This week in Islam

[bleeding heart]

I don't know the stats for Christian sympathy with draconian laws (including imprisonment) for homosexuality in Uganda...but I'll wager it's a lot higher than 18%.

The part played by American missionaries in the sordid mess is also doubtless an interesting story.

[bush_cheney2004]

Sure, and no doubt all the missionaries were "American".

[bleeding heart]

I heard the story by watching a trailer clip for the movie "God Loves Uganda." It doesn't mention any other nationalities, so I can't speak to it.,

[Shady]

Why isn't it ever possible to have a consersation about JUST Islam? Why is it that the usual suspects always have to resort to the usual, yeah, but other religions...? Why is it that conversations about JUST Christianity, etc are possible, but not with Islam? Why is it that the usual suspects always have to try and pretend that the problem issues associated with Islam are just as prominent in other religions, when facts state otherwise? Why don't these people ever bring the same defence to other religions? Why don't they ever say, yeah, that's a problem with Christians, but look at Muslims too?

[Argus]

I don't know the stats for Christian sympathy with draconian laws (including imprisonment) for homosexuality in Uganda...but I'll wager it's a lot higher than 18%.

The part played by American missionaries in the sordid mess is also doubtless an interesting story.

You think more than 18% of Christians in Canada would sympathize with cutting off hands and executing adulterers and homosexuals?

Because the 18% figure you're referencing is "Canadian" Muslims. World Muslim sympathy for extremist laws is actually a strong majority.

Edited May 2, 2014 by Argus

[Argus]

Only if you compare it to other religions and find out what things they believe. Also what does 'sympathetic' mean. That said, yes that number is higher than anybody should feel comfortable with anyway.

Where would find such a Christian ? In some illiterate backwater where there is no education, torn apart by war and violence perhaps ?

Which describes most Muslim countries. So here's the question:

Are they backwaters, often torn apart by war and violence because they're Muslim? Because if you go around the world looking for social backwaters you're likely to be looking at a lot of Muslim countries.

Edited May 2, 2014 by Argus

[Michael Hardner]

Which describes most Muslim countries. So here's the question:

Are they backwaters, often torn apart by war and violence because they're Muslim?

I don't think so, but whether or not I think it or not, it's an exceedingly complex question and historians with far more depth of knowledge than you and I wouldn't even agree.

I will say that Jared Diamond expounded on a few aspects of Christianity that were conducive to commerce, and to creating a sort of continental meritocracy in Europe. But that is only one factor - every culture has high and low points, including Christianity and Islam.

Because if you go around the world looking for social backwaters you're likely to be looking at a lot of Muslim countries.

I went to Wiki and looked at the first list - the IMF one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

Those countries at the bottom are all African - so what would you conclude about that ?

I have to step carefully because I already once tried to make an analogy between generalizing about religion and generalizing about race. The person I was posting to reported me as falsely accusing him of being a racist, which he found disgusting. That was a real head scratcher for me, as the line of thinking I had put into both analogies was the same and yet he rejected the logic outright, in favour of moral outrage.

[Argus]

I don't think so, but whether or not I think it or not, it's an exceedingly complex question and historians with far more depth of knowledge than you and I wouldn't even agree.

I wouldn't doubt you're correct. It just seems to me that a disproportionate amount of the world's violence and barbarism seems to eminate from Mulim countries.

I went to Wiki and looked at the first list - the IMF one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

Those countries at the bottom are all African - so what would you conclude about that ?

That Africans are poor. Your list is of GDP and not entirely relevent to whether a country is socially advanced. I note that Qatar is number one on the list, for example. They flog people for having sex outside marriage there, and for drinking. Homosexuals are jailed if caught. Not exactly an example of a socially advanced nation. In terms of socially progressive nations, the worst is considered to be Nigeria, followed by Pakistan, Yemen, Niger and Angola. Three of the five are African, four of the five are Muslim. Eight of the bottom ten are Muslim majority, or at least, strong Muslim minority countries. The top ten were all Christian. In fact, the only non Christian countries in the top thirty were Japan and South Korea, both countries which were occupied, and basically remade by the Americans over a long period of time.

http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/document/pdf/201414/progress.pdf

Edited May 2, 2014 by Argus

[Michael Hardner]

That Africans are poor.

No, it's not a wealth ranking it's a GDP ranking

[Michael Hardner]

Argus, here's how the question above gets posted when using the analogy of Africa and GDP:

"Are they unproductive and unresourceful because they're African ? Because if you go around the world looking for unproductive countries, you will find most of them are African"

I think that you would be ok with this characterization of the situation, as reflected by the data. I wouldn't frame it that way - because it focuses on the wrong thing, reflects illogical thinking, and - yes - because with all of those facts it's also insulting to people to imply they're inferior.

When I put this analogy back to another poster (who I would say isn't as sharp as you) he was so aghast that he reported me to the mods.

[cybercoma]

I find it laughable to suggest that Japan as remade by America. They certainly have a strong and proud culture of their own that is entirely different from US culture.

Also, when you look at the advantages so-called Christian countries have had through colonialism, triangular trade, and the exploitation of people and resources, it's plain to see why former colonies are behind the ball. Decolonization only began after WWII and was still going on into the 90s. That's after generations of exploitation by colonial powers. Of course the impoverished are going to war for control of the government which includes what wealth and resources a nation has. And of course this is going to throw society into complete disarray with people turning to strict religious codes for some form of social order.

This is no more backward than social systems in Christian societies in the Dark Ages that relied on religion and had barbaric and horrific rules. We don't even have to go back that far. Just look up the treatment of the slave girl Marie-Joseph Angélique for allegedly setting the Montréal Fire of 1734. If you know about how that trial was conducted and the resulting decision, then you would see many parallels to the "backwards" societies of today.

So it's not the people that are backwards. Those nations are simply in a place that colonizing powers were in some time ago. And mind you that the colonizing powers were economic powerhouses then. You can't honestly look at slavery and its pasting effects and claim some sort of moral high ground over African countries or give Christianity some good star for progress. Various sects of Christians fought each other over the matter. As to Christian fighting, you can also see bloody wars (or terrorism depending on perspectives) battled in Ireland between Christians. Muslim sects often fight each other too.

In short, it's a bit blunt to claim cultural or religious superiority if you look at the historical context of our successes and their so-called failures. If the genocide of aboriginal peoples by Christians everywhere in New Worlds and the slavery of people for the accumulation of wealth is advanced then I've got news for you.

Edited May 3, 2014 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

In any case, the issue in the OP is disgusting and needs to be investigated and resolved, just as the missing and murdered aboriginal women in Canada need their cases investigated and resolved.

[Michael Hardner]

cybercoma, on 03 May 2014 - 09:20 AM, said:

So it's not the people that are backwards. Those nations are simply in a place that colonizing powers were in some time ago. And mind you that the colonizing powers were economic powerhouses then. You can't honestly look at slavery and its pasting effects and claim some sort of moral high ground over African countries or give Christianity some good star for progress. Various sects of Christians fought each other over the matter. As to Christian fighting, you can also see bloody wars (or terrorism depending on perspectives) battled in Ireland between Christians. Muslim sects often fight each other too.

In short, it's a bit blunt to claim cultural or religious superiority if you look at the historical context of our successes and their so-called failures. If the genocide of aboriginal peoples by Christians everywhere in New Worlds and the slavery of people for the accumulation of wealth is advanced then I've got news for you.

So it's not the people that are backwards. Those nations are simply in a place that colonizing powers were in some time ago. And mind you that the colonizing powers were economic powerhouses then. You can't honestly look at slavery and its pasting effects and claim some sort of moral high ground over African countries or give Christianity some good star for progress. Various sects of Christians fought each other over the matter. As to Christian fighting, you can also see bloody wars (or terrorism depending on perspectives) battled in Ireland between Christians. Muslim sects often fight each other too.

In short, it's a bit blunt to claim cultural or religious superiority if you look at the historical context of our successes and their so-called failures. If the genocide of aboriginal peoples by Christians everywhere in New Worlds and the slavery of people for the accumulation of wealth is advanced then I've got news for you.

Good post, I agree although I don't know who you're replying to.

Societies, like organisms, have attributes that allow them to grow and thrive in certain conditions - and since these conditions change then the importance of different attribute change too. One of Diamond's assertions was that Christianity allowed for private property rights and enterprise, as well as corporations and investment wheras the Chinese system didn't. That provided a basis for a meritocracy where innovation produced rewards and spawned economic improvement.

When people tout the superiority of Christianity, however, I don't think they say (at least directly) that it's a better system for big business, which is what all of this leads to.

[cybercoma]

Good post, I agree although I don't know who you're replying to.

I don't often get to read through threads as closely as I want. So it wasn't directed towards anyone in particular. Just the idea of cultural and religious superiority that seemed to be floating about.

When people tout the superiority of Christianity, however, I don't think they say (at least directly) that it's a better system for big business, which is what all of this leads to.

Weber would. Are you familiar with the Protestant Ethic? This is a summary that gives a taste of his argument, but is severely lacking the detail and nuance of his book. However, it seems to me anyway, that it's not merely about economic systems, but a cultural superiority that's being touted here. Our culture was one that was built on numerous forms of exploitation. Even to this day, we get cheap goods through the exploitation of workers in foreign markets. We don't politically colonize garment factory employees in Bangladesh, but we do economically exploit them. If I were to agree with Weber's assertion that the Puritan Spirit led to economies that sought the accumulation of wealth as an end in itself, rather than the means to other ends, then my argument would be that the exploitation that allowed for the accumulation of this wealth ought to create a cognitive dissonance with Christian values. Indeed, Africans were dehumanized as property in order to avoid such dissonance. Today, we've moved our slaves overseas, so we don't actually have to see the exploitation taking place. Imagine if you had to go to that factory in Bangladesh to buy your shirts? I don't think many people would have the stomach for it, seeing that kind of exploitation face-to-face.

[bleeding heart]

Thanks, Cybercoma....well-timed perspective of the type that's often forgotten.

It's a complex matter. I mean, I agree completely, and without reservation, that there are serious human rights issues in what we term "the Muslim world," issues so grotesque they are almost beyond belief in some cases (though I would suggest we get more specific, as different countries and regions have different political, cultural, and, yes, religious factors that severely complicate the simplistic criticisms...or the simplistic defenses). There are a lot of practices that are backwards and ugly...and sometimes stunningly vicious.

But the reason I agree with you and other "relativists" that the colonial powers have been a crucial part of the problem--a key problem--and that this has continued under a cosmetically different manner in the "post" or "neo" -colonial global order, is for practical reasons...not "Western self-flagellation" or any of the other nonsense terms floated about by Western nationalists.

What it amounts to is that we are responsible for our own actions. Not exactly a radical stance, I once thought, but I now see that it is, aside from being used as boilerplate to berate the poor, here and elsewhere. But the principle is real enough. And in a Western democracy, we can collectively have some effect on the way our nations behave...it's limited, or at any rate difficult, but there's still something to it.

I bring this up because I wish to posit something: let's say, for argument's sake, that most of us are opposed to terrorism, for a salient example of a matter that garners a lot of attention. It's a pretty uncontroversial statement. So ok...terrorism causes suffering, and we wish to decrease it as much as possible.

Well, there is a lot of evidence, overwhelming evidence, that the so-called "war on terror" has dramatically increased the amount of global terrorism.

And we're not talking in conventional war terms, with an army fighting back in increased desperation...we're talking about terrorism that would not occur were we behaving differently.

Anyone who does not take this seriously can have no real interest in decreasing terrorism.

A very notable example is Iraq; the terrorist attacks in London were explicitly pointed out by British Intelligence as being a direct result of the war on Iraq...which was a controversial war in which every horror was aptly predicted beforehand.

More importantly (in terms of scale, and of human lives lost) is the terrorism occurring within Iraq itself. The invading coalition precipitated it, and shares direct culpability for all of it. So that's pretty serious. Not to mention the rise in Islamic fundamentalism....and that women's rights are less protected now than they were before the war..

And I'm here being generous to the more hawkish among us...because I am so far omitting the terrorism that is directly committed and/or materially supported by the Western nations themselves, as a matter of actual policy.

Honestly, to hear people claim--always angrily--that "politics has nothing to do with it," and that "Islam" alone is the problem...is astonishing. Truly staggering.

It makes the self-indulgent and dishonest Cold War binaries seem nuanced by comparison.

Edited May 3, 2014 by bleeding heart

[cybercoma]

It's a complex matter. I mean, I agree completely, and without reservation, that there are serious human rights issues in what we term "the Muslim world," issues so grotesque they are almost beyond belief

And I want to underscore the fact that this needs to be at the forefront of the discussion. I feel like I'm weighing in on an aside here. The treatment of these women is so beyond disgusting, I don't even have the words to properly condemn it. What I'm arguing here, however, is that condemning it from a position of cultural superiority is insulting to the victims themselves, as it's their culture being insulted. I think we can make better arguments and have a more meaningful effect if we didn't insult the billions of Muslims out there by calling this an Islam problem because the issue is miles deeper than that. Passing it off as just being part of their culture ignores the history and development of cultures over time. It doesn't account for why there are Muslims fighting each other. It doesn't account for the peaceful Muslims that are also disgusted by this. It's just so painfully simplistic that it does a disservice to properly condemning the problem and addressing it appropriately. That's what bothers me most about these bigoted arguments and is why I tend to avoid these discussions. Standing on your soapbox and patting your own culture on the back does nothing to help these women nor does it properly condemn the people that are carrying out these abhorrent crimes.

Edited May 3, 2014 by cybercoma

[WestCoastRunner]

I heard a profound statement from a journalist tonight on this issue. He mentioned the international efforts to locate the missing Malaysian plane. Why not do the same for these kidnapped girls. Countries around the world should join forces to rescue these poor girls. Not only are these girls subjected to horrific conditions but also the Nigerian kids that are left behind that are now denied an education because of the fear of them being kidnapped.

[Argus]

Argus, here's how the question above gets posted when using the analogy of Africa and GDP:

"Are they unproductive and unresourceful because they're African ? Because if you go around the world looking for unproductive countries, you will find most of them are African"

I think that you would be ok with this characterization of the situation, as reflected by the data. I wouldn't frame it that way - because it focuses on the wrong thing, reflects illogical thinking, and - yes - because with all of those facts it's also insulting to people to imply they're inferior.

When I put this analogy back to another poster (who I would say isn't as sharp as you) he was so aghast that he reported me to the mods.

I'm sorry but how does it show they're 'inferior'? It shows they're poor. If they find that insulting, well, that's not my problem.

The data I posted had nothing to do with GDP but with cultural sophistication or backwardness. Unsurprisingly, many of the nations at the bottom of the list are African or Muslim or both. Again, if some Nigerian finds that insulting (Nigera is near the bottom of the list), that's not my problem.

The fact is that any nation or people whose cultural makeup is heavily influenced by a religion which came into existance many centuries ago and which has undergone no reformation or modern reinterpretation are going to be culturally backward. I can see why the members of that culture would find such a description insulting but that does not make it untrue.

Edited May 6, 2014 by Argus

[Argus]

I heard a profound statement from a journalist tonight on this issue. He mentioned the international efforts to locate the missing Malaysian plane. Why not do the same for these kidnapped girls. Countries around the world should join forces to rescue these poor girls. Not only are these girls subjected to horrific conditions but also the Nigerian kids that are left behind that are now denied an education because of the fear of them being kidnapped.

You want us to invade Nigeria? The Nigerian government doesn't give a damn about those girls, or any girls.

[PIK]

I never said they were equal. I said this happens all over the world, and nobody here has done a single thing to bolster the underlying suggestion that its worse in muslim countries. The worst countries in the world are China, Russia, and Uzbekistan, Thialand and Brasil. Im not saying this isnt terrible it is... But most of you are just using it as an excuse to attack your favorite boogeyman. Muslims.

Im not defending islam Im attacking the ability of you guys to form coherent thoughts, and employ basic elementary school level logic.

Please show us where christians are kidnapping girls by the hundreds and selling them or just letiing his men have thier way with them.I find it sick when the muyslims do something like this and people scream christians do it to. Maybe some are but right now in this world at this time ,muslims are the biggest offenders. Well will people smarten the fuck up, and quit with the whiteman/christian guilt trips.

Edited May 6, 2014 by PIK

[Wilber]

I heard a profound statement from a journalist tonight on this issue. He mentioned the international efforts to locate the missing Malaysian plane. Why not do the same for these kidnapped girls. Countries around the world should join forces to rescue these poor girls. Not only are these girls subjected to horrific conditions but also the Nigerian kids that are left behind that are now denied an education because of the fear of them being kidnapped.

I agree but Argus is right, without the co-operation of the Nigerian government, the rest of the world can't do much.

[cybercoma]

You want us to invade Nigeria? The Nigerian government doesn't give a damn about those girls, or any girls.

The Nigerian government asked for help, not an invasion.

[cybercoma]

Please show us where christians are kidnapping girls by the hundreds and selling them or just letiing his men have thier way with them.I find it sick when the muyslims do something like this and people scream christians do it to. Maybe some are but right now in this world at this time ,muslims are the biggest offenders. Well will people smarten the fuck up, and quit with the whiteman/christian guilt trips.

Please connect the kidnapping to the religion.

[Argus]

I find it laughable to suggest that Japan as remade by America. They certainly have a strong and proud culture of their own that is entirely different from US culture.

Certainly, but the US remade many aspects of their culture. Don't believe me look at what it was like before WW2.

Why do you think the only two Asian countries in the top thirty are the ones which were occupied by the Americans? Coincidence?

Also, when you look at the advantages so-called Christian countries have had through colonialism,

You forget that Islamic nations were once more advanced, culturally, scientifically, and militarily than Christianity. And they set about colonizing Christian lands, and, in many places, forcing the inhabitants to convert.

So how exactly did the Christian countries surge ahead, culturally, scientifically, and militarily? Why were Muslim countries left behind in the dust? The answer can probably be explained, to some degree, in that even now,in Muslim nations, parents of a bright girl only want her to be married safely, and of a bright boy cherish dreams of him becoming an Islamic scholar. Parents of a bright boy or girl in the West cherish dream of them becoming a doctor, lawyer, engineer or scientist.

All the ideas and concepts deeloped in the Renaissance, the Reformation, were ignored in the Muslim world. There was no scientific revolution, now industrial revolution, no englightenment.

This is no more backward than social systems in Christian societies in the Dark Ages

Perhaps it's not, but wouldn't we describe dark age europeans as socially bakward compared to us?

In short, it's a bit blunt to claim cultural or religious superiority if you look at the historical context of our successes and their so-called failures. If the genocide of aboriginal peoples by Christians everywhere in New Worlds and the slavery of people for the accumulation of wealth is advanced then I've got news for you.

And again, no one is denying that we were socially backward back then, so why are you denying they are now?

[Argus]

Our culture was one that was built on numerous forms of exploitation.

ALL cultures were built on numerous forms of exploitation. All cultures still are built on various forms of exploitation.