I think where we’d disagree is over Curtis’s allegation of a neoconservative plot and the degree to which people who consider themselves neocons wield as much power as he seems to claim. I’m also unsure whether he gives us a clear picture of what a neocon is, except someone on the right who wants to “export” democracy. Well, there are people on the left who want to “export” democracy (since Woodrow Wilson) as well, and they’ve been put in an awkward position of having to agree with their ideological rivals on the Right (e.g., Michael Ignatieff) or they’ve simply decided that only Democrats can export democracy, which isn’t much of a position.

I’ve already said my peace on the documentary’s treatment of Strauss.

I also suspect you’re right about Muslims’ viewers’ responses about Qutb. That’s not to say that Muslims necessarily agree with Qutb. Rather, he might perform the role of being a useful pitbull who gets the attention of the West, providing a cover for other sorts of activists, either benign or malign.

By contrast, other critical bloggery on the series has been ill-informed, prejudiced, inaccurate bile from people who have not even seen it. One of your other commenters cited Samizdata – this is one of the worst offenders.

What would now be really interesting, and is so far conspicuous by its absence, is a response from Muslim readers on the series’ treatment of Sayyid Qutb.

[...]