| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
191621
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Using the case study of Egypt’s largest Salafi movement, the Alexandrian Da‘wa Salafiyya and its party al-Nur, this article revisits Wiktorowicz’s typology which identified three dominant factions within Salafism: purists, politicos, and jihadis (2006). Based on this Egyptian case study, I show that there is no clear boundary between the purists and the politicos. This article also makes the case for an additional category: voluntary co-optation. Instead of fitting into immutable categories, Da‘wa Salafiyya leaders move between religious and political identities depending on what they deem to be the most effective strategy for political survival. Egyptian Salafis have adopted three different strategies to ensure their political survival since the movement’s inception: quietism under Sadat and Mubarak, political activism following the 2011 Revolution, and finally co-optation by the military regime since 2013. Wiktorowicz’s categories are best interpreted as time-bounded pragmatic political strategies rather than finite and static identities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
191623
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Quintan Wiktorowicz’s typology and other methods of classification developed by other scholars from his approach have been the most popular when studying Salafism. However, such typologies, especially when examining Salafism in non-Middle Eastern and minority contexts, have their shortcomings. The first main problem with current typologies is that they discuss distinct Salafi factions at a specific time and local context, but intend to be universal. However, these factions often tend not to be conceptually different, as in many cases, their participants only behave differently due to different circumstances in different localities. Second, these typologies were devised by scholars who chiefly study the Middle East and distinguish different Salafi groups based on their discourses on issues often relevant only in Middle Eastern contexts. This article tests the applicability of the existing classifications of Salafism by drawing on three ethnographic case studies from Cambodia. In Cambodia, Salafism emerged in a Muslim minority context. With the expansion of its networks, fragmentation occurred within the movement due to disagreements such as how to deal with the Muslim (non-Salafi) other and the non-Muslim majority. The article argues that classifications should be set up based on observing local group dynamics instead of being universal. This is because differences among Salafis, just as in other social movements, mainly arise due to the participants’ interaction with the local realities and issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|