The perception is that the political establishments don’t give a damn about anyone outside their circles of patronage (true), and the Islamist parties at least are incorruptible, care about justice, distribute food and supplies to the poor, etc.

You’ve always got to remember that Islamic terrorist groups have usually focused most of their energies against governments in the Middle East, not us. It’s the old, secular kingdoms and regimes they want to topple. They’re held in place by America, however, so they have to settle businsess with us, too.

The idea that it’s about our freedom, or anything else about our culture is just more of the same American narcissism that gets us into so much trouble abroad.

Arab politics is too damned confusing. The street politics aspect creates a dynamic that we in the modern West just cannot properly understand. It allows for more cross contamination between ideas and the common man. I’m skeptical of any real connection between any serious ideology and the current direction of the Arab world.

As to the Brotherhood, the European and American offshoots are by necessity more liberal than their Middle Eastern counterparts (though I’d hardly call them liberal). I don’t trust the Brotherhood in Egypt as far as I could throw them. It just so happens that they represent the largest element that vaguely resembles a democratic movement contra Mubarak (their popularity insulates them in ways that less Islamist groups cannot expect).

Qutb wants to fight the institutions of ignorance and reestablish a Sharia judicial system (obviously). How strong is this movement, do you think?

My knowledge of Qutbism is limited in scope, but I do know that on a macro scale organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood are gaining in popularity and influence. The question regarding that movement is, how “democratic” and “peaceful” are the respective Muslim Brotherhoods throughout Europe and the Middle East?

From what I’ve read on the Brotherhood, its European counterparts tend to be more tolerant and democratically workable, compared to their Middle Eastern equivalents who see the west and globalism as the enemy of the umma.

Correction from earlier post: Qutbism is considered by most Muslim experts as an off shoot of fundamentalist salfism/wahhabism. I apologize for my affiliation mishap (portion deleted for ignorance).

I think we are probably all in agreement there.

But when simply discussing the motivation of the extremely small groups that have shown the desire and ability to strike the United States and the West where they live is more complex (as I have described in previous comments). The well articulated thoughts of Qutbism and its antecedents have at least as much to do with the situation.

I think that most Arabs perceive it as a clash of both, in so far as America is willing to use its ideas of democracy to make a geopolitical transformation of an area. Or in the case of Israel, to support the ideological and political suppression of another group.

It is true that the proliferation of the globalization movement has many nasty ramifications for parochial cultures. This, in turn, fuels hatred and indignation of the movements center, that is arguably the United States. Perhaps rightfully so.

I think the basic question is this: has America’s foreign policy over the last 40 years done more harm or more good, in respect to Arab-American and Persian-American relations? It seems to me that the answer is more the former than the latter. And this harm has done justice to radical movements’ support base and mass appeal, regardless of the rhetoric and mission.

They do not target other liberal democracies because the United States serves as the symbol of neo-imperialism. And really, how often have they targeted anyone? It is not easy for them to strike so far from home.

US blanket support of Israel
US sanctions on Iraq and Iran
US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq
US bases in Saudi Arabia
US failure to keep Israel in check (especially in the most recent war in Lebanon)

Your explanation also falls because if al Qaeda and similar groups just felt general loathing torward liberal democracies, they would be targeting many other nations in Europe. They aren’t. Al Qaeda and similar groups pretty much only target nations that directly interfere in the Middle East.