Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (55886)	11/6/2002 5:54:05 AM
From: frankw1900	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

During this time, Islam was a vast empire stretching from western Africa into India?an empire that valued learning, prized scholars, maintained great libraries, and preserved the works of many ancient writers. But within three centuries, this greatest civilization on the face of the earth was in retreat, and the West was rising to produce a civilization renowned for its commitment to personal liberty, scientific expertise, political democracy, and free markets. That civilization mostly destroyed itself. "Faith is greater than science." Probably a good thing for the West it did. The last four paragraphs are not up to the rest of the essay: The touchstones for Western success in reconciling religion and freedom were nationalism and Christianity, two doctrines that today many sophisticated people either ignore or distrust. Probably because Christianity keeps trying to get back into politics. Nationalism in the 20th century was taken over by various totalitarian ideologies which the modern world had to defeat at great cost. Those who distrust nationalism usually conflate it with these ideologies. A mistake. But then they did not have to spend four centuries establishing freedom of conscience. We are being optimistic if we think that, absent a unique ruler such as Atatürk and a rare opportunity such as a world war, the Middle East will be able to accomplish this much faster. By "optimistic" he means unrealistic. I don't know about a world war, but it's very likely the ME is in for a huge upheaval of some kind in the next short while. The regimes in Iraq and Iran are obviously in big trouble and the Saudi one doesn't look that secure. Some smaller states in the area are moving towards democracy. My betting is that in the next six months the Israelis go up the Hamas and Hezbollah trail and also expel Arafat and cronies. A useful deal with the palestinians may come a lot sooner than many expect and it's going to be very secular. It's also likely that the regime in Iraq is going to go down soon with US help of one kind or another. It's not necessary that country have an Ataturk to come up with a better arrangement than it has now. The Iranian regime will go down shortly after. Secular muslim states do exist and could become modern very quickly on destruction of islamofascist credibility. ... When the West reconciled religion and freedom, it did so by making the individual the focus of society, It reconciled the two by putting the individual in front of government with no intermediary and, ultimately, as the enlightenmenst progressed. as a responsible, voting member of the nation. I don't think "focus of society" has meaning here unless we're talking about 15 minutes of fame. (You or I are not the focus of society). To be the focus of society means living in a totalitarian society. and the price it has paid has been individualism run rampant, in the form of weak marriages, high rates of crime, and alienated personalities. Sententious bumpf. Rates of crime were much worse in previous centuries. Weak marriages and alienated personalities have always existed in a large part of any population, secular or not. When Islam kept religion at the expense of freedom, it did so by making the individual subordinate to society, and the price it has paid has been autocratic governments, religious intolerance, and little personal freedom. Islam didn't "keep religion at the expense of freedom," it eliminated the reason/science it had and replaced it with faith. The loss of freedom was a by product as the individual was left naked in front of god and the mullah. The rest followed. I believe that in time Islam will become modern, because without religious freedom, modern government is impossible. True. I hope that in time the West will reaffirm social contracts, because without them a decent life is impossible. Social contracts are an artificial concept invented by 18th century philosophers. We have customs and laws and they change over time to suit conditions. People break them and stretch them both for reasons of persoanl advantage and justice. But decent abidance makes for a decent life. This guy is grinding his own axe here. But in the near term, Islam will be on the defensive culturally?which means it will be on the offensive politically. Part of Islam is on the offensive ideologically against the modern world and against most muslims in an effort to promote the establishment of an imaginary past (thus solving all the problems of the present). And the West will be on the offensive culturally, which I suspect means it will be on the defensive morally. What's to defend, morally? The West treats its citizens and minorites considerably better than do most islamic nations. It's justice is more uniform and considerably less cruel than that of most islamic nations. Its treatment of women is generally much superior than that of most islamic nations. The West is going to be on the moral offensive. And don't forget, singing, dancing and fornication are very attractive. More axe grinding. If the Middle East is to encounter and not merely resist modernity, it would best if it did this before it runs out of oil. Nonsense. ME would be better off if it ran out of oil tomorrow.