Eyad Qunaibi - La psychologie de la déviance 3 3
Personal Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/EyadQunaibi4
Twitter account: @EYADQUNAIBI Google account gplus.to\eyadqunaibi
Peace be upon you, dear brothers.
In the previous episode, we discussed the role of the factors of "documentation" and "public commitment" in deviating calls from their course, starting with statements that seem inconsequential but end with a change in mindsets, where they deny the Sharia and accept positivist methods and ally with the enemies of the nation. We linked this to the "commitment and conformity" style, a psychological approach previously used to change the mindsets of prisoners.
Today, we will continue by discussing two other important factors for the success of the commitment and conformity style in deviating calls, which are: self-choice and extra effort.
As for self-choice, we saw that the Chinese investigators used to offer the American prisoner a trivial reward in exchange for his writings, in which he would make some concessions, so that the prisoner would feel that these writings were his own and emanated from himself, without seeing himself as having written what he wrote for a big reward; that is, so that he would not feel that he was compromising his principles for material gain. The goal for this prisoner is to accept the internal self-responsibility for his work and writings, and to feel that he is the decision-maker in them, bound by them, and compelled to defend them.
What is the implication of this on the reality of Islamic movements?
When these movements made one concession after another, were they promised in return an Islamic state and the effective empowerment of Sharia, or liberation from subservience and economic and food dependence on the West? No. If they were promised this, they would feel that their enemy was bargaining with them on their principles in exchange for a goal they know is important to these movements, and at that point, it would be difficult for these movements to abandon these principles that they felt were being targeted by their enemy; because the deal would be clear: "You movements do something that does not agree with your religion and creed to serve the religion of God."
This is a deal to buy consciences and wade through filth for the sake of reaching a pure goal, and it is a deal that repels the souls no matter how great the goal. Even if the Islamic movements accepted this deal, they would not accept the internal responsibility for it, and they would not see the concessions they made as part of their being, and their minds would not agree to conform to these concessions.
The goal is for the person being manipulated not to feel manipulated, so that when he looks at himself in the mirror in the evening, he does not feel that he sees the image of a man who has compromised his principles. If his conscience says to him, "You answered your enemies with what they asked of you," he replies, "But I am the decision-maker, and I chose to do what I did with conviction emanating from myself and my being." And if his conscience says to him, "You are making concessions," he replies, "Concessions for what? The one who makes concessions is usually tempted by something he cares about, but I am probing the enemy's slips and weaknesses and points of weakness in his system and law to achieve a benefit for my religion."
The statement he made and the position he took do not constitute a great breach of my principles and creed; therefore, he deceives himself that he is outsmarting the enemy and sneaking through the loopholes in his system, not bargaining on his principles. This was regarding the factor of self-choice, which, as in the book "Influence and the Psychology of Persuasion," is the most important factor for the success of the commitment and conformity style.
The fourth and final factor is the extra effort. We saw in the first episode of "The Psychology of Deviance" that the person who undergoes great pain and hardship to obtain something gives this thing much greater importance than someone who obtains it with little effort.
In the case of Islamic movements, it was completely clear that they were required to make a great effort in parliamentary elections, spending time, money, and effort in mobilizing votes and organizing campaigns, then making a great effort to obtain the presidency; for it came after excluding some candidates and then nominating new candidates who were apparently corrupt. The obtaining of the position was not in the first round and was not by a large margin.
Similarly, regarding the constitution and the imposition of the military on personalities in its establishment, at every station of these stations, the panic of "the secularists and the remnants" is stirred up, and the sword of the constitutional court is wielded to cut the ropes and lead the people to a new, illusory lifeline. All of this is so that the Islamic movements give great importance to the meager achievements they reached with great difficulty.
For the presidency, which is a position stripped of powers, is the president in it but a servant of the status quo system that contradicts Sharia, and a cover for this system with a "beard" that gives it legitimacy, then bears the heavy legacy of its corruption. And so that the parties do not wake up from the stupor of concessions and do not knock on the door of real relief, it was necessary to distract them periodically with achievements that they find in the folds of the failure corridor.
Sometimes they are allowed to change the leadership of the army, and sometimes they are deluded into playing a historical role in the Gaza war, and then these achievements are magnified by both sides:
After this, we say, brothers: All of the above is but an example of His saying, may He be glorified: {And it is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter that they should have any choice in their affair. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly gone far astray.} And the One who says, may He be glorified: {And this is My path, which is straight, so follow it; and do not follow the paths, for they will lead you away from His path. This He has instructed you with, that perhaps you may become righteous.}
When we point out the mistakes - indeed the sins - of the Islamic movements, some respond to us: "Brother, do you doubt that they want reform? Are you betraying them?" And the answer, brothers: When a person deviates from the command of Allah while he knows, then the mistake equals betrayal no matter the goal.
For he who justifies to himself that he chooses in a place other than choice, and contradicts the evidence and leaves the transmitted for the rational, then this deviation is in itself betrayal, even if the goal with the disobedience of Allah is to serve the religion of Allah. The mistake becomes betrayal because the result is one, which is the destruction of Islam, and the mistake becomes betrayal because Allah, the Exalted, warned against little deviation and leaning towards the enemies and obeying them, so this sinner disobeyed his Lord. The mistake becomes betrayal because Allah commanded taking Islam in its entirety and warned against following the steps of Satan, so this sinner disobeyed his Lord.
Therefore, I am not enticed by the theory that this party or that has sold its conscience and made a deal with America or others in closed rooms. I do not believe that the enemies of the nation will confront the parties with an explicit request to betray their nation; for they want to ensure the factor of "self-choice" as we have mentioned, but in the end, there is no difference. The mistake and betrayal will achieve the same task.
What happens in closed rooms is not necessarily an agreement on betrayal, but these individuals enter already having lost the battle psychologically from the start, having lost the legal compass, and possessed by the idea of presenting a moderate image of themselves. All of this leads to making renunciation a principle and betrayal a personal choice.
Therefore, when we address the people that this or that action by the parties is contrary to "what Allah has said and what His Messenger has said and the consensus of the Muslims," it is astonishing that the response is: "But my brother, their intention is to serve Islam!" What is our concern with intentions, my brothers? Who said that we accuse the intentions of betrayal and harming Islam? We accuse them of what appears as a contradiction to the legal evidence, and at that moment, the mistake is betrayal.
Finally, my brothers, we have tried in these episodes to address the issue of deviation from the method of Allah from the psychological aspect as a new and comprehensive dimension with the legal aspect that is being established in the series "Support for the Sharia." The goal of this approach is not to determine the position based on rational evidence and psychological study, as they are subject to opinions, ijtihad, error, and correctness, but rather positions are determined based on legal evidence.
And among the greatest good is that we submit to the command of Allah the Almighty in submission, surrender, and certainty of the wisdom of Allah, His knowledge, and His mercy. We have addressed the topic from the psychological aspect in imitation and an attempt to understand something of the wisdom of Allah the Exalted, who has made the renunciation of the constants of religion a serious matter and has forbidden both its little and much.
May Allah guide the misguided and return the parties to His path in a beautiful return. Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah.