Chapter 4: The Occidental Discourse of Qasim Amin

The objective of this chapter is to analyze the Occidental discourse of Qasim Amin (1863-1908), who is considered to be one of the main founders of Arab liberalism in general and of the Arab women’s liberation movement in particular. Amin’s Occidental views are unique and stimulating not only because of his intellectual influence but also because of his willingness to stand up to some of his time’s most powerful social and cultural taboos, especially regarding the role of women in the Muslim societies. In addition, Amin saw the West as a model that should be mimicked at the social and cultural level, an idea that was unpopular at his time.

To explain the factors that shaped Amin’s Occidental views, I argue that Amin’s personal and historical circumstances, his view of reform that despised politics and focused instead on social and cultural reform, and his willingness to stand up against the will of public opinion allowed him to advocate Occidental views that were uncommon and unpopular at his time. In this regard, Amin who wanted his Egyptian audience to look up to Europe as a model for social and cultural reform, manipulated the information he had about the West, deemphasized his critiques of the negative effects of Western colonialism on the East, stressed his appreciation of Western civilization and culture, and used double discourse, one when talking to Muslims and the other when talking to Westerners, in order to remain consistent before his Muslim audience.

To illustrate the previous argument, I will start this chapter with an overview of Amin’s life and main ideas. Then I will analyze Amin’s views of the West in general and of the United States in particular. I will also examine Amin’s understanding of the role religion plays in the relationship between Islam and the West. I will conclude this chapter by highlighting some key characteristics of Amin’s Occidental discourse.

1) Amin’s Life

I don’t write to gain the praise of the ignorant or of the masses, who, if they listen to the words of Allah, whose words are eloquent and whose meanings are clear, would not understand them unless they are distorted by the opinion of a religious scholar, who is the most ignorant among all people about his religion; and who [the masses] don’t love their country unless it looks in their eyes in an ugly picture, in wrong ethics, and in idiot traditions. However, I write to the people of knowledge. In particular [I write] to the new generation, who are our hope for the future (Imarah 1989:421).


Amin lived a life of an intellectual who stayed away from politics and devoted his life to social and cultural reform. In this regard, Amin cared for the masses, but he was not willing to hold his ideas captive to the masses’ conservative agenda. Instead, Amin introduced social and cultural ideas that were taboos at his time and hoped that the next generations would understand him and benefit from his ideas. Several factors led Amin to think this way.

First, Amin could be considered part of the Egyptian elite that held new and different ideas from the rest of scholars and the conservative masses. Amin was born in Egypt in 1863 to a Turkish father who worked as a high officer in the Egyptian military, and an aristocratic Egyptian mother. Amin acquired an undergraduate degree in law in 1881 and traveled to France in the same year to study law for four years. After his return to Egypt in 1885, Amin worked as a public prosecutor and then as a judge. He wrote articles in the Egyptian press and authored two books on the status of women’s rights in Egypt.

Amin’s writings on women’s rights, which were widely criticized at his time, made him one of the main, if not the main, modern founders of the women’s liberation movement in the Arab world. Amin was a known figure in the Egyptian national movement. He also worked closely with Saad Zaghloul, one of the main leaders of the Egyptian national movement during the first quarter of the 20th century.

One can argue that Amin’s aristocratic background and his life and education in Europe at a young age introduced him to ideas that were not very common among Egyptians, the majority of whom were illiterate, conservative, and impoverished. However, it is also important to note that Amin’s aristocratic background did not alienate him from the difficult conditions and suffering of the Egyptian masses. He always considered himself an Egyptian, who was concerned about the welfare of the poor Egyptian masses. These attitudes could be partly explained by Amin’s association as a youth with Jamal al-Din al-Afghani and his intellectual circle at the end of the 1870s. Amin also met and worked closely in France with some of Al-Afghani’s associates, who were expelled from Egypt after the national uprising in 1882. In addition, Amin’s writings were always colored with a humanistic social philosophy that focused his attention on the miseries of the poor Egyptian masses and kept him busy looking for solutions for such miseries.

Second, Amin spoke with optimism about the political life of Egypt at the end of the 1890s, when he published his two books. He believed that Tawfiq and Abbas were constitutional rulers, who granted Egyptians many freedoms (Imarah 1989:243). He also believed that the conditions of Egypt had been improving in the second half of the 19th century, especially since the Orabi public uprising in 1882. Once the British occupation forced the Egyptian governments to open up their political systems and to lessen their control over the Egyptian press some intellectuals, such as Qasim Amin, were convinced that Egyptians enjoyed enough political freedoms and needed instead to focus on social and cultural reform.

Third, Amin despised politics in general and felt that Egyptians spent too much time on politics while neglecting the need to reform their social and cultural circumstances.

The freedom to criticize has been used so far in criticizing the works of the government because this new tone (political criticism) amuses the listeners and opens their hearts and buckets. But when it comes to the other issues; the religious [issues], the social [issues], the [issues] related to personal affairs, habits, and ethics, these issues have not been criticized by the observers. They [the observers] have not seen in those issues any shortcomings, which are worth of criticism. This is not exactly true. They see the problems but they don’t dare to point them out (Imarah 1989:162).

Fourth, Amin looked down on public opinion and its role in achieving reform. “What is public opinion?,” Amin asked (Imarah 1989:151), “Is it not, many times, an idiot crowd, an enemy to change, a servant to falsehood, a supporter to injustice? If reformers always wait for the agreement of the public opinion, the world will never change.” These views led Amin to focus on writing and to abstain from engaging the masses at the grassroots level.
2) Amin’s View of Reform

Amin’s life and circumstances led him to view reform as a gradual, evolutionary long-term process that would take generations to happen and that should focus first and foremost on changing the social and cultural circumstances of his contemporary Egyptians, starting with reforming the way Egyptians treated women and raised up their children. Amin understood that authoritarianism was a major hindrance to Muslims’ progress, but he favored not to deal with politics and to focus instead on social and cultural reform.

In this regard, Amin believed in some kind of a linear evolutionary theory. He actually quoted Darwin and his evolutionary theory a few times. Amin thought that human history is moving toward progress and that all nations can follow the same path of civilization if they follow science. He believed that all societies rise and decline and fight with each other for power and control and that victory will be granted to the society that is most powerful in science, wealth, and the military. (Imarah 1989:374-375)

In addition, Amin believed that change can only come from inside. “The status of any nation,” Amin argued (Imarah 1989:171), “is not a situation that exists or changes because of luck. It is a permanent outcome that does not change unless that nation changes itself.” He thought that Muslims were not going to reform their societies unless they clearly saw their shortcomings and weaknesses. “If nations don’t feel their retreat compared to other nations and their inabilities to achieve what other nations have achieved,” Amin argued (Imarah 1989:503), “nations will not seek either to advance or to achieve one of the goals [that the more advanced nations have achieved].” Therefore, he criticized Muslims who talked about the glorious past of the Muslim civilization “every time Europeans speak about their sciences and arts” and urged them to focus instead on their contemporary difficult circumstances and to evaluate their conditions humbly and objectively (Imarah 1989:450).

He also believed that “all Muslim societies” at his time were living in “a state of full decay” (Imarah 1989:232) that started after the fall of the Abbasid Empire (Imarah 1989:485). As a social critic, Amin saw decline and retreat in all aspects of Egyptians’ lives. He criticized Egyptians for being lazy and dependent on their governments in education and in employment. He criticized them for neglecting the importance of education, for disrespecting their families and their fellow citizens, and for neglecting the importance of educating women and children.

Third, Amin believed that Muslims’ decay was rooted in two major problems, lack of education (in its general and holistic sense) and authoritarianism. Regarding education, Amin saw Egyptian society as a society that was full of ignorance, wrong ideas, and bad habits. For example, he criticized Egyptians for mistreating their wives, for preventing their daughters from going to school, and for believing that educating women corrupted their souls and ethics. He also believed that Egyptians did not respect their countries, each other, or their families. He felt that Egyptians misunderstood their religion, neglected science and the scientific way of thinking, and favored many wrong habits and traditions that they inherited from their parents. Therefore, he believed that reform in Egypt should start with spreading knowledge and education and with fighting the many wrong social, religious, and cultural ideas that Egyptians had. He also believed that reform should start with educating women because women are responsible for educating the future generations.

If Egyptians want to reform their conditions, they have to start reform from its first step. They have to believe that they have no hope in becoming a lively nation that is respected among the advanced nations. …unless their homes and families are a good environment that can raise men who have the characteristics of success. And there is no hope for transforming the homes and families [of the Egyptians] into this good environment unless women are educated and unless women share, with men, men’s ideas, hopes, and pains, if not all of their activities. (Imarah 1989:512)


Although Amin devoted most of his writings to social reform and to defending women’s right to education, he believed that the main cause of Muslims’ decline was authoritarianism. He thought that government oppression was the source of all oppression in society, and he believed that ending oppression would improve people’s ethics and spread a culture of ethics and rights. In this regard, Amin was very critical of the Muslim governments in general and of Mohamed Ali’s regime in particular. Amin believed that Mohamed Ali and Ismael were very oppressive rulers who, along with other former rulers of Egypt, taught the Egyptian peasants to fear nothing more than they feared the oppression of the government. This fear, according to Amin, taught Egyptians many wrong social and cultural habits, such as lying, hypocrisy, and to oppress their subordinates.

Yet, Amin did not recommend any specific solutions for authoritarianism. He was a social reformer who believed in gradual change through spreading education and ethics. He also believed that change requires a long period of time and that reform would take generations to occur (190). He also praised his contemporary Egyptian rulers, Tawfiq and Abbas, for being constitutional rulers, who granted Egyptians many freedoms (Imarah 1989:243).

Fourth, it is important here to note that Amin rejected the idea of blaming Islam for Muslims’ decline. Throughout his writings, Amin spoke about the Islamic religion as a perfect religion that provides right guidance to Muslims in all aspects of life. On the other hand, Amin believed that the way his contemporary Muslim masses and religious scholars understood Islam was wrong and problematic. He believed that Muslims had replaced Islam’s guidance and rules with distorted views and facts that were based on wrong un-Islamic habits and with traditions that were encouraged by authoritarianism.

3) Amin’s Occidental Discourse

In the two previous sections of this chapter, I have focused on explaining Amin’s life and view of reform. I have demonstrated how the political circumstances of Egypt during the 1890s and Amin’s aristocratic background, in addition to his attitudes toward the masses and toward politics, led him to see reform from a particular perspective. In this section, I will explain how the previous factors shaped Amin’s Occidental discourse and led him to deemphasize the negative perceptions he had about the West for the sake of promoting the West as a model for social and cultural reform.

1. Amin’s Occidental Discourse When Talking to Westerners

Most of Amin’s writings were in Arabic and were directed toward Egyptian intellectuals and young, educated generations. However, Amin wrote a French book that is hardly known in Arabic intellectual circles (Imarah 1989:220). Amin wrote this book, titled The Egyptians, in 1894 responding to a French traveler, Duc D’h Arcouri, who wrote a book criticizing Egyptians and Egypt.

In The Egyptians Amin criticized the European Orientalists who wrote about Islam, Muslims, and Muslim societies without having enough knowledge or understanding of them and who used, in their books, strange, extreme and random stories about the Orient to make their books more interesting to the general public and more saleable. “I know from my experience the approach that Europeans follow in writing their books [about the Orient],” Amin said (Imarah 1989:224), “They depend on what the translators provide them. And the more horrible and very weird these materials are, the more expensive it will be. We should not forget how these materials guarantee the success of the book.” Amin also criticized the Orientalists for not mixing with Easterners and for not making any serious efforts to know the people or the cultures of the Orient.

Amin was particularly critical of the way Orientalists studied the religion of Islam. Amin felt that (Imarah 1989:225) Duc D’h Arcouri “hated” Islam “deep in his heart” and that (281) Duc D’h Arcouri was launching a “campaign” against Islam in his book. He also criticized Duc D’h Arcouri for not studying the Quran or the life of the Prophet Mohamed and for failing to quote either of them when talking about Islam. Duc D’h Arcouri’s perceived attack on Islam led Amin to defend Islam’s position regarding several issues, such as Islam’s position on learning and science, on women’s rights, and on slavery. Moreover, Amin launched a counterattack on the history of Europe and on Christianity. For instance, regarding the issue of slavery, Amin responded to Duc D’h Arcouri’s criticism by defending Islam as a religion that sought to end slavery. Then he launched a counterattack on Duc D’h Arcouri by remanding him that some Western nations, including America, approved slavery and that many European poor classes lived during the Middle Ages in a status that was worse than slavery. Amin also attacked Christianity in response to Duc D’h Arcouri’s attack on Islam and described it as a religion that is full of contradictions and irrationalities. Amin also attacked the concept of the Trinity as “a vague [concept] that cannot be explained.” (Imarah 1989:265)

When it came to the treatment of women, which was one of Amin’s favorite intellectual subjects, Amin responded to Duc D’h Arcouri’s attack on the status of women in Egyptian society by defending the way Egyptians treated women and by launching a counterattack on the way Western societies treated women. In this regard, Amin defended the separation between men and women in Egyptian society as a practice that protected both men and women from seduction (Imarah 1989:261). In contrast, Amin attacked Western societies for having high rates of divorce, out-of-marriage pregnancies, and abortion (Imarah 1989:252-255). He also attacked several Western social habits, such as drinking and swimming while wearing tiny swimming suits, for being too liberal and seductive.

When it came to ethics, Amin described the average Oriental as a kinder individual, whose soul was less corrupt and who was ethical by nature and not because of his fear of being punished by law (Imarah 1989:274-275). Amin also defended Egyptians, Arabs, and Turks as brave, honest, generous and kind people who were corrupted only because of their authoritarian governments. In contrast, Amin thought that the majority in the West acted ethically not because of their natural kindness, but out of their fear of being punished by law (Imarah 1989:275).

If someone wants to judge the ethics of a nation, he can only observe the behaviors of its individuals. And I emphasize again that the people of the East in general are less interested in evil, less willing to offend others, and more willing to help others. Even the criminals [among the Eastern people]! Their crimes don’t involve the deceiving tricks, the intensity, the diversity, and the precision that the criminals of the West are known for. (Imarah 1989:279)


When it came to the interactions between the East and the West, Amin was very critical of the negative effects many Europeans had on the East. He felt that many Europeans who lived in the East did not care about the interests and welfare of Easterners. Instead, they used all illegal means and tricks to deceive and overcome the poor Egyptian peasants and to manipulate their land and wealth (Imarah 1989:276). At the state level, Amin believed that Europe used its influence and control over Egypt’s affairs against the interests of the Egyptian people.

The influence of Europe has been increasing in Egypt since the regime of Said until it reached during Ismail’s regime [the level of] real control over us. Since that time, all our actions and movements have become subject to orders coming from the prime ministries of Paris, London, and Berlin. …Europe has always used this influence against Egypt. (Imarah 1989:300)


Amin was critical of how the European consulates in Egypt had become like “independent kingdoms” inside Egypt that were “fully free” from the influence of the Egyptian state. Amin criticized the European consulates for caring too much about the interest and safety of their own citizens to the extent that they shielded their citizens from Egyptian law even if they violated the law and committed punishable criminal acts (Imarah 1989:301).

However, this criticism did not prevent Amin from expressing some positive views toward the West. For instance, Amin showed appreciations for the minority of Europeans who moved to the East to benefit and help Easterners (Imarah 1989:228). In addition, throughout the book Amin looked at Europe as a role model that Egypt was seeking to mimic (Imarah 1989:232).
What is striking about these views is that they were hardly expressed in Amin’s writings to the Egyptian masses, which focused on presenting the West to Muslim as a model for reform that should be imitated.

2. Amin’s Occidental Discourse When Talking to Egyptians

Amin’s Arabic articles and books, in contrast to his French book, held generally positive views of the West. This is because, as explained in the previous section, Amin viewed reform from an evolutionary perspective that saw the decline and rise of nations as an inevitable, continuous process and thought that all nations would learn from each other one day. This led Amin to believe that his contemporary Egyptians had no other alternative to progress but to look up to Europe, his contemporary most advanced civilization, and learn from it. This conviction led Amin, when talking to Egyptians in Arabic, to deemphasize many of the negative Occidental views that he expressed in his French writings.

When talking to Egyptians, Amin rejected the idea of blaming Europe for Muslims’ problems. Amin once described Europe as the “the only major obstacle that we [Egyptians] have been fighting in order to reclaim our status in the world” (Imarah 1989:302); but he believed that Egyptians’ interactions with Europeans had been ultimately positive because those interactions stimulated Egyptians to mimic Europeans and to seek to reach their standard of living.

Egyptians started in these last years to feel their bad social conditions. They started to show signs of pain from such circumstances, and they felt the necessity to work to improve their status. They got the news of the Europeans and they mixed and lived with many Europeans. They got to know how advanced the Europeans are. They saw how the Europeans are enjoying good living, power, influence, and many other advantages that the Egyptians lack. …Therefore, the Egyptians felt the need to match them [the Europeans], and to enjoy the same advantages. (Imarah 1989:511)

Moreover, Amin believed that Egyptians were the source of their own problems, not the Europeans: “If the Europeans intend to harm us, they don’t have to do anything other than to leave us to ourselves. Then the Europeans will not find a means to achieve their goal than our current status (Imarah 1989:512).”

Europe, for Amin, was a role model that Egypt should follow to improve its circumstances. He saw Europe as the most advanced civilization of his time and believed that Muslims should learn from European sciences, values, and social systems. “Egypt is becoming a European nation in an amazing way. Egypt’s administration, buildings, monuments, streets, habits, language, ethics, taste, food, and clothes are acquiring a European taste,” Amin stated proudly (Imarah 1989:232).

Therefore, Amin had no problem admitting that his contemporary Muslim societies were weaker than the European (Imarah 1989:304). But he believed that Egyptians’ weakness and decline were not inherent or endemic characteristics in the Egyptian people. Egyptians’ problems, according to Amin, were man-made problems that other societies had faced before. He frequently talked about Europe and how it was less advanced during the Middle Ages and saw that as a proof that all nations can overcome their temporary decay. These ideas reflect Amin’s belief in an evolutionary view of progress, which I explained in the previous section.

According to the same views, Amin believed that Muslims, when they were stronger, “conquered other nations to defend what they have and to expand their kingdom and power, and to benefit their industry and trade.” “This is the goal that Europeans try to achieve in the Orient now,” Amin thought (Imarah 1989:377). He also saw the endless competition between nations as a universal order ordained by God.

In addition, Amin thought that all nations learn from each other at some historical moment. He believed that early Muslims learned and adopted the advanced sciences and arts of the nations that they conquered (Imarah 1989:494). Then Muslims built on those sciences and arts and developed their own. In the Middle Ages, Amin believed, Europeans learned from Muslims and used Muslims’ advanced sciences and arts to build their own civilization. Therefore, he encouraged Muslims to learn from Europe and progress in the same way Europe had progressed. For instance, when it came to the issue of treating women, Amin stated (Imarah 1989:485), “I don’t find any reason why we should not follow the same path, in which the European nations have marched ahead of us.” And, when it came to educating the new generation, Amin believed (Imarah 1989:499), “we have no solution except to raise our children so they would understand the affairs of the Western civilization and know its foundations and branches and effects.”

It is impossible to fix our [difficult] conditions, if we don’t establish them according to the new contemporary modern sciences. Human conditions, despite how different they are, and regardless of whether they are materialistic or non-materialistic, are subject to the power of science (Imarah 1989:499).

This is why we see that the advanced nations, despite their different races, languages, nationalities, and religions, are similar to a great extent in the shape of their governments, administrations, courts, family systems, education, languages, literature, buildings, and streets. Moreover, [they are similar] in many basic habits, such as clothes, greeting, and eating. And, when it comes to sciences and industries, there is no difference except that they increase in some nations more than in others (Imarah 1989:499-500).

From this, we can verify that the result of civilization is to push all humanity in the same path. The difference between the primitive nations or the nations that did not reach a high level of civilization [on one side and the civilized nations on the other side] is that these nations [the primitive ones] have not built their social status on a scientific basis (Imarah 1989:500).

This is what made me use the Europeans as a role model and recommend imitating them and what encouraged me to encourage people [Egyptians] to look at the [status of] European woman (Imarah 1989:500).

This view of progress and of the relationship between the East and the West led Amin to spread more positive images of Europe than negatives ones. In this context, Amin repeatedly used two main images of the West. The first image was the image of the Western individual as an active, ambitious individual, who is risk-taking and who was raised up to think of his own self as an independent free person who does not like to depend on his government. Amin also praised Europeans for being good citizens, who love their countries and love to work voluntarily and to establish non-profit organizations that work for the public good. In contrast, Amin criticized Egyptians for being lazy, complaining, dependent on their government, and lacking the ethics of public and group work (Imarah 1989:173-187).

You can see [that] the [Western] man, in America for instance, starts his career with a small business or industry, then reaches after a few years to the level of a big businessman who own millions. Why? Because he works to gain wealth. They are always working. Every one of them works during the day and brainstorms about his work during the night. He [the Western man] was brought up to work hard. He was raised up to be independent. …His education and habits taught him to be attached to work. …He observes everything. He experiments with everything. And, when he reaches his goal, he will feel victorious and his success will encourage him to continue. If he fails and faces a hindrance that he cannot overcome, he will start a different business or he will work in the same business [after] seeking a different approach. (Imarah 1989:173)

In contrast, you will find the individual among us, the Egyptians or the Easterners in general, is like an animal that is tied blindly to a water pump. He [the Easterner] walks slowly, step by step, with his eyes covered. And he may stop after very few steps until he hears a sound alarming him [that he has to work more]. Then he will push himself to walk another step; then he will stop. (Imarah 1989:173)

The second image dealt with the status of women, which was the main focus of most of Amin’s Arabic writings. In this regard, Amin praised the West for being more respectful of women and for encouraging women to learn and play sports and advance in education and careers. He felt that women were equal to men in the West and that Western societies had developed better ways for educating and bringing up their children, both mentally and physically. “Westerners speak proudly of the [positive] effect women have on their lives,” Amin applauded (Imarah 1989:234).

The new woman, which is one of the fruits of modern civilization, started to appear first in the West due to the new scientific discoveries that freed the human mind from the influence of myths, doubts, and lies, and that made him the master of his own self. (Imarah 1989:420)


In addition to these positive images, Amin encouraged Muslims to learn more about the West and to understand the Western mind and way of thinking, which may be different from Muslims’ habits and traditions. He discouraged Egyptians from making generalizations about the West and from judging the West before knowing more about its traditions, history, and languages. Instead, he promoted the idea that Western societies consisted of different classes and groups. For instance, Amin thought (Imarah 1989:504) that Western elites were more corrupt that the middle classes because the former were more “rich and unemployed, and are controlled by their own desires.”

We, in reality, don’t know about the West except some of the superficial stuff. And many of us do know [about the West] more than what is known [about the West] in the streets, the coffee shops, and what he [that Egyptian] may have read in some stories and fairy tales. (Imarah 1989:504-505)

Whoever wants to judge them [the Westerners] fairly, has to understand all aspects of those [Western] nations’ lives and understand all the feelings and emotions that move their souls. This will require a complete understanding of their languages, history, traditions, and ethics. (Imarah 1989:505)

On the other hand, Amin was very critical of the status of women in Muslim societies. He criticized Egyptians for disrespecting women and mistreating them. He criticized the way Egyptians brought up their daughters and how Egyptians prevented their daughters and wives from gaining education, playing sports, and pursuing their own careers.

Woman, in the eyes of Muslims, in general, is not a full human being. And man among them believes that he has control over her and he treats her according to this conviction. There are many proofs of that. (Imarah 1989:438)

It is also important here to note that, Amin, when talking to Egyptinas, used some negative images of the West, but less frequently. When it came to the relationship between the European nations, Amin saw them as blood brothers who hated each other. “The European kingdoms,” Amin argued (Imarah 1989:395), “show peace while they are getting ready for war. And when the opportunity comes each of them will jump on the other to destroy him.”

Amin was critical of colonialism. He saw European civilization as a greedy civilization that was looking for wealth and profit everywhere and through all means, regardless of whether those means were legitimate or not. He also believed that Europeans were willing to use violence and their power to dominate weaker nations and manipulate their wealth (Imarah 1989:374)

In addition, Amin was critical of the history of Europe and Christianity. He believed that Europe during the Middle Ages was socially and culturally as bad as, and some times worse than, the Muslim societies of his time. He also believed (Imarah 1989:325) that Christianity as a religion was inferior to Islam when it came to family laws and to the rights of women. For example, he thought that Christianity, contrary to Islam, did not provide a clear religious legal system that deals with women’s rights. He also criticized (Imarah 1989:398) the church for prohibiting divorce for a long period of time, which made family laws intolerable for some Christians.

In summary, this section shows that Amin, deep in his heart, saw the West both as an obstacle against and a model for reform. Yet, because of Amin’s personal agenda and background and his understanding of reform and how it should be achieved, he chose to focus on portraying the West positively when talking to Muslims.

4) Amin’s View of America

America was clearly present in Amin’s writings. He spoke about America several times and saw it as the best and most advanced Western society in terms of the way Americans treat women, bring up their children, and teach their children to be independent and risk-taking individuals.

When it came to the status of women in the West, Amin believed that “the American woman comes first” in terms of freedom and independence. “Then,” Amin thought (Imarah 1989:325), “comes the British woman, then the German, then the French, then the Austrian, then the Italian, then the Russian, and after that the rest will follow.” “America’s women,” Amin argued (Imarah 1989:364), “are the earth’s freest women.” He also spoke positively about the freedoms American women have and about how they mix freely and constantly with men without either getting corrupted or loosing their honor or ethics. He praised America for granting women their political rights and for having civil groups that worked on defending women rights (Imarah 1989:384). He also praised America for having flexible divorce laws despite the church’s opposition to that notion (Imarah 1989:399).

In addition, Amin spoke positively of the role American women played in America’s public life. He praised America for allowing women to work as priests, judges, public officials, engineers, journalists, and in many other careers. He felt that the participation of women in America’s public life had a positive effect on the rest of society and that it made public life more civil and honest (Imarah 1989:429).

When it came to education, Amin praised the way Americans brought up their children and taught them to be free, independent, and risk-taking individuals. He also praised Americans’ independence from their governments.

Look at the Eastern countries: you will find that women are enslaved to men and that men are enslaved to the rulers. The [Eastern] man is unjust inside his home and [simultaneously] a subject for injustice outside his home. Then look at the European nations, you will find that their governments are built on freedom and on respecting individual rights, which contributed to the rise of women to a high degree of status and freedom in terms of work and thinking. …Then look at America: you will find that [American] men are fully independent in their private lives and that the authority of the government and its intervention in individuals’ affairs are almost non-existent. This is why the freedom of women [in America] very much increased beyond [the freedom of women] in Europe. Hence, women in America are equal to men in all private rights, and in some states they became equal in some political rights (Imarah 1989:426-427).


Yet Amin also mentioned some negative images of America. This was part of his general critique of Europe and the West more than a critique of America itself. In this regard, Amin criticized America as one of the Western societies that approved slavery in modern times (Imarah 1989:237). He also criticized the founders of America for the injustices they committed against the native Americans. In this regard, Amin compared early Americans to European colonizers, whom he perceived as selfish, greedy, and uncaring about the interests of poor nations and masses (Imarah 1989:374).

In general Amin, used America as another better example to show his Arab and Muslim audience that they needed to learn from the West. By portraying America as a new and better West, Amin was trying to demonstrate to Egyptians the richness of Western civilization and how it is capable of producing new and more advanced societies.

5) Role of Islam in Amin’s Occidental Discourse

Religion had a limited place on Amin’s Occidental discourse. Amin was very critical of the way his contemporary Muslims understood Islam (Imarah 1989:289). He always felt that the masses’ understanding of Islam reflected their inherited cultural customs and traditions more than it reflected the true teachings of Islam itself, especially when it came to the treatment of women (Imarah 1989:380). He rejected the notion that Islamic civilization was perfect. Instead, he believed that Muslim civilization was a human experience that is imperfect. Therefore, he encouraged his contemporary Muslims to learn about Islamic civilization; but he cautioned that (Imarah 1989:496) “many aspects [of Islamic civilization] cannot be part of our contemporary social system.” He believed that modern Europe was capable of producing a more advanced civilization and that better social systems could be established in the universe in the future.

In addition, Amin was an advocate for national unity. Therefore, he was proud (Imarah 1989:228) that Egyptian Muslims were united with the Egyptian Copts against the Ottomans rulers (who were Muslims) during the Orabi national uprising of the early 1880s. He also spoke throughout his writings about the Egyptians in an inclusive language that included all Egyptians, and he did not differentiate between Muslim Egyptians and Christian Egyptians. Moreover, he believed that Eastern Christian women were more educated about life than their Muslim counterparts because they were allowed to mix with men and participate in public life more than the Muslim women (Imarah 1989:363).

However, Amin’s critiques of religious thinking and nationalistic attitudes did not prevent him from speaking proudly about Islam as a religion. He defended Islam frequently. In addition, he believed that Islam provided better guidance on issues such as women’s rights, family laws, social justice, and scientific thinking than Christianity and than many contemporary European laws.

Yet Amin’s pro-Islamic attitudes did not lead him to believe that religion was a major reason for the conflict between the West and the Muslim world. Actually, he rejected those who spread religious animosity between the East and the West and called upon his contemporary Muslims to reject religious bias and to look at the West and study it objectively.

The old animosity that lasted for generations between the Easterners and the Westerners because of their different religions has been, and still is, a reason for their ignorance about each other, for doubting and misjudging each other, and for affecting their minds to the extent that they misperceive things. Nothing can push people away from the truth more than being under the influence of desires while looking for the truth. (Imarah 1989:502)

5) Conclusion: Main characteristics of Qasim Amin’s Occidental Discourse

I conclude this chapter with highlighting some of the key aspects of Qasim Amin’s Occidental discourse.

First, the circumstances of Egypt at the end of the 1890s were different, at least as seen by Amin, than what someone like Afghani saw during the 1870s. Amin felt that Egyptian society during the 1890s enjoyed more political rights and freedoms. Unlike Afghani, who was occupied with agitating the masses to resist British colonialism, Amin focused on reforming the social and cultural circumstances of the Egyptian society. He considered colonialism to be a greedy and manipulative phenomenon, but he did not focus on resisting it. He also considered authoritarianism to be the main source of Muslims’ decline, but he did not pay much attention to fighting it.

Second, most of Amin’s attention focused on social and cultural reform. He thought that educating the masses should help them empower themselves and build an advanced civilization. He also believed that all civilizations learn from each other and that it was Muslims’ turn to look up to Europe as a model and mimic it.

Third, Amin was unique in his willingness to challenge the social and cultural views of his contemporary Egyptian masses, which were largely conservative. In this regard, Amin despised the role of the masses in achieving reform, looked down on Egyptian public opinion, and did not consider himself as a grassroots or a public leader. Instead, he focused on intellectual reform.

Third, Amin, deep in his mind, believed that Western civilization had many negative aspects. He believed that some Europeans hated Islam and campaigned against it, that Western civilization had produced many social and cultural problems, and that Europeans were less kind individuals than Arabs and Muslims. He expressed such views in his French book, yet he chose to deemphasize these views in his Arabic writings.

Fourth, Amin’s background, understanding of reform, and his willingness to challenge the conservative beliefs of the masses led him to manipulate the information he had about the West in order to serve his reform agenda by convincing his Arab audience that the West was a model for reform that they should look up to, learn from, and mimic. In this regard, Amin used some distinct discourse tactics.

He used double discourse, one when writing to Egyptians and the other when addressing Europeans. When talking to Egyptians Amin deemphasized the negative information he had about the West.

Amin refused to address some serious challenges to Arab and Muslim reform at his time, such as the tyranny of many of his contemporary Muslim governments, the negative effects of colonialism on his contemporary Arab and Muslim societies, and the fact that the exchange between the East and the West at his time was between unequal parties, which could lead to the cultural hegemony of the West over the East.

Amin used binary opposition to contrast Easterners with Westerners. Some of these binaries portrayed Easterners as lazy, dependent people in contrast with active and independent Westerners. Other binaries saw Westerners as less kind people, who were willing to commit evil acts and hurt others knowingly. In contrast Amin portrayed Easterners as kinder people by nature.

It is also important to note that Amin encouraged his Arab audience to learn more about the West and discouraged them from rushing to judgment and from making broad generalizations about the West and Westerners.

Amin used the information he had about America to reinforce his views about the West. By portraying America as a new and better West, Amin was trying to demonstrate to Egyptians the richness of Western civilization and how it is capable of producing new and more advanced societies. Yet Amin also invoked two negative images of America. He spoke about America as a country that approved slavery for a long period of time. Amin mentioned this idea in his French book. He also criticized, in one of his Arabic books, the founders of America for annihilating the native people of the American continent.

Finally, Amin rejected the idea of using religion as a basis for explaining the relationship between the East and the West. He was critical of Islamic civilization and rejected those who believed that Islamic civilization was perfect or complete. He was also very critical of his contemporary Muslim religious scholars, who he believed misunderstood Islam. On the other hand, when it came to Islam as a religion, Amin spoke about Islam as a perfect religion that was superior to Christianity and to modern Western legal systems.