex wrote to the Earl of Rutland:

‘…above all other books be conversant in the histories, for they will best instruct you in matter, moral, military and politic, by which, and in which, you must ripen your and settle your judgment.”

Now, while it is abundantly clear that the politicians are the scum of the human species, and that their age is effectively over, anarchy is not in our interest. Tacitus and Imam Malik are one in their preference for a limited tolerance of incapable government to chaos itself. The present duty of the, alas, uneducated urban masses is to steer a calm course into a doomed future while working intensely to build a new model of society devoid of the capitalist institutions, instruments and personnel. This is true for Britain, Greece, France, Germany and Spain. The internal crisis inside the U.S.A. is irretrievable. Even ending its wars will not bring rescue. Its near future will be hispanic, and one hopes, finally, Navaho!

With reference to the imminent British election – the historical perspective is vital. While the Empire’s system was in place, the structuralist government was constant. Two parties not governing in opposition but rather on the hidden model, front benches in power, ministerial rule passing among ministers, and, till their turn came, ‘shadow’ ministers. Parliament itself remained engaged in local issues. The two parties which provided this ministerial class were Conservatives and Liberals. They were not in leadership – opposed to one another. Of the Liberals, Oscar Wilde’s Lady Bracknell declared, “We dine with them!”

The socialist ‘Labour’ party were not voted into power but owe their existence, ironically, to the Royal Prerogative of George V, in his rescue of political governance. Ironic, because they plan to abolish that same Prerogative which is the historical foundation of post-Roman Britain.

In the first monetary crisis of post-War Britain with the ruling financial and banking system still insecure, they did not dare risk a socialist government. To break the old two party system logic, rendered merely technical once Opposition now meant, ideologically, an opposite financial doctrine, the logical solution was to split the Labour vote. To this end the financiers set up a rogue politician, Clive Jenkins, to ‘re-create’ the ruined Liberal Party as ‘The Liberal Democrats’. It was to ‘break the mould’ of two party politics. What it did, was what it was intended to do, break Labour and put in a Conservative Party which was in fact a new breed of trained monetarists. Jenkins, the ex-socialist, was elevated to the peerage. The Liberal-Democrats had been financed by a raft of oligarchs, led principally by Lord Rothschild!

For a second time the now terrified financial oligarchy have seen fit to play the broker’s card – ‘Lib-Dem’.

This time it can give Parliament an impotised Government that dare not oppose banking reform, robbed as it will be of legislative power. The Hung Parliament – all middle and no extremes – will assure the rise of extremist groups. It will weaken the Monarchy – the last Henrician gift of religion protecting the State – and this will lift the only protection the Muslim community can count on inside the State. It will also licence the extremist republican right whose prime target is Islam and the Muslims.

It follows from this – that ‘choice’ is not available. The Sky Television, poll manipulated ‘decision’ is something thinking Muslims cannot afford. Forget personalities, forget parties. The issue is survival. For the Muslim population the only way to a safe immediate future is to support Cameron Conservativism and the weak but potentially strong Monarchy. If not them, then the demise of functioning government – ‘the centre cannot hold, mere anarchy is loosed upon the world’ – as Yeats foresaw, and a bleak atheist future.

May Allah grant wisdom to the Muslims of Britain,
and by them rescue their new land and my ancient one.