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: JohnM who wrote (87271)	3/28/2003 11:52:56 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Got any thoughts? Maybe I can "nuance" something for you, John. Although it would be one hell of a lot easier if the damn cursor was visible. It seems to come and go with my version here. I am about ready to compose everything on "Composer" and then cut and paste. There was a digest of articles about the ME at "Prospect" Magazine, with a link at "A&L" under the title of: "Is the Middle East ill-suited to democracy? Can America, or anyone else, impose it from without? Are home-grown models showing signs of life?."http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/ArticleView.asp?accessible=yes&P_Article=11887 You will like them. The articles are very nuanced and reject the idea that the ME will go democratic. Fouad Ajami, however, said, "The ambition is risky, but US action may indeed spark wider Arab democracy." The point that struck home with me is that the Muslim Religion is so authoritarian in the secular area. It believes that anyone can govern as long as the Shari'a is followed. That is why it is so much tougher to graft Democracy to Islam than it was to Christianity's "render" concept. This clip from one article sums it up. "Authors such as Bernard Lewis in 'What went Wrong?' argue that the roots of Arab authoritarianism go back a very long way, perhaps to the Islamic golden age. According to classical Islam, the legitimate ruler was the man who ruled in conformity with the Shari'a, the law of God. So long as the Shari'a was observed, he could be a foreigner (an Ottoman Caliph) or even a slave (as were the Mamelukes in Egypt). Thus, it was more important to uphold the law than the will of the people that lived under it. Given that the law could only be administered in co-operation with the urban elite, a degree of consensus was built into the system. However, authoritarianism increased from the late 19th century, as Arab leaders sought to propel their populations out of backwardness. Furthermore, given the multi-ethnic, multi-religious populations of the middle east, nation states-the incubators of democracy in western Europe-could not easily develop." I have printed out and have been studying the article by Paul Berman, "The Philosopher of Islam Terror." You know my propensity for believing that scribblers in garrets run the world. In this case, one in prison seems to have taken over the cutting edge of Islamic radicalism. I will try to get a "Thumbsucker" posted on it this weekend. However, worshiping at the Church of Tiger Woods comes first. :>)