Sorry, still busy with academic tasks but I’ll be back with numerous posts including some long ones soon. For now I’ll leave you with this excellent article by Ali Eteraz on a phrase we’re slowly beginning to hear louder and louder: “Islamic reform”.
SudaneseThinker
SudaneseThinker
{ 11 comments… read them below or add one }
“The question that has to be asked now is how the extremists ended up dominating Muslim dissent.”
Whoever makes the most noise usually gets the press.
“Islamic reform”
I don’t believe Islamic reform is needed. In fact the current face of Islam has been a reform.
Just return to where Islam was a few hundred years ago and work from there.
“It has also been espoused by Wolfowitz and Blair in service of their neo-colonial ambitions.”
I know Ali is not an idiot which is why I find that statement particularly infuriating.
“Neo-colonial ambitions”
Iraq ATTACKED American and British aircraft patrolling no-fly zones imposed by a cease-fire and refused to allows inspections as demanded by the cease-fire. Iraq BROKE a cease-fire and THAT is why American and British troops are now in Iraq.
Similarly Afghanistan attacked the US, hence is now occupied by British and American troops.
And Israel was attacked so often that the US now support her defence.
Colonialism has nothing to do with being attacked and defending oneself.
The Muslim world does not need religious reform as much as it needs a reform of its arrogance. It is NOT “western aggression” when the west refuses to be attacked by any Muslim or Arab who happens to want to kill a few Americans or Jews. And it is NOT “neo-colonialism” when Americans refuse to allow Arabs to slaughter Kurds and protest genocide in Sudan.
Once the Islamic world has learned that it doesn’t have the right to attack and murder whomever it wants at any time it finds it convenient to do so, there is no need for western or Israeli occupation forces anywhere any more.
His article also seems to imply that Bin-Laden and Co. are first and foremost a reaction to external factors, and only then an internal issue. Yes, he did say that the internal issue is important, but as a second factor. I don’t agree with that, it implies lack of personal responsibility and that morality and culture are meaningless. There is always something to react to, if you search hard enough. Often it is mostly made-up to suit the purpose when it is sought, like with Nazi Germany’s “reaction” to faked Polish agression. What truly matters is *how* you react. If you react by systematically and deliberately blowing up civilians… And have plenty of like-minded comrades… Well, in that case I’d start looking at the society you came from and start asking uncomfortable questions. Like just what is messed-up in it.
Now, Drima, when you run for president in the first democratic election in Sudan, I advise you to “play down” the Islam reform thingy just a little… that is to say, until you have absolute power. THEN you an reform.
Aaron,
“Whoever makes the most noise usually gets the press.”
Ya, the media loves the damn drama.
Andrew,
““It has also been espoused by Wolfowitz and Blair in service of their neo-colonial ambitions.””
Just because of that one sentence, you’ve gone from talking about Iraq to talking about Israel, even when the main topic is Islamic reform. Chill man.
I’ve already read the argument you espouse for the legitimacy of Iraq’s invasion many times before in different places. Whether the facts are true or not, is again debatable. You could be right.
There is even another argument that says Saddam didn’t comply with the UN’s orders and hence there was no option left but to invade. Whatever it is, I think what Ali is talking about is other motives.
Previously I used to buy the “this is about oil” argument but I don’t anymore. However clearly there’s more to Iraq than just toppling Saddam. It’s part of a geopolitical strategy. Iran is now effectively surrounded by powerful armies and military bases on both sides, Afghanistan being on the other.
It has been mentioned numerous times by Bush that Iran or other hostile groups in the region must not be allowed to control energy supplies or disrupt them. In other words, America wants to be sure of its interests in the region not just for now but for years to come. I think that’s what Ali meant when he said “neo-colonial ambitions.”
Better still, why not just ask him?
Roman,
“His article also seems to imply that Bin-Laden and Co. are first and foremost a reaction to external factors, and only then an internal issue.”
I didn’t think that was implied. Bin-Laden and Co.’s terrorist tactics are due to reinterpretations which say civilians can be targeted. Such interpretations are based on Salafism/Wahhabism.
That’s how they began to justify terrorism. Obviously what played a role leading to that were the foreign policies and external pressures which they considered oppressive and wanted to fight. Foreign policies have played a role. Whether that role was primary or not is debatable. However from my view, the justification for terrorism itself all began as an internal thing i.e. Wahhabi/Salafi reinterpretations.
Halalhippie, many Muslims who get pissed off by the phrase “Islamic reform” do so because they misunderstand what it means, others because they’re hardcore non-reform oriented traditionalists.
There are many Muslims who believe that the Sharia requires reform. This is also very true of main stream Muslims. So that means the majority of us want Sharia reform. The question is, how much reform are we talking about? That’s where many disagreements start happening. Al-Qaradawi for example *does* want progressive reforms, but only for some tiny tiny areas. NOT enough.
I believe the harsh treatment of religious minorities and women, death for apostasy, and the freaky “Stone Age” punishments should be changed. That will be a good start. Another thing is getting rid of all the anti-Semitism which has been infused with Islamic interpretations for self-serving political purposes.
Might sound corny…but Islam has been hijacked by rage-aholics…
When leadership stands up…when people stand up and say…this ain’t working…this ain’t helping…this ain’t good, this ain’t Godly…it will get better.
I don’t believe there is any “one” religion…but I do believe in one God and I believe there are universal truths…When will our religious leaders, overall, stress things like just treating each other more decently…starting with THEM.
“Just because of that one sentence, you’ve gone from talking about Iraq to talking about Israel, even when the main topic is Islamic reform. Chill man.”
I didn’t. He did.
“Neo-colonialism”, whether it exists or not, has nothing to do with religious reform. If Islam has to be reformed because of what it makes people do, it has to be reformed. The behaviour of the Americans or anybody else has nothing to do with it.
I consider that one sentence an explanation of the core of the problem: the (perhaps) needed reform takes a second place after made-up problems like “neo-colonialism”. (I grew up in occupied territory myself, never did understand how that was a problem as such.)
If he wants to reform Islam, he has to focus on Islam.
Perhaps you’re right, Drima, and I judged Ali Eteraz’s article wrongly.
“I believe the harsh treatment of religious minorities and women, death for apostasy, and the freaky “Stone Age” punishments should be changed. That will be a good start. Another thing is getting rid of all the anti-Semitism which has been infused with Islamic interpretations for self-serving political purposes.”
That’s a good summary.
However, I would mix that with a pro-Islamic campaign to get rid of nationalism. I still think that many of the bad things we associate with Islam today are actually “features” of Arab (and Iranian) nationalism and that these must be destroyed at their non-Islamic root.
Arabs, for example, must be more patriotic (Yeah Lebanon!) and less nationalist (Yeah Arab nation!). Arabs must also become more traditionalist and support the traditional monarchies rather than “modern” Republican rulers that title themselves “president”. The traditional Arab monarchies (and I do _not_ count the Saudi “monarchy” as such) have proven to be more open to useful reform than the dictatorships and have always been less open to stupid (nationalist) reforms. They are a feature and the Arab world should use them.
Many people talk about the need to reform Islam. Now you can stop talking and start helping.
With the help of our readers we went through the Koran and removed every verse that we believe did not come from Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate. However, it is possible that we missed something, and we could use your help. If you find verses in the reformed version of the Koran that promote violence, divisiveness, religious or gender superiority, bigotry, or discrimination, please let us know the number of the verse and the reason why it should be removed. Please email your suggestions to koran-AT-reformislam.org.
When we finish editing process, we would like to publish Reform Koran in as many languages as possible. If you could help with translation or distribution of the Reform Koran, please email us at koran-AT-reformislam.org. If you could provide financial support, please visit our support page.
In Memoriam of Aqsa Parvez.
http://www.reformislam.org/reform.php
Leave a Comment