Muslim Brotherhood

QUESTION: Can anyone explain me the difference(s) between Wahhabism and Muslim Brotherhood?

In general terms, Muslim Brotherhood is socialist semi-fundmentalist Islam and Wahhabism is fascist fundamentalist Islam, tho Wahhabism is by far the more fundamentalist and dangerous as it is fundamentalist at it's core while Muslim Brotherhood is less fundamentalist but has attracted fundamentalists in Egypt who have been responsible for acts of terror. In Egypt it is sort of a class issue about whether you support Muslim brotherhood or not, with metropolitan educated Egyptians and those whose lives depend on tourism, many millions, not supporting them, and the Fellahin (peasants) suporting Muslim Brotherhood.

Khepesh wrote:In general terms, Muslim Brotherhood is socialist semi-fundmentalist Islam and Wahhabism is fascist fundamentalist Islam, tho Wahhabism is by far the more fundamentalist and dangerous as it is fundamentalist at it's core while Muslim Brotherhood is less fundamentalist but has attracted fundamentalists in Egypt who have been responsible for acts of terror. In Egypt it is sort of a class issue about whether you support Muslim brotherhood or not, with metropolitan educated Egyptians and those whose lives depend on tourism, many millions, not supporting them, and the Fellahin (peasants) suporting Muslim Brotherhood.

Wahhabites and Salafis are two heads of the same hydra, the only difference is the geographic implantation and the enemies they have faced. While Wahabites have been a power sect, the MB Salafis have been underdogs. But it's more than a class distinction.

For the rest it's same shit different brand, both are retrograde, decentralized, fanatics with the Qur'han as basic guideline. The underdog status in the Sunni craziness that the MB has, has driven them into the whole charity business, but both fuckers do that shit.

Not exactly. One can be a follower of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab without being a Salafi and one can be a Salafi without following Abdul Wahhab. Of course one can also be both.

Modern day Muslim Brotherhood is not the same organization as the one from the times of Sayyid Qutb. Sayyid Qutb's organization was a hardcore Islamist organization, modern day Brotherhood is Islamic only in rhetorics - ran by clean shaven guys in western-style suits and ties, they didn't give a damn about implementing Sharia once they took power in Egypt.

Walther von Oldenburg wrote:Not exactly. One can be a follower of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab without being a Salafi and one can be a Salafi without following Abdul Wahhab. Of course one can also be both.

Modern day Muslim Brotherhood is not the same organization as the one from the times of Sayyid Qutb. Sayyid Qutb's organization was a hardcore Islamist organization, modern day Brotherhood is Islamic only in rhetorics - ran by clean shaven guys in western-style suits and ties, they didn't give a damn about implementing Sharia once they took power in Egypt.

so we can say that Muslim Brotherhood advocates more "political islam"

George1 wrote:

Walther von Oldenburg wrote:Not exactly. One can be a follower of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab without being a Salafi and one can be a Salafi without following Abdul Wahhab. Of course one can also be both.

Modern day Muslim Brotherhood is not the same organization as the one from the times of Sayyid Qutb. Sayyid Qutb's organization was a hardcore Islamist organization, modern day Brotherhood is Islamic only in rhetorics - ran by clean shaven guys in western-style suits and ties, they didn't give a damn about implementing Sharia once they took power in Egypt.

so we can say that Muslim Brotherhood advocates more "political islam"

I would say yes, and that is perhaps why it is not allowed in KSA as it is against feudalism, that is why I described them as "socialist" Islam. They are not of course socialist in the normal sense, but have "self help" aspects that can be seen as analogous to some socialist ideas, more perhaps from Kropotkin, but really they are just power mad hypocrites same as most poiticians.

Wahabism per se does not promote feudal structures - but since it found patronage in Al Saud family, it became associated with it over course of history.

i have a question about Muslim Brotherhood and S.Arabia.

Why Saudis have banned Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization in their country but they supported it in Egypt?

George1 wrote:i have a question about Muslim Brotherhood and S.Arabia.

Why Saudis have banned Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization in their country but they supported it in Egypt?

The vast majority of Saudi oilfields are in the Eastern part of the country, an area that is predominantly Shia. If the Saudis allow the Muslim Brotherhood to operate freely in Saudi Arabia there is every possibility that there will be large scale sectarian violence across the country because MB will target Shias. Moreover the leadership of MB is not based in Saudi Arabia so the Saudi Royal family do NOT have much control over them. Already there are several Sunni jihadi groups in Saudi Arabia who are targeting Shias.

If this happens Iran and a few other Shia states might start arming Saudi Shias to fight against the Saudi Government. End result will be that Saudi Arabia will turn into another Iraq, Pakistan or Yemen. Also,  Israel might take advantage of this situation and start to fuel Shia-Sunni conflict inside Saudi Arabia.

In order to prevent large scale sectarian violence the Saudis have banned Muslim Brotherhood in Saudi Arabia.

jhelb wrote:

George1 wrote:i have a question about Muslim Brotherhood and S.Arabia.

Why Saudis have banned Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization in their country but they supported it in Egypt?

The vast majority of Saudi oilfields are in the Eastern part of the country, an area that is predominantly Shia. If the Saudis allow the Muslim Brotherhood to operate freely in Saudi Arabia there is every possibility that there will be large scale sectarian violence across the country because MB will target Shias. Moreover the leadership of MB is not based in Saudi Arabia so the Saudi Royal family do NOT have much control over them. Already there are several Sunni jihadi groups in Saudi Arabia who are targeting Shias.

If this happens Iran and a few other Shia states might start arming Saudi Shias to fight against the Saudi Government. End result will be that Saudi Arabia will turn into another Iraq, Pakistan or Yemen. Also,  Israel might take advantage of this situation and start to fuel Shia-Sunni conflict inside Saudi Arabia.

In order to prevent large scale sectarian violence the Saudis have banned Muslim Brotherhood in Saudi Arabia.

so they use it just as an "instrument" to extend their influence in other arab countries

George1 wrote:so they use it just as an "instrument" to extend their influence in other arab countries

Not necessarily.For example they won't be using them in UAE,Oman, Qatar etc, however will certainly be using them in Iraq, Libya, Yemen and maybe even Pakistan. Just like what they did with Al Qaeda. Financed it, supported it albeit indiscreetly but never allowed it to function within Saudi Arabia.

Basically they use any Wahabbi indoctrinated jihadi group in non [Sunni]Islamic countries.

i found this interesting document

http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/110091

This file contains a meeting between Saddam and the members of the Ba'ath Party in all the Arab countries. Saddam talked about the role of the Ba'ath Party in controlling the Islamic current in the whole Islamic world and the Arab countries. He said that it isn't a profitable trend to contend with these currents, but rather to negotiate with them and try to persuade them that it is inevitable and better to separate between religious thought and command. He talked about the current of the Muslim Brotherhood movement. He stressed that this movement must be exploited to be an ally rather than an enemy. This movement and others similar to it must be persuaded to work with the Ba'ath Party and not against it.