29ﺁﻭﺭﻳــﻞ 2012
ﭘــﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻮﺩﺗــﺎﻯ 22ﺑﻬﻤــﻦ ،57ﺩﺭ ﻣــﻮﺭﺩ ﺭﻳﺸــﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ »ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﻰ« ﻣﻄﺎﻟﺐ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﻔﺼﻠﻰ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺎپ ﺭﺳﻴﺪ. ﻣﻮﺍﻓﻘﺎﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻮﺩﺗﺎ ،ﺍﺯ ﭼﭗﻧﻤﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺗﺎ ﺭﺍﺳــﺖﺍﻓﺮﺍﻃﻰ ،ﺑﺎ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ »ﺣﻘﺎﻧﻴﺖ« ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﻗﺸﺮ ﺭﻭﺣﺎﻧﻴﺖ ﺷﻴﻌﻪ ،ﻭ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﺎً ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻊ ﺷــﺨﺺ ﺭﻭﺡﺍﷲ ﺧﻤﻴﻨﻰ ﻣﻰﻧﺎﻣﻴﺪﻧﺪ ،ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺎﻳﻪ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺗﻮﺟﻴــﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ .ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺣﻜﺎﻳﺖ »ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﺍﺕ« ﻣﻼﻳﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳــﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭ ﻭ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺳــﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﻃﻰ ﺳﺎﻝﻫﺎﺋﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ 22ﺑﻬﻤﻦ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻣﻴــﺪ ،ﻧﻘﻞ ﻣﺤﻔﻞ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻨﺎﺡﻫﺎ ﺷــﺪ .ﻣﺸــﻜﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ
ﺍﻳﻨــﺎﻥ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﻣــﺪ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺮﻭﻫﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺎﻓﻠﺔ ﻛﺴﺎﻧﻴﻜﻪ ﻃﻰ ﻛﻮﺩﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻧﺪ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻧﺪ .ﺭﻭﻧﺪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻫﺴــﺖ :ﻫــﺮ ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺎﻓﻠﺔ ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻥﺳــﺎﺯﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳــﻼﻣﻰ ﻭ ﻻﺕﻭﻟﻮﺕﻫﺎ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻣﺎﻧﺪ ،ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚﺑﺎﺭﻩ ،ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭ »ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ« ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺷــﺪ ﺑﻪ »ﻣﺪﺍﻓﻊ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ« ﻭ »ﺩﺷــﻤﻦ ﺳﺮﺳــﺨﺖ ﺣﺎﻛﻤﻴﺖ« ﺑﺮﺧﺎﺳــﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ! ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺳﺎﺩﻩﻟﻮﺣﻰ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺎﺕ »ﺻﺪﺭ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ« ،ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻣﺎﻡﺷــﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻭﺍﻥ ﺳــﻴﻨﻪ ﺯﺩﻧﺪ ﺍﺗﻼﻑ ﻭﻗﺖ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ .ﺍﻣﺎ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳــﻦ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺭﻳﻮﺯﮔﻰ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﻰ ،ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻫﻴﺎﻫﻮﻯ ﻛﺮﻭﺑﻰ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺳﻮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ »ﺗﻘﻠﺐ« ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺑﺎﺕ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺍﻩ
ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩ .ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻨﺠﺎﻝ ﻛﻪ ﺭﻭﺯﻫﺎﻯ ﻃﻮﻻﻧﻰ ﻛﺸــﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻴﺠﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺻﻮﺭﻯ ﻭ ﻣﺴــﺨﺮﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺁﺷﻮﺏ ﻛﺸــﺎﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ »ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻔﺖﻫﺎﻯ« ﻧﻬﻀﺖﻋﺎﻇــﺎﺩﻯ ﻭ ﺟﺒﻬﺔ ﻣﻠﻰ ﻭ »ﻣﻨﺎﻓﻘﻴﻦ« ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ ﺑﺎ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﺷــﺪ ﺁﻧﻘﺪﺭﻫﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺖ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﺒﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﺎﻻ ﺑﺨﻮﺑﻰ ﻣﻰﮔﻨﺠﻴــﺪ .ﺧﻼﺻﺔ ﻛﻼﻡ ،ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ« ،ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﻣﺎﺟﺮﺍﺟﻮﻳﺎﻥ ﺧﻴﺎﺑﺎﻧﻰ ،ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﻫــﺮ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻭ ﺻﻴﻘﻞ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﻰ ،ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻣﺸــﺘﻰ ﺭﻭﺣﺎﻧﻰ، ﺁﻧﻬﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺃﺱ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ »ﺗﺮﻗﻰﺧﻮﺍﻩ« ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴــﻪ ﺑــﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﺍﻯ »ﻏﻴﺮﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ« ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﺷــﺪ؛ ﭼﻪ
ﺑﺴــﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﭘﻴﺶﻓﺮﺽﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺎﺭﻳﺖ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷــﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﻋــﻰ »ﻟﻨﻴﻨﻴﺴــﻢ« ﺍﺧﺘﺮﺍﻋﻰ ،ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺍﻳــﻦ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻴﻞ »ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻴﻮﻥ« ﺧﻮﺩ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﺍﺯ »ﺧﻠﻘﻰ« ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ! ﺍﺯ ﺳــﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕــﺮ ،ﺩﺭ ﺟﻨﺎﺡ ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻔــﺎﻥ ﻛﻮﺩﺗــﺎ ،ﮔﺮﻭﻩﻫﺎﺋﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻧﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴــﺘﻘﻴﻤﺎً ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺳــﺎﺑﻖ ،ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻛﻮﺩﺗﺎﻯ »ﺳــﻠﻄﻨﺘﻰﻧﻤﺎ« ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ،ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﻣﻮﺳﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ »ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ ﺍﺳــﻼﻣﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻮﻝ ﺧﻮﺩﺷﺎﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ »ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺎﺩ ﺩﻩ« ﺗﺤﻠﻴــﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨــﺪ! ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﺯ »ﺍﻳــﺮﺍﻥ« ﻭ »ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻧﻰ« ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞﻫﺎﺋــﻰ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴــﺨﺮﮔﻰ ﻭ ﺳــﺎﺩﻩﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺼﺔ ﺍﻣﺎﻡﺣﺴﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺮﺑﻼ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻢ ﻭ ﻛﺴﺮ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ .ﺧﻼﺻﺔ ﻛﻼﻡ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﻧﺨﺴــﺖ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸــﺖ ﺑﻪ »ﺍﺭﺯﺵﻫﺎﻯ« ﺻﺪﺭ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ ﺭﻫﺎﺋﻰﺑﺨﺶ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻣﻰﺷــﻮﺩ ،ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺁﺳﺎﻳﺶ ﻭ ﺁﺭﺍﻣﺶ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﺁﺭﻳﺎﻣﻬﺮ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﭙﺬﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ .ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﮕﻮﺋﻴﻢ ،ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﮔﺮﻭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﻰ ﻛﺸــﻮﺭ ﻛﻢ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢ ﭘﺎﻳﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻜﺮﻯ ﻭ ﻋﻘﻴﺪﺗﻰ ﺍﺳــﺘﺒﺪﺍﺩ ﺭﻭﺣﻮﺿﻰ ﺁﺭﻳﺎﻣﻬﺮﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺯﻳﺮ ﺳــﺌﻮﺍﻝ ﺑﺮﺩﻩ ﺷــﻮﺩ ،ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺩﻗﺎﻳﻖ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻧﺎﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑــﻪ ﻛﻮﺩﺗﺎﻯ 22ﺑﻬﻤﻦ 57ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻣﻴﺪ .ﺑﻪ ﻫــﺮ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯ ﺗﻼﺵ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻜﻴﺔ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻯ ﺑﺮ ﺷﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ »ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ« ﻟﻘﺐ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ،ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻊ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﻰﻣﺎﻥ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺤﺎﺗــﻰ ﺑﻴﺎﻭﺭﻳﻢ .ﭘﺲ ﻧﺨﺴــﺖ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻳﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻳﺸﻪﻳﺎﺑﻰ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥﻧﺸﻴﻦ. ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺜﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﺟﻨﮓﻫﺎﻯ ﺻﻠﻴﺒﻰ ﻭ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﺎً ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺩﻭﻟﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﻃﻮﺭﻯ ﻋﺜﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ ،ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯﻳﻦ ﻛﺸــﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥﻧﺸﻴﻦ ﺑﺎ ﻏﺮﺏ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧــﺪ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻋﻤﻠﻜﺮﺩ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺳــﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﺗﺒﻴﻴــﻦ ﺷــﻮﺩ .ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳــﻦ »ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ« ﺑــﻪ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻗﺪﻳــﻢ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ ،ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺍﺳــﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﻛﺸــﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥﻧﺸــﻴﻦ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﻣﻰﺷــﻮﺩ .ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺷﺪ ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻰ ،ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ،ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻯ ﭘﺎﻯ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺖ ،ﻭﻟﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺘﺮﺕ ﻣﺰﻣﻦ ﺧــﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺖ ﺑﮕﻮﺋﻴﻢ، ﺑﻪ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﻧﻪ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻗﺮﻭﻥﻭﺳــﻄﻰ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ. ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ،ﺟﻬﺖ ﺭﻳﺸــﻪﻳﺎﺑﻰ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻄﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺸﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﺎﻃــﻖ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻛﺮﺩ ،ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺤﻠﻴــﻞ ﭼﻨﺪ ﻭ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺟﻨﮓﻫﺎﻯ
ﺻﻠﻴﺒﻰ ﻭ ﻳﺎ »ﻋﻈﻤﺖ« ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﺗﻮﺭﻯ ﻋﺜﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻳﻢ؛ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ،ﺭﻳﺸــﺔ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺍﺳــﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺧﺎﻭﺭﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺭﻭﻳﺖ ﺑﺎﺷــﺪ ،ﺩﺭ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎﻯ ﺷﻤﺎﻟﻰ ﻭ ﺳــﻴﺎﻩ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺸــﻢ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ .ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ »ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ« ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻧﺎﻥ ﺑﻬﻴﻨﻪ ﺷﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ »ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ« ﺭﺍ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ. ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈــﺮ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨــﻰ ،ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻴﻜﻪ ﺗﻮﺳــﻌﻪﻃﻠﺒﺎﻥ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎﺋﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻟﺔ ﺗﻬﺎﺟﻤﺎﺕﺷــﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳــﺖ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﻣﻮﺍﺩ ﺧﺎﻡ ،ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﺗﺠﺎﺭﺕ ﺑﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﺑﺎﺯﺍﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎ ﭘﺎﻯ ﮔﺬﺍﺷــﺘﻨﺪ، ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞﺷــﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ »ﻗــﺎﺭﺓ ﺳــﻴﺎﻩ« ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺣﺎﻛﻢ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺭﻭﺷــﻦ ﺑــﻮﺩ .ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻨــﺎﻥ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎﺋﻰ ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻧﺴــﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻳــﻚ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺷــﻤﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺁﻣﺪ .ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ »ﺳــﻬﻤﻴﺔ ﺷــﻴﺮ« ) (1ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝ 2004ﭼــﺎپ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ ﺁﻥ ﺍﻧﺘﺸــﺎﺭ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ،ﺑﺮﻧــﺎﺭﺩ ﭘﻮﺭﺗﺮ ) (2ﺩﺭ ﺗﺸــﺮﻳﺢ ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻊ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﻳﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴــﺘﺎﻥ ،ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺸﻘﺮﺍﻭﻻﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭ ﺑﺮﻳﺘﺎﻧﻴﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎﺋﻰﻫﺎ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ، ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺖ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ: »ﻃﺒﻴﻌــﺖ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎﺋﻰ ﻫﻤﭽــﻮﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻛــﻮﺩﻙ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺎﻟﺐﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﻭ ﺷــﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺑﺮﺧــﻮﺭﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﺳــﺖ ـ ﻳﻚ ﺑﻮﻡ ﺑﻜــﺮ؛ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻣﻨــﺪ ﭘﺎﻙ ﻛﺮﺩﻥﺍﺵ ﺑﺎﺷــﻴﻢ ﺑــﺮ ﺁﻥ ﻫﺮ ﺁﻧﭽــﻪ ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﻴﻢ(3) «. ﻫﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ »ﭘﻮﺭﺗﺮ« ﻣﺸــﻜﻼﺕ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺑﺮﻗــﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﺷــﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻧﺎﻣﻨﺎﺳــﺐ ﺩﺭ ﭼﺎﺭﭼــﻮﺏ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﺳــﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭ ﻛﻬﻦ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ،ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﺣﻤﻼﺕ ﺍﺳــﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎ» ،ﺳﻮﺳــﻴﺎﻝ ﺩﺍﺭﻭﻳﻨﻴﺴــﻢ« ) (4ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ ،ﺩﺭ ﭘﺲ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩ »ﻛﺎﺷﻔﺎﻥ« ﻗﺎﺭﺓ ﺳﻴﺎﻩ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻭ ﻋﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﻮﺩ. ﺳﻮﺳــﻴﺎﻝ ﺩﺍﺭﻭﻳﻨﻴﺴــﺖﻫﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳــﺎﻝﻫﺎﻯ ،1870ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴــﺘﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺳــﭙﺲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﺘﺤﺪ ﻓﻌﺎﻝ ﺷﺪﻧﺪ ،ﻧﮕﺮﺵ »ﺑﻴﻮﻟﻮژﻳــﻚ« ﺩﺍﺭﻭﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ »ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ« ﺭﺍ ﺑــﻪ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻛﺸﺎﻧﺪﻩ ،ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ،ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻊ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ »ﺑﺮﺗﺮ« ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ .ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﺍﺳــﺘﺎ ،ﺩﺍﺭﻭﻳﻨﻴﺴــﺖﻫﺎ ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺖ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﻴﻮﻟﻮژﻳﻚ »ﻧﻮﻉ« ﺿﻌﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺟﺎﻯ
ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﻉ »ﻗﺪﺭﺗﻤﻨﺪ« ﺑﺴــﭙﺎﺭﺩ ،ﭘﺮ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺗﺤــﻮﻻﺕ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ،ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻫﺎﻯ »ﻏﺮﺏ« ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺴــﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻊ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎﺋﻰ ﻭ ﺁﺳــﻴﺎﺋﻰ ﺗﺤﻤﻴﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ .ﻭﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﮕﺮﺵ ،ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﺗﻤﺎﻣــﻰ »ﻋﻠﻤﻰﻧﻤﺎﺋﻰﻫﺎ« ،ﻓﻘﻂ ﺧﻮﺩﭘﺮﺳــﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩﺑﺰﺭگﺑﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﺎﺷــﻔﺎﻥ ﻗﺎﺭﺓ ﺳــﻴﺎﻩ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﺎﺏ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ .ﺭﻳﺸــﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻉ »ﺩﺍﻭﺭﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﮋﺍﺩﻯ« ﻧــﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺤﺚﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ،ﻛﻪ ﺻﺮﻓــﺎً ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﭽﺔ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﺑﻮﺩ .ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻌﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺜﺒﻴﺖ ﺭﻧﮕﻴﻦﭘﻮﺳــﺘﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩ »ﭘﺴﺖ« ،ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﺩﺍﺭﻯ »ﻧﮋﺍﺩ ﻣﻬﺘﺮ« ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ .ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﮕﺮﺷﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻌﺪﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻟﻤﺎﻥ ﻧــﺎﺯﻯ ﻭ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎﻯ ﺟﻨﻮﺑﻰ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﻪﻫــﺎﻯ ﻗﺪﺭﺗﻤﻨﺪ ﺍﻳﺪﺋﻮﻟﻮژﻳﻚ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺩﻋﺎﻯ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﺖ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ »ﻧﮋﺍﺩﺑﺮﺗﺮ« ﺭﻳﺸﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻧﮕﺮﺵ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ. ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺳــﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴﺘﺎﻥ ،ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ ،ﺁﻟﻤﺎﻥ، ﻫﻠﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻠﮋﻳﻚ ﺩﺭ »ﻧﺒﺮﺩ« ﻧﮋﺍﺩ »ﻣﻬﺘﺮ« ﺑﺎ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ »ﻛﻬﺘﺮ« ﺑﺎ ﻣﺸﻜﻼﺕ ﻓﺮﺍﻭﺍﻥ ﺭﻭﺑﺮﻭ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ .ﻧﺨﺴــﺖ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺴــﺖ ﺗﻬﺎﺟﻤﺎﺕ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺻﺮﻓﺎً ﺭﻳﺸــﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻯ ﻭ ﭼﭙﺎﻭﻟﮕﺮﺍﻧﻪ ﺩﺍﺷــﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺒﻰ »ﺑــﺰﻙ« ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ ،ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻊ ﻋﻘﺐﻣﺎﻧﺪﺓ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎ ،ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺑﺰﻙ« ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺳــﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻳﻦ ﻣﻴﺴﺮ ﺷﺪ .ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺤﻤﻴﻖ ﺗﻮﺩﻩﻫﺎ ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ »ﺩﻛﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﻦ؟« ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻣﻴﺴــﻴﻮﻧﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺳــﺖ ﻣﺎﺟﺮﺍﺟﻮﻳﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺍﻭﺑﺎﺵ ﻭ ﭼﭙﺎﻭﻟﮕﺮﺍﻥ ﭘﺎﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺎﺭﺓ ﺳــﻴﺎﻩ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ. ﻣﻴﺴــﻴﻮﻧﺮﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﻋﻈﻪﻫﺎﻯﺷﺎﻥ ،ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺳــﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺎﻁﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻀﺤــﻚ ،ﻣﺴــﻴﺤﻴﺖ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎﺋــﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑــﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﭽــﺔ ﻫﻮﻟﻨﺎﻙ ﻭ ﺿﺪﺍﻧﺴــﺎﻧﻰﺍﺵ ،ﺑــﻪ ﺭﺷــﺪ ﺍﻗﺘﺼــﺎﺩﻯ ،ﺻﻨﻌﺘــﻰ ﻭ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻫﻨﺮ ﺟﻨــﮓﺁﻭﺭﻯ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ .ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﺮ ،ﻫﻢ »ﺩﻳﻦ« ﻛﺬﺍ ﻭ ﻣﺮﺍﺟــﻊ ﻭ ﻣﺮﺍﻛﺰ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻤﻠﮕﻰ ﻭﺍﺑﺴــﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺘﺨﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺑــﻮﺩ ،ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤــﻞ ﺑﻪ »ﻓﺮﻭﺵ« ﻣﻰﺭﺳــﺎﻧﺪﻧﺪ ،ﻭ ﻫــﻢ ﭼﭙﺎﻭﻟﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻮﺿــﻊ ﺗﺎﺭﺍﺟﮕــﺮ ﻭ ﺗﺠﺎﻭﺯﮔﺮ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﻛــﺮﺩﻩ ،ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩ ﭘﻴﺎﻡﺁﻭﺭ »ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺘﻪ« ،ﻳﺎ ﺣﺪﺍﻗﻞ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ »ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺴﻢ« ﻣﻰﻧﺸﺎﻧﺪﻧﺪ. ﺍﻳﻨﮕﻮﻧــﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛــﻪ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﮔﺴــﺘﺮﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺧﻮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴــﻴﺤﻰ ﻧﻴــﺰ ﭘــﺎﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺻﺤﻨﺔ ﭼﭙﺎﻭﻝ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎ ﮔﺬﺍﺷــﺘﻨﺪ .ﺑــﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ، ﺍﺳــﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻟﺸﻜﺮ ﺩﻳﻦﻓﺮﻭﺷــﺎﻥ ،ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮﺏ ﻣﺬﺍﺑﻰ
ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻟﻮﻟﺔ ﺗﻔﻨﮓﻫﺎﻯﺷﺎﻥ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻣﻰﺟﻬﻴﺪ ،ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻭﮔﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﻓﺮﻭﺷــﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺩﺯﺩﺍﻥ ﻭ ﭼﭙﺎﻭﻟﮕﺮﺍﻧــﻰ ﻛــﻪ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺩﺍﺷــﺘﻨﺪ، »ﻛﻼﻡ ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪﻯ« ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﻓﺰﻭﺩﻧﺪ .ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﺴــﻴﺮ »ﺍﻟﻬﻰ« ﺷــﺎﻫﺪﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚﺷﺒﻪ ﺩﻩﻫﺎ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻼﺕ »ﻣﻴﺴﻴﻮﻧﺮﻯ« ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺍﻛﺰ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺳﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﺭﺍﺥ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ .ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻼﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺍﺧــﻞ ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ،ﺭﻭﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺯ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ،ﺑﻮﺩﺟﻪ ،ﻭ ﻧﻔﻮﺫ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺗﻰﺷــﺎﻥ ﺍﻓﺰﻭﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺷــﺪ .ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ» ،ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﻣﻴﺴــﻴﻮﻧﺮﻯ ﻛﻠﻴﺴــﺎ«) ، (5ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳــﺎﻝ 1799ﺑﺎ ﺑﻮﺩﺟﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻧﺎﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻬﺮ ﻟﻨﺪﻥ ﮔﺸﺎﻳﺶ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ،ﺑﻮﺩﺟﺔ ﺳﺎﻻﻧﻪﺍﺵ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﺳــﺎﻝ 1856ﺑﺎﻟﻎ ﺑﺮ 125ﻫﺰﺍﺭ ﻟﻴﺮ ﺍﺳﺘﺮﻟﻴﻨﮓ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ! ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﻭﺯﻫﺎ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﺒﻠﻐﻰ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﮔﺰﺍﻑ ﺑﻮﺩ. ﻃﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳــﺎﻝﻫﺎ ،ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﭼﭙﺎﻭﻝ ﺷﺪﻩ »ﺳﻪﭘﺎﻳﺔ« ﻣﻌﺮﻭﻑ »ﺩﻳﻦﻓﺮﻭﺷــﻰ«» ،ﺳﺮﻛﻮﺏ ﺍﺳــﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ« ﻭ »ﭼﭙﺎﻭﻝ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻯ« ﺭﺍ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ .ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺳﻪﭘﺎﻳﺔ ﻣﻘﺪﺱ« ﺟﻬﺖ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﺖﺍﺵ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺴــﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ ،ﻣﺮﻛﺰﻯ ﻭ ﺟﻨﻮﺑﻰ ﻗﺎﺭﺓ ﺳﻴﺎﻩ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺸﻜﻞ ﺟﺪﻯ ﺭﻭﺑﺮﻭ ﻧﺸﺪ .ﻭﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﺷﻤﺎﻟﻰ ﻭ ﺷﺮﻗﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺎﺭﻩ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﺮﺍﺭ »ﺳﻪﭘﺎﻳﺔ« ﻣﺬﻛﻮﺭ ﻣﺸﻜﻼﺗﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ .ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ» ،ﺑﻮﻡ ﺑﻜﺮ« ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺏ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭ، ﺁﻧﻘﺪﺭﻫﺎ »ﺑﻜﺮ« ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ .ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ،ﭘﻴﺸﺘﺮ »ﺑﻌﻀﻰﻫﺎ« ﺑــﺮ ﺁﻥ »ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ« ﺭﺍ ﻧﻮﺷــﺘﻪ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ،ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻻﺋﻠــﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻝ ﻣﺠﺎﻝ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰﺷــﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ،ﭘﺎﻙ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﻭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﻣﺴــﻴﺤﻴﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺑﻮﻡ« ﻧﻪ ﺁﻧﻘﺪﺭﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺻﺮﻓﻪ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﺑﻮﺩ ،ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﭙﺬﻳﺮ. ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﺷــﺮﻗﻰ ﻭ ﺷــﻤﺎﻟﻰ ﻗــﺎﺭﺓ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘــﺎ ،ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﺨﺴــﺘﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺑــﺎ ﭘﺪﻳــﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﻫﻮﻟﻨﺎﻙﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺣﺸــﻰﮔﺮﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻭﻝ ﺧﻮﺩﺷــﺎﻥ ﺭﻭﺑﺮﻭ ﺷــﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ .ﻗﻀﻴﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ،ﻛﺸــﻮﺭ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺳــﺎﻝ 1834ﺑﺮﺩﻩﻓﺮﻭﺷﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﺎً ﻣﻤﻨﻮﻉ ﺍﻋﻼﻡ ﻛﺮﺩ .ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﻣﻠﻬﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﻓﺮﻭﺷــﻰ ،ﺣﺘﻰ ﭘــﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﮓﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺍﺧﻠﻰ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﻭ ﻟﻐﻮ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻨﮕﻪﺩﻧﻴﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺳــﺎﻝ ،1870ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﺎﻭﻳﻦ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺗﺎ ﺩﻩﻫﺎ ﺳﺎﻝ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺿﻤﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻯ ﻏﺮﺏ ﻓﻌﺎﻝ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ .ﺳــﺎﻝﻫﺎ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻟﻐﻮ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻨﮕﻪﺩﻧﻴﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺠﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺮﺗﻐﺎﻝ ،ﻣﺴﺘﻌﻤﺮﺍﺕ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎﺋــﻰ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴــﺘﺎﻥ ،ﺑﺮﺯﻳﻞ ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻛﺸــﻮﺭﻫﺎ »ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻰ« ﺑﻪ ﺷــﻤﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺭﻓﺖ .ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻃﻼﻉ ﺷــﺎﻳﺪ ﻻﺯﻡ ﺑﺎﺷــﺪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ
ﻛﻪ ﻛﺸﻮﺭ »ﻣﺪﺭﻥ« ﻭ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﭘﻴﺸــﺮﻓﺘﺔ »ﺍﻣﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻣﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﻋﺮﺑﻰ« ﻓﻘﻂ ﺩﺭ ﺳــﺎﻝ ،1963ﺳﻠﻄﺎﻥﻧﺸــﻴﻦ ﻋﻤﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝ ،1970ﻭ ﻣﻮﺭﻳﺘﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺳــﺎﻝ 1981ﺑﺮﺩﻩﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻏﻴﺮﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻰ ﺍﻋﻼﻡ ﻛﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ! ﺣﺎﻝ ،ﭼﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺸــﻮﺭﻫﺎ ،ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ،ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴــﺌﻠﻪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺎﺑــﻮﺩﻯ ﻭﺟﻬــﺔ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻰ »ﺑــﺮﺩﻩﺩﺍﺭﻯ« ،ﺩﺭ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺗﺎ ﭼــﻪ ﺣﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺠﺎﺭﺕ ﻣﻤﺎﻧﻌﺖ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻳﻢ ،ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﺓ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯ ﻣﺎ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ. ﻭﻟــﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ،ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴــﺘﺎﻥ ﺑــﺎ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﺎﻛﻢ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻭﺍﺳــﻂ ﻗﺮﻥ ﻧﻮﺯﺩﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺑــﺮﺩﻩﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ، ﺩﺭﺑــﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺲ ﻭ »ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯ« ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴــﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺗﺠﺎﺭﺕ« ﭘﺮﺳــﻮﺩ ﺑﻰﻧﺼﻴﺐ ﻧﻤﻰﮔﺬﺍﺷــﺖ! ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ،ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﻫﺎﻯ »ﺧﻮﺏ« ﻭ ﭘﺮ ﻣﻨﻔﻌﺖ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﻫﺪﺍﻑ ﻣﻴﺴﻴﻮﻧﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎﻯ ﺳــﻴﺎﻩ ،ﺁﺳﻴﺎﻯ ﺩﻭﺭ ،ﻭ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻛﺸﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻗﺎﺭﺓ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﺎﻧﺪ .ﻭﻟﻰ ﺍﻳــﻦ ﺍﻫﺪﺍﻑ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻻﺋﻠﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥﻧﺸــﻴﻦ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎ ﻭ ﺁﺳــﻴﺎ ﺑﺎ »ﺳــﺪ« ﻧﻔﻮﺫ ﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﺭﻭﺑﺮﻭ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ .ﻣﻴﺴﻴﻮﻧﺮﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﺗﻌﺠﺐ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ »ﺳﻨﺖ« ﺑﺮﺩﻩﻓﺮﻭﺷﻰ ﻭ ﺗﺠﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎ ﻗﺪﺭﺗﻤﻨﺪﺗﺮ ﻭ ﺭﻳﺸﻪﺩﺍﺭﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ! ﺧﻼﺻﺔ ﻛﻼﻡ ﻣﻨﻬﻴﺎﺕ ﺻﻮﺭﻯ ﻭ ﻇﺎﻫﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﺔ ﺗﻘﺒﻴﺢ ﺗﺠﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﻧﺴــﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻴﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺤﺎء ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ »ﻣﻜﻠﻒ« ﻣﻰﺩﻳﺪ ،ﺩﺭ ﺩﻳﻦ »ﺍﺳﻼﻡ« ﺍﺻﻮﻻً ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺷــﺖ .ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻳﻦ »ﺑﺮﺩﻩﻓﺮﻭﺷــﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﺟﺎﻳﺰ ﺷﻤﺮﺩﻩ، ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺗﺠﺎﺭﺕ« ﺿﺪﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺣﺪ ﻭ ﺣﺪﻭﺩﻯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﺪ. ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﻓﺮﻭﺷــﺎﻥ ﺻﻠﻴﺒﻰ ﻣﻐﺮﺏﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﻗﻴﺒﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ »ﺍﺳﻼﻡ« ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻨﺪ! ﻭ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻓﺤﺎﺷﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﺓ ﺍﻳﻨﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻳﻦ ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ ﻃﻰ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻃﻼﺋﻰ »ﺗﺠﺎﺭﺕ ﺑﺮﺩﻩ« ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴــﺖ ﺟﺰ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﻊ ﺗﺠﺎﺭﻯ! ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ،ﭘﺮ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺔ ﻣﻌﺮﻭﻑ »ﺩﻳﻦ ،ﺳﺮﻛﻮﺏ، ﭼﭙﺎﻭﻝ« ،ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺘﻴﻢ ،ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥﻧﺸﻴﻦ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻥ ﻭ ﺗﺰﻟﺰﻝ ﺭﻭﺑﺮﻭ ﺷــﻮﺩ .ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ،ﺍﻓﺴﺎﺭ »ﺩﻳﻦ« ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭ ﺗﺤﻤﻴﻖ ﺗﻮﺩﻩﻫﺎ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺳــﺖ ﻛﻠﻴﺴــﺎﻯ ﻛﺎﺗﻮﻟﻴــﻚ ﻭ ﻳﺎ »ﺍﺳــﻘﻒ ﻛﺎﻧﺘﺮﺑﺮﻯ« ﻧﺒﻮﺩ؛ ﺧﻠــﻖﺍﷲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﺧﻮﺩﺷــﺎﻥ ﻣﻼ ﻭ ﺁﺧﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻣﻔﺘﻰ ﺩﺍﺷــﺘﻨﺪ ،ﻭ ﺳــﻪﭘﺎﻳﺔ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﺼﻮﺭﺕ ﺗﻖﻭﻟﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ.
ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ »ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮﻯﻫﺎﻯ« ﮔﺴــﺘﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻴﻦ »ﻣﺒﻠﻐﻴﻦ« ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻴﺖ ﻭ ﭘﻴﺎﻡﺁﻭﺭﺍﻥ »ﺗﺸــﺮﻑ« ﺑﻪ ﺩﻳﻦ ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﺭﺓ ﺳﻴﺎﻩ ،ﻣﻄﺎﻟﺐ ﻭ ﻛﺘﺐ ﻓﺮﺍﻭﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺳــﺖ ﺍﺳــﺖ .ﺩﺭ ﺍﻛﺜﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﺐ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎﺋﻴﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﭘﻮﺷﺶ »ﻛﺎﺷﻒ« ﻭ ﻣﻴﺴﻴﻮﻧﺮ ،ﺩﺭ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺠﺎﺭﺕ ﺑــﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻏﺎﺭﺕ ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻣﺎﻟﻰ ،ﻛﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺴــﺎﻧﻰ ﭘﺎﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺎﺭﺓ ﺳــﻴﺎﻩ ﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ،ﺍﺯ ﮔﺴــﺘﺮﺵ »ﺳــﺮﻃﺎﻧﻰ« ﺩﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﻮﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻇﻬﺎﺭ ﻧﮕﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ .ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ »ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻭﻳﻜﺘﻮﺭﻳﺎﺋﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﻧﮋﺍﺩ« ) ،(6ﺑﻪ ﻗﻠﻢ »ﻛﺮﻳﺴــﺘﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﺖ«) (7ﺑﺎ ﺍﻇﻬﺎﺭﺍﺕ »ﺳﺮ« ﺭﻳﭽﺎﺭﺩ ﺑﺮﺗﻦ ،ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﺷﻔﺎﻥ ﺻﺎﺣﺐﻧﺎﻡ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﺎﻩ ﺑﺮﺧــﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ .ﻭﻯ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪ ﺍﺳــﺖ ﻛﻪ» ،ﻋﺮﺏ ﻭ ﻛﺎﻛﺎﺳــﻴﺎ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢ ﺟﻮﺭ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﻨﺪ ،ﺗﺎ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎﺋﻰ ﻭ ﺳﻴﺎﻩﭘﻮﺳــﺖ .ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻤﻨﻮﻉ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻣﺸــﺮﻭﺑﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻰ ،ﺟﻠﻮﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻨﺎﻭﻝ ﮔﻮﺷﺖ ﻧﺎﭘﺎﻙ ،ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻔﺖ ﺑﺎ ﭼﻨﺪﺷــﻮﻫﺮﻯ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺮﺭ ﺩﺍﺷــﺘﻦ ﻏﺴــﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﻭﺯﺍﻧــﻪ ﻭ ﺣﻔﻆ ﺣﺠﺎﺏ ،ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎﺋﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ ﻭ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﺑﻬﺒﻮﺩ ﺑﺨﺸﻴﺪﻩ(8)«. ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻨﻬﻤﻪ ،ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ »ﺳﺮ« ﺭﻳﭽﺎﺭﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺩﻳﻦ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ »ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺘﻪ« ﺑﻪ ﺍﻭ ﻳﺎﺩﺁﻭﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ .ﻭ ﭘﻴﺎﻡ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺘﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺟﻤﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﻯ ﻣﻨﺘﺴﺐ ﻛﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺖ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﻢ» :ﻫﺮ ﭼﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﺩﻳﺎﻥ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻛﺮﺩﻡ، ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﺮﺍﻓﺖ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻡ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺟﺰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻫﻴﭻ ﭘﺮﻭﺭﺩﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻧﭙﺮﺳﺘﻴﺪﻩ «.ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ» ،ﺳﺮ« ﺭﻳﭽﺎﺭﺩ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺳﺎﺯﻭﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﺳــﺐ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻯ ﻣﻨﺎﺳــﺐ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ »ﻛﺎﻛﺎﺳﻴﺎﻩﻫﺎ« ﻣﻰﺩﻳﺪ؛ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺑــﺎﻻ! ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ،ﻃﻰ ﺑﺮﺭﺳــﻰ ﺩﻗﻴﻖﺗــﺮ ﺍﻇﻬﺎﺭﺍﺕ »ﺭﻳﭽﺎﺭﺩ ﺑﺮﺗﻦ« ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺴــﺎﺋﻞ ﺟﺎﻟﺒﻰ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ .ﺑﻪ ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺖ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﻢ ﻛــﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ »ﭘﻴﺶﻓﺮﺽﻫﺎﻯ« ﺩﻳﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﻮﻣﻴﺎﻥ ،ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﺗﻬﺎﺟﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﻭ ﭼﭙﺎﻭﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﺎﻩ ﺩﭼﺎﺭ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻝ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ. ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻄــﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﻴــﻢ ،ﺗﻬﺎﺟﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﺳــﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻧﮕﺮﺵ »ﻓﺮﻧﮕﻰﻣﺂﺑﻰ« ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺖ ﺑﻮﻣﻰ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺷــﺪ ،ﻭ ﺍﻳــﻦ »ﻓﺮﻧﮕﻰﻣﺂﺑﻰ« ،ﺑــﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺍﺭﻭﭘــﺎ ﺍﺯ »ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺘﻪ« ،ﺑﺎ ﺳــﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺌﻮﺩﺍﻝ ﻭ ﻭﺍﭘﺲﻣﺎﻧﺪﺓ ﻗﺒﻴﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﺁﻧﻘﺪﺭﻫﺎ ﻫﻢﺧﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺷــﺖ .ﺩﺭ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻴﻜﻪ ﺩﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﮕﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ
ﺍﻟﻬﺎﻡ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻋﻘﺐﻣﺎﻧﺪﻩﺗﺮ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﻮﺍﻧﻰﺗﺮ ،ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻌﻰ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﻮﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻭ ﭼــﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺍﻛﺰ ﺍﻟﻬﺎﻣــﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻋﻈﻤﺖﻃﻠﺒﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﺗﻮﺭﻯ ﻋﺜﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻫﻨﻮﺯ ﭘﺎﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺮﻭﻥﻭﺳــﻄﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ،ﺑﻪ ﺭﺍﺣﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺍﭘﺲﮔﺮﺍﺋﻰ ،ﺗﻌﺪﺩ ﺯﻭﺟﺎﺕ ،ﺑﻰﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺗﺠﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﻓﺮﻭﺷﻰ ﻭ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺣﺸﻴﮕﺮﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻭﻝ ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮓ ﻛﻨﺪ. ﻣﺸــﻜﻞ ﺩﻳﮕــﺮﻯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﭘﺪﻳﺪ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺑــﻮﺩ» ،ﺩﻋﻮﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴــﻴﺤﻴﺖ« ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺷــﺒﻜﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺳﻴﺎﻩﭘﻮﺳﺘﺎﻥ »ﻛﺎﻓﺮ ﻭ ﺑﺖﭘﺮﺳــﺖ« ﺳﺎﻛﻦ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﭼﭙﺎﻭﻝ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺟﺬﺍﺑﻴﺖ ﻛﻢﺗﺮﻯ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﺗﺎ ﺩﻋﻮﺕ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ »ﻣﺴــﻠﻤﺎﻧﺎﻥ!« ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﺑﻮﺩ .ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ،ﺑﻮﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺭﻭﺯﻣﺮﺓ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡﻭﺍﺭ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻬﺎﺟﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻳﺪﻧﺪ ،ﺩﺭ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻴﻜﻪ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﺍﻟﻬﺎﻡ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺗﻬﺎﺟﻤﺎﺗﻰ »ﺁﺷﻨﺎﺗﺮ« ﻭ »ﺳﻨﺘﻰﺗﺮ« ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻨﺎﻥ ﺗﺤﻤﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ! ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ،ﺗﺤﻤﻴﻞ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ »ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺘﻪ« ،ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻩ ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺍﻩ ﺑﺎ »ﻣﺴــﻴﺤﻴﺖ« ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎﺋﻰ ﻋﺠﻴﻦ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ ،ﺁﻧﻘﺪﺭﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺬﺍﻕ ﺑﻮﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺵ ﻧﻤﻰﺁﻣﺪ. ﻛﺎﺷــﻔﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻣﻴﺴــﻴﻮﻧﺮﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑــﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ« ﺑــﻪ ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺴــﻴﺤﻴﺖ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘــﻪ ،ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ »ﺯﺍﻳﻨــﺪﺓ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋــﻰﺍﺕ« ﻣﻌﺮﻓــﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻧــﺪ ،ﻭ »ﭼﻨﺪﻫﻤﺴــﺮﻯ« ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴــﺎﻥ ﻣﺴــﻠﻤﺎﻧﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻜﺒﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺴــﺘﻨﺪﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺑﺮﻳﺘﺎﻧﻴﺎﺋﻰﺍﻯ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴــﺖ ﺗﺤﻤﻞﺍﺵ ﻛﻨﺪ. »ﺭﻭﻧﺎﻟــﺪ ﺁﻧﺘﻮﻧــﻰ ﺍﻟﻴﻮﻳــﺮ«) (9ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘــﺎﺏ »ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻴﺴــﻴﻮﻧﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺷــﺮﻕ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎ«) (10ﺍﺯ ﻗﻮﻝ »ﺩﻳﻮﻳﺪ ﻟﻴﻮﻳﻨﮕﺴــﺘﻦ«) ،(11ﻛﺎﺷﻒ ﺳﺮﺷﻨﺎﺱ ﻗﺎﺭﺓ ﺳﻴﺎﻩ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴــﺪ» ،ﺗﺠﺎﺭﺕ ﺑﺮﺩﻩ ﻗﺴﻤﺖ ﻋﻤﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻰﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳــﺮﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺍﺳــﺖ ،ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻋﺮﺏﻫﺎ ﻫﺮ ﻛﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻭﺭﻧﺪ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﺧﺮﻳﺪ ،ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺳــﺮﺯﻣﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﺟﻨﮕﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ، ﺁﺩﻡﺩﺯﺩﻯ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳــﻦ ﺭﺍﻩ ﻛﺴــﺐ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ!«) (12ﻭﻟــﻰ ﻧﮕﺮﺍﻧﻰ »ﭘﺪﺭ« ﻟﻴﻮﻳﻨﮕﺴــﺘﻦ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ »ﻋﺸﻖ« ﻣﻔﺮﻁ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘﺎً ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝ 1873ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻗﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳــﻬﺎﻝ ﺧﻮﻧﻰ ﻣﺒﺘﻼ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺟﺎﻥ ﺳﭙﺮﺩ، ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎً ﺍﺯ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺁﺩﻡﺩﺯﺩﻯﻫﺎ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ ،ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺳﻬﻢ ﺑﺮﻳﺘﺎﻧﻴﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺑﺎﺯﺍﺭ« ﻣﻰﻃﻠﺒﻴﺪﻧﺪ. ﺣﺎﻝ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳــﺌﻮﺍﻝ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﺷــﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻭﺍﺳﻂ ﺳﺪﺓ 1800 ﻛﺎﺷﻔﺎﻥ ﻗﺎﺭﺓ ﺳﻴﺎﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺸﻜﻼﺕ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺩﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﺍﺷــﻐﺎﻟﻰ »ﺁﮔﺎﻩ« ﺑﻮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ ،ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺕ ﭼﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩﻫﺎﺋﻰ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ؟ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻄﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﻴﻢ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺩﻳﻦ
ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﭙﺬﻳــﺮ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ ،ﻭ ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮕﻰ ﻭ ﻫﻤﮕﺎﻣﻰ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺕ ﻣﺴــﻴﺤﻴﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺸﻜﻼﺗﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ،ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ،ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺴﺖ ﻣﻨﺘﻈﺮ ﻋﻜﺲﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ ﻣﺤﺎﻓﻞ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﻄﻊ ﻣﻰﺑﻮﺩﻳﻢ .ﻭ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻋﻜﺲﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﺯﻣﻴﻨﻰ ﺷﺎﻫﺪﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻌﺪﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎﻡ »ﮔﻴﻨﻪ« ﺩﺭ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎ ﺑﻪ »ﺍﺳــﺘﻘﻼﻝ« ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ. ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺮﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﻓﺮﺩﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ »ﺳﺎﻣﻮﺭﻩ ﺗﻮﺭﻩ«) (13ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻦ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ ﻗﺎﺭﺓ ﺳﻴﺎﻩ ﺭﺍ ﭘﺎﻳﻪﺭﻳﺰﻯ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﺑﺮ »ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻴﻢ« ﺍﺳﻼﻡ، ﺍﺯ ﺳــﺎﻝ 1882ﺗﺎ 1898ﺑﺎ ﺍﺷﻐﺎﻟﮕﺮﺍﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﺟﻨﮕﻴﺪ! ﻭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝ 1989ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻳﺎﻥ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﻴﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ ،ﺑﻪ ﻗﺘﻞ ﺭﺳﻴﺪ. ﺑﺤﺚ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﭼﻨﺪ ﻭ ﭼﻮﻥ »ﻧﺒﺮﺩ« ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ »ﺳﺎﻣﻮﺭﻩ« ﺑﺎ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻳﺎﻥ ﺍﺷﻐﺎﻟﮕﺮ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﺍﺯﺍ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻛﺸﺎﻧﺪ ،ﻭﻟﻰ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﺑﺮ »ﺍﺣﻜﺎﻡ« ﺳﺮﻧﻮﺷﺖﺳــﺎﺯ »ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ« ،ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻴﻮﻥ ﺳﺎﻣﻮﺭﻩ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ ﺳﺨﺘﻰ ﺑﺮ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ ﺗﺤﻤﻴﻞ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ .ﻓﻘﻂ ﺳﺎﻝﻫﺎ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ »ﻏﺎﺋﻠﺔ« ﺳﺎﻣﻮﺭﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺷﺪ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴﺘﺎﻥ، ﺟﻬﺖ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺭﺍﻧﺪﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻳﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ »ﮔﻴﻨﻪ« ﻛﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺱ ﻭ ﺳﻼﺡﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺑﻨﺎﺩﺭ »ﺳﺎﺣﻞﻃﻼ« ﻭ ﺳﻴﺮﺍﻟﺌﻮﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳــﻼﻣﻰ »ﺳﺎﻣﻮﺭﻩ« ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺩ .ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ ﺳﺎﻣﻮﺭﻩ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻣﺪﻳﻮﻥ ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻟﻨﺪﻥ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺭﺗﺶ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻳﺒﺨﺶ. ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻄﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﻧﻴﺰ ﮔﻔﺘﻴﻢ ،ﺩﺭ ﺍﻭﺍﺳــﻂ ﺳﺪﺓ ﻧﻮﺯﺩﻫﻢ ،ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻛﺎﺷــﻔﺎﻥ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎﺋﻰ ﻗﺎﺭﺓ ﺳﻴﺎﻩ ﻣﺤﺮﺯ ﺷــﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺴﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ ﺍﺳــﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ »ﻛﻨﺎﺭ« ﺁﻣــﺪ .ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻮﻝ ﺧﻮﺩﺷــﺎﻥ ،ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻭ ﺧﻮﻯ »ﻛﺎﻛﺎﺳﻴﺎﻩﻫﺎ« ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮕﻰ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻯ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺩ ،ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﺩﺭ ﭼﻨﮓ ﻳﻚ »ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ« ﭼﻤﺎﻕ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻋﻘﺐ ﺭﺍﻧﺪﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ »ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎ«. ﻫﺮ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺳﻼﺡ« ﺑﺮﺍ ﻣﺠﻬﺰ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ ﺧﻄﺮﻯ ﺑــﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻳﮕــﺮﺍﻥ .ﻭ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺍﻣــﺮﻭﺯ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺩﻧﺪﺍﻥ ﻃﺮﻓﺪﺍﺭﺍﻥ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ ﺍﺳــﻼﻣﻰ ﺍﺳــﺖ ،ﺩﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺧﻄﺮﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﻳﺎﻟﻴﺴﺖﻫﺎ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ ،ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻨﻰ ،ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺸــﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥﻧﺸﻴﻦ، ﺷــﺮﺍﻳﻄﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﻳﻚ »ﻗﺪﺭﺕﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ« ﻛﺸﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥﻧﺸﻴﻦ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻔﺎﻯ ﻧﻘﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﻴﻦﺍﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻪﺍﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ. ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻃﻰ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﺩﻫﺔ ﻗﺮﻥ ﺑﻴﺴﺘﻢ ،ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﻭ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺸــﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥﻧﺸــﻴﻦ ﺑــﻪ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩ ،ﻭ ﺍﻳــﻦ ﺩﻳﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ
ﺍﺳﺐﺷــﺎﻫﻮﺍﺭ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﺖ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻛﺮﺩ ،ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻮﺭﺧﺎﻥ »ﻗﻠﻢﺑﻪﻣﺰﺩ« ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﭽﺔ »ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﺍﺕ« ﻓﺮﺿﻰ ﻣﻼﻳﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻣﻔﺘﻰﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴــﻨﺪ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ .ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺩﻻﺋﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻛﺎﺷﻔﺎﻥ ﻗﺎﺭﺓ ﺳــﻴﺎﻩ ﺑﺎ ﻇﺮﺍﻓﺖ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺘﻨﺪ ،ﺳــﻼﺣﻰ ﺍﺳــﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺳــﺮﻛﻮﺏ »ﺩﻳﮕﺮﺍﻥ!« ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﻓﺴﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﻴﻞﻣﺴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺳﺖ ﮔﻴﺮﺩ. ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﺳــﺖ ﻛــﻪ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄــﻼﺡ »ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑــﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﺣﺘﻰ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﺟﻨــﮓ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ،ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥﻧﺸــﻴﻦ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺍﺳــﺘﻴﻼﻯ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﺗﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺷــﺪ .ﻭ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺗﻌﺠﺐ ﻧﻴﺴــﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻇﻬﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻣﺜﺎﻝ »ﺳﺮ« ﺭﻳﭽﺎﺭﺩ ﺑﺮﺗﻦ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ ﻭ ﺳﺎﺯﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻫﺎﻯ »ﻛﺎﻛﺎﺳﻴﺎ«، ﻣﻴﺮﺯﺍﻯ ﺷــﻴﺮﺍﺯﻯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺠﻒ ﺑﺎﺏ »ﻓﺘﻮﻯﺳﺎﺯﻯ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﮕﺸﺎﻳﺪ .ﺑﺎﺭﻯ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻮﺩﺗﺎﻯ ﺑﻠﺸــﻮﻳﻚﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺷــﻮﺭﻭﻯ ،ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﺗﻮﺳــﻂ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﻳﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴــﺘﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﻚ ﺁﺯﻣﺎﻳﺶ ﮔﺬﺍﺷــﺘﻪ ﺷــﺪ ،ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﮔﺬﺭﺍ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻋﻨﺎﻭﻳﻨﻰ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ »ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺳﻴﺪﺿﻴﺎء«» ،ﻧﻬﻀﺖ ﺟﻨﮕﻞ« ،ﻭ ...ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻉ »ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ« ﭘﺎﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻰ »ﺯﻭﺩﮔﺬﺭ« ﻧﻬﺎﺩ. ﺑــﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟــﻮﺩ ،ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺫﻋﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺷــﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻘﺶ ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ ،ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﭼﻮﺑﺪﺳــﺖ ﺍﺳــﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭ ﻓﻘﻂ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﺟﻨﮓ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺖ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ .ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﻼﻝ ﻫﻨﺪﻭﺳﺘﺎﻥ ،ﻣﻨﻄﻘﺔ »ﭘﺎﻙﺳﺘﺎﻥ« ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ »ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ« ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻫﻠﻰ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺷﺪﻩ ،ﺩﺭ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺗﺤﺖﺍﻟﺤﻤﺎﻳﺔ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﺗﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ .ﺳﭙﺲ ﻧﻮﺑﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺮﺑﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﺳﻌﻮﺩﻯ ﻭ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ »ﻭﻫﺎﺑﻰ« ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻛﻤﻚ ﺭﻭﺯﻭﻟﺖ ﻭ ﻧﺎﻭﮔﺎﻥ ﭘﻨﺠﻢ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﺷــﺒﻪﺟﺰﻳﺮﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺷــﻐﺎﻝ ﺷﺮﻛﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻔﺘﻰ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ .ﺑﻌﺪﻫﺎ ﺷﺎﻫﺪ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺠﺰﻳﺔ ﻋﺮﺍﻕ ﻭ »ﺗﻮﻟﺪ« ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻛﻮﻳﺖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻳﻢ» .ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ« ﺍﻟﺠﺰﺍﻳﺮ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺪﻳﻮﻥ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺜﺎﻝ »ﺑﻦﺑﻼ« ﺍﺳﺖ» .ﺑﻦ ﺑﻼ« ﺑﺎ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﺑﺮ »ﺷﺮﻳﻌﺖ« ﻣﺤﻤﺪﻯ ،ﺑﻪ ﻗﻮﻝ ﺳﺮ ﺭﻳﭽﺎﺭﺩ ﺑﺮﺗﻦ ﺩﺭﺩ »ﻛﺎﻛﺎﺳﻴﺎ« ﺭﺍ ﺧﻮﺏ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻟﻨﺪﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﺰﺍﻳﺮ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﺎﻻ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷــﺪ .ﺁﺧﺮﺍﻻﻣﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺸﻮﺭ ﺧﻮﺩﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺍﻓﺘﻀﺎﺣﻰ ﺑــﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ ﺭﻭﺡﺍﷲ ﺧﻤﻴﻨﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ ﺍﺳــﻼﻣﻰ» .ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ« ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﻚ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﻋﻠﻨﺎً ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﭘﺎﻳﺘﺨﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻛﺸﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥﻧﺸﻴﻦ »ﺑﺎﺯﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ« ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ!
ﻫﺪﻑ ﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻧﮕﺎﺭﺵ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﻓﻮﻕ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﺔ ﻳﻚ ﺧﻂﻓﻜﺮﻯ ﻣﺸــﺨﺺ ﺍﺳﺖ. ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﻂﻓﻜــﺮﻯ ﻣﺨﺎﻃﺐ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩﻯ ﺍﻧﺘﻘــﺎﺩﻯ ﺑﺎ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺳــﺘﺒﺪﺍﺩ ﺭﺍﻳﺞ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ،ﻭ ﺧﻼﺻﺔ ﻛﻼﻡ ﺗﺠﺰﻳﻪ ﻭ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺧﻠﻖﻭﺧﻮﻯ »ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺳــﻮﻣﻰ« ﻓﺮﺍﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻭ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ،ﻧﻘﺶ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖﺑﺎﺯﺍﻥ ﻭﻃﻨﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﺍﺕ »ﺧﺴﺘﮕﻰﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮﺷــﺎﻥ« ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭ ،ﻛﻠﻪﺷﻘﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻭﻝﺷــﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻰ ،ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻭ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻗﺖ ﺑﻴﺸــﺘﺮﻯ ﺑﺮﺭﺳــﻰ ﻛﻨﺪ .ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﻛﻠﻪﺷﻘﻰﻫﺎ« ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﻟﻴــﻞ »ﺑﺮﺩ« ﻧﻴﺴــﺖ؛ ﻛﺎﻣ ً ﻼ ﺑﺮ ﻋﻜﺲ! ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﺴــﻴﺮ ﺑﺎﺧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺍﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﺖ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻛﻠﻪﺷﻘﻰﻫﺎﺳــﺖ .ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺷﺒﻜﺔ ﺍﺳــﺘﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ،ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎ ،ﺍﺯ ﺭﻳﺸــﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻠﻪﺷﻘﻰﻫﺎ ﺁﮔﺎﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ، ﻭ ﺑــﺎ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﺑــﺮ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ »ﺳــﻨﺖﻫﺎ« ،ﺑﺮ ﺧﺎﻛﺴــﺘﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﻭﻧــﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﻠﺖﻫﺎ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﮔﺰﺍﺭﻯ ﻓﺮﺍﻭﺍﻥ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ.
)(The Lion’s Share) (1 )Bernard Porter (2 )» (3ﺳﻬﻤﻴﺔ ﺷﻴﺮ« ،ﺻﻔﺤﺔ .72 )Social Darwinism (4 )The Church Missionary Society (5 )Victorian Attitudes To Race (6 )Christine Bolt (7 )» (8ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻭﻳﻜﺘﻮﺭﻳﺎﺋﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﻧﮋﺍﺩ« ،ﺻﻔﺤﺔ 115 )Roland Anthony Oliver (9 )The Missionary Factor in East Africa (10 )David Livingstone (11 )» (12ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻴﺴﻴﻮﻧﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺷﺮﻕ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎ« ،ﺻﻔﺤﺔ 32 )Samore Toure (13