Tunisia and Egypt play dominoes?

[Orogun01]

Wals, you need to consider the differences in the situation in Egypt. They aren't as cut off from the rest of the worlds as a lot of the other predominately Muslim countries, as clearly evidenced by the amount of tweets that went into organizing the protests. I believe that culture and education factor in dispelling extremism.

[Walsingham]

Wals, you need to consider the differences in the situation in Egypt. They aren't as cut off from the rest of the worlds as a lot of the other predominately Muslim countries, as clearly evidenced by the amount of tweets that went into organizing the protests. I believe that culture and education factor in dispelling extremism.

 

Could well be. Sorry. I'm posting a little late in the day here. Brain's a bit mushy.

[pmp10]

As for the Islam / Democracy argument, well hyperoble rules the roost on both sides. But for a Muslim the secular and the divine are indivisible. The Koran is as much a political as religious tract. I've said it before on this forum, the 'Render unto God what is God's and Caesar what is Caesar's' moment never happened in Islam.

And when exactly has such a moment happened elsewhere?

Separation of church and state?

A common soundbite found in western constitutions.

Unless you imply it is actually practiced?

The enlightenment age, sounds familiar?

Very, but I can't see how that makes your point.

People after that time still insisted on living their lives according to religious dogmas.

[Orogun01]

Very, but I can't see how that makes your point.

People after that time still insisted on living their lives according to religious dogmas.

Religion was still very central to everyday life at the time. But following the departure from the pure divine in the Renaissance, the enlightenment age continued the humanist wave. A lot of the intellectuals at the time weren't highly religious, science came and overcame religion. How is it that the time period which focused the western world on the values of freedom and independence, encouraged a ton of revolutions not be relevant to my point that the modern age was influenced by the ideals of that time?

 

@Wals, just clarifying one of your points. You asked for more disscusion on the subject, so I was happy to comply.

PS. it's okay if you brain it's a little mushy, it is still one of the smartest brains I know

[pmp10]

How is it that the time period which focused the western world on the values of freedom and independence, encouraged a ton of revolutions not be relevant to my point that the modern age was influenced by the ideals of that time?

It's not.

I was trying to point out that secularism is by no means a product of one age in the history of western civilization.

It's certainly true that many enlightenment ideas and values are adopted by today

[Orogun01]

How is it that the time period which focused the western world on the values of freedom and independence, encouraged a ton of revolutions not be relevant to my point that the modern age was influenced by the ideals of that time?

It's not.

I was trying to point out that secularism is by no means a product of one age in the history of western civilization.

It's certainly true that many enlightenment ideas and values are adopted by today

[Tigranes]

Regarding the possibly-bogeyman-MB issue, it's been interesting to me that they've stayed almost invisible in the media reports of what's happening - they haven't spoken up as a group or tried to commandeer the popular uprising under their banner. Probably a smart move given how big and furious it is, but especially now Mubarak has made his move and is organising his own 'protests', and the army has subtly shifted from its neutral position (bringing the full weight of its former neutrality towards its latest recommendation for dispersal), it's puzzling. Is it simply that they feel they can't hope to lead the movement or take any advantage? Are they as 'invisible' down amongst the Egyptian protests? (I've heard that they're playing a big role in grassroots organisation of the protests, but can't remember where).

 

Certainly the failure for the protests of such size, length and vigour to not crystallise into (or appropriated by) a specific demand involving specific personnel makes the situation still capable of a twist - El Baradei hasn't really been the spokesman for the protests either.

[Monte Carlo]

I think it's interesting that my post triggered some WTF-style challenges and hostility. Note that there is no judgement or criticism of Islam. I respect all of the great world religions, even though I am not a believer myself. Put simply, though, Islam is a political religion in a way that Christianity is no longer. Of course Christianity is political, has political views and a political dimension, but in the West it is acknowledged that it is an adjunct to democracy not an integral part of the machine. That isn't to say that it is axiomatic that any government in an Islamic country will be a theocracy, just that (as in Turkey) it will be a dimension more acute than in Western Europe.

 

As for Zoraptor, I have to defer to what is presumably your superior knowledge of the Ottoman Empire, turn-of-the-century Levantine politics, Islamic jurisprudence and the inner workings of the Turkish army.

Edited February 3, 2011 by Monte Carlo

[~Di]

They are demonstrating for freedom and democracy. I just can't help but hope they succeed. But I don't think they will. Mubarak, regardless of what he has said, is an arrogant SOB who has no intention of giving up power. He just wants enough time to create a crisis that will allow him to say, "Sorry, but I must stay on until this crisis has passed, for the stability of Egypt." He's willing to put his police in plain clothes and pay thugs to crack skulls. And we want this guy as our ally?

 

Very sad for those poor people wanting only freedoms and rights. Very sad.

[213374U]

Turkey got the AK party and Attaturk's secular dream is dead.

[citation needed]

<insert links on the AKP's struggle against the judiciary and their constitutional reform work>

 

There is an ongoing effort on the part of the AKP to dismantle if not secularism, at least Kemalism, as embodied in Turkey's constitution. This is not an either-or between a return to a less secular Turkey and simply greater powers for the executive, it's actually both.

 

 

I was trying to point out that secularism is by no means a product of one age in the history of western civilization.

Semantics. It doesn't matter if the changes were confined to the Age of Enlightenment, while the intellectual foundations of those changes were laid down a century or two earlier - history is a continuum and "Age" markers are never universal, indicative of actual changes, or even uniformly agreed upon.

 

It begins with intellectuals starting to risk their necks by publishing seditious material that is in direct conflict with an organization of society based on the idea of civil authorities drawing their power from -and therefore being defined by- Divine Right. Didn't happen overnight, but it did happen. I am greatly ignorant of Islamic philosophical currents past and present, so I would be grateful if peeps could point me to works and figures with comparable leanings within Islamic academia.

[Walsingham]

Put simply, though, Islam is a political religion in a way that Christianity is no longer.

 

But I'm saying that it isn't inherently political, and nor does it have only political themes to it.

 

I'd be an idiot if I claimed there had been an Islamic transition to secularism. But On the whbole it's not a big deal. Where it becomes problematic is when you have one or more factors in addition:

 

1. Uneducated stone age bastards

2. A radicalisation machine, along communist infiltration lines (pioneered by the MB, incidentally)

3. Some sociopolitical problem which benefits from the simplicity of simply pointing at the opposition and screaming 'unbeliever'.

[pmp10]

It begins with intellectuals starting to risk their necks by publishing seditious material that is in direct conflict with an organization of society based on the idea of civil authorities drawing their power from -and therefore being defined by- Divine Right.

First of all - calling Locke work seditious is a bit of a stretch.

He was not proposing anything extraordinary compared to political institutions in other parts of Europe at the time.

Secondly - the concept of divine rights is a Christian invention.

Islamic philosophy never claimed that ruler power was absolute.

 

I am greatly ignorant of Islamic philosophical currents past and present, so I would be grateful if peeps could point me to works and figures with comparable leanings within Islamic academia.

You may want to read about avarroe then.

That Islam would become just as much a political philosophy as a religion was by no mean preordained.

[213374U]

First of all - calling Locke work seditious is a bit of a stretch.

He was not proposing anything extraordinary compared to political institutions in other parts of Europe at the time.

se

Edited February 3, 2011 by 213374U

[Walsingham]

I'm reminded of the end of the poem 'The Sceret People'

 

We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet,

Yet is there no man speaketh as we speak in the street?

It may be we shall rise the last as Frenchmen rose the first,

Our wrath come after Russia's wrath and our wrath be the worst.

It may be we are meant to mark with our riot and our rest

God's scorn for all men governing. It may be beer is best.

But we are the people of England; and we have not spoken yet.

Smile at us, pay us, pass us. But do not quite forget.

 

There is a world of difference between what scholars may say in dusty beams of light, and what kings may sign in fire and steel, and what ordinary people think as they scrub the toilet.

[pmp10]

Have you actually read the Letter?

No, I am afraid my english skills are not up to the task.

I had to make do with a summary.

Locke had to flee England due to his involvement with the failed plot(s) against Charles II and the would-be James II, and that saw Sydney executed for authorship of a document published as Discourses Concerning Government, to which Locke himself was connected. He only came back after the triumph of the Glorious Revolution -in which divine right was one of the chief elements of contention-, so I think it's actually spot-on to describe Locke's later political works as seditious.

That's good to know but I meant the letter itself.

I was under impression that it was published after the Glorious Revolution, unless I got the dates wrong.

You may argue that these bozos are perverting Islam in the same way absolutist kings perverted J.C.'s message, but that's immaterial - the majority of the intellectual Islamic elite agrees with and supports these autocracies. And in a sense, their hands are tied. What happens if an Islamic jurist speaks against a key Islamic precept, such as the power of men to beat their wives (surah 4:34)? I'll tell you what happens, they are undermining their own credibility, as their respectability stems from their Islamic academic record. Given that the Qur'an is flawless and final, anyone speaking against it is an infidel and/or plain wrong.

I'm sure many people know that Qur'an contains passages justifying discrimination and violence.

I just don't see it as reason to decry the whole religion.

Bible and Torah also have parts full of aggression yet they did not make infanticide acceptable in respective societies.

 

As for Islamic elites and their academic record - I can't say I have sufficient knowledge in those matters to pass a definitive judgment on it.

I

[lord of flies]

If that article is correct that MB is the most popular party in Egypt, and that does agree with what I read earlier, then the situation in Egypt would be entirely different. Al Qaeda sprung from MB ideology, in fact they're the two complementary approaches to the same goal, and Egypt under MB will make Iran look like the paragon of democracy and liberalism.

The Muslim Brotherhood is not some radical group, it has specifically denounced the use of violence and terrorism and is loathed by Al Qaeda. Throughout the protests, the Muslim Brotherhood has been explicit in their desire not to take over the protests. Don't talk about things you don't understand.

The Iran-Hizbollah-Hamas-MB axis is there so long as their mutual enemy, US, is in the Middle East. Sure they'd turn on each other eventually, but that's a ways off.

Venezuela is an ally with Iran, a strategic alliance against US imperialism does not mean ideological brotherhood.

Iranian government is the most dangerous in the world

You misspelled "the United States."

The Muslim Brotherhood may be pro-democracy now, but as one commentator put it, that may well be an attitude of "one man, one vote, one time". Because one time is all they may need.

Perhaps the same could be said of all parties. But seriously though, stop making **** up. Edited February 3, 2011 by lord of flies

[Wrath of Dagon]

A fascist is still a fascist no matter what he calls himself.

[lord of flies]

A fascist is still a fascist no matter what he calls himself.

Perhaps if you could cite even the tiniest piece of evidence that the Muslim Brotherhood is an "ooga booga evil Islamist theocracy" party, I would be more inclined to believe you. At present, however, you're simply repeating falsehoods with no factual basis in the hope that they will become true.

[Wrath of Dagon]

I posted a link in this thread where the leader of Egyptian MB call for a Jihad against the US. Of course to you that's a good thing. Enoch posted a document which exactly explains the Islamist philosophy, which I quoted from, but I guess to you that's no proof either. It's useless for me to argue with you because we don't have a single point of moral reference in common.

[Orogun01]

I posted a link in this thread where the leader of Egyptian MB call for a Jihad against the US. Of course to you that's a good thing. Enoch posted a document which exactly explains the Islamist philosophy, which I quoted from, but I guess to you that's no proof either. It's useless for me to argue with you because we don't have a single point of moral reference in common.

WoD, remember that you are talking to LoF

[Calax]

I posted a link in this thread where the leader of Egyptian MB call for a Jihad against the US. Of course to you that's a good thing. Enoch posted a document which exactly explains the Islamist philosophy, which I quoted from, but I guess to you that's no proof either. It's useless for me to argue with you because we don't have a single point of moral reference in common.

Wasn't that post to a conservative Israeli think tank who has a vested interest in Mubarak staying in power to prevent the POSSIBILITY of being attacked by them again?

[Wrath of Dagon]

Do you expect me to link to an Iranian government website exposing Islamism? And I'm not aware of that site being Israeli, but if you researched it, may be so. Anyway, he gives the text in Arabic and an English translation, so keep your ad hominem arguments to yourself.

[Calax]

Uh, his job is to give a skewed view of things...

Barry Rubin is a professor at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, Israel, the director of the Global Research in International Affairs Center of the IDC, and a senior fellow at the Interdisciplinary Center's International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism. Anyone wanting to get a glimpse of the skewed thinking behind the Obama administration's foreign policy will benefit from Rubin's "Just say 'no': I get personally invited to help the Obama administration engage--and thus strengthen--terrorists." For "terrorists," in this case, read "Hezbollah."

 

Taken from

http://www.powerlineblog.com/

(first post actually has a copy paste from an Egyptian blogger who got taken down/arrested by the Egyptian government but was released).

[Wrath of Dagon]

So because he's Israeli, his view is skewed? May be it's your view that's skewed. In any case, unless you're disputing that he posted a factual document, you have no argument.

 

Edit: I don't see the reference to Rubin on the page you linked. Lots of good info about Egypt on that site btw.

Edited February 3, 2011 by Wrath of Dagon

[Walsingham]

Interesting that LoF is weighing in on the MB's side.

 

I just had the most fantastic mental image of LoF's birthday party.