Dennis I don't completely disagree with you. Consider this as complementary to my previous post on the subject. Certainly they are not American. At the same time, it is not true that we do not want them to be Americanized. We do and we try very hard at it.
What we are discussing now, has been a hot topic for almost 30 years, but especially over the past 10 years. One of the books on this is called "Coca Cola Versus Ayatollah". Unfortunately I haven't been able to find a good reference to it. May be you'll have better luck (anybody from Europe wants to get a crack at it?). It argues about this interaction. There are some others who argue points against my position but they acknowledge the relevance of the issues I am raising. I have some of them at the bottom of the page.
Also you may want to look at the intellectual undercurrents present in the east prior to the rise of fundamentalism. One of the best examples was Jalal Al Ahmad. In a way you can see him go through all the stages that Iran as a whole went through later on. He started from old fashioned religious background. Got to believe in Western institutes. Became an atheist and a communist. Became anti-western. And eventually laid the foundations for a new form of Islam that later became the politicized fundamentalism. Looking at him iranchamber.com you get a very different view of the movement than what you'd get from Khomeini. The Iranian revolution was not made on the back of hardliner fundamentalists. It was people like Al-Ahmad, Prof. Shariati (from Sorbonne University), Dr. Bazargan, and many others who worked on bringing about an ideology that was as much indigenous as it could succeed.
So despite what many think, fundamentalist Islamic move was not purely an invention of backwards clerics. Many, if not most, of its founders had Ph D. from European and American universities. The goal was to design a movement that would achieve independence. Rejection of the West was as much from nationalism as it was from anger and backlash. The ugly face of the mullah that you see, was the most exotic and the loudest of the voices, but certainly not the most followed.
Al Ahmad's 1962 essay called "Weststruckness" or "Fascination with the West" is even more critical of the regime. Addressing Iran's mounting social problems directly for the first time in Iranian literature, "Weststruckness" takes western intrusion into Iran's traditional Islamic educational system to task. Teaching about the various ways to serve a hot dog to students who have never seen a hot dog, Al Ahmad says, is a waste of time for both the teacher and his wards.
In addition to his literary activities, Al Ahmad contributed to the understanding of sociological and cultural aspects of far-off regions of Iran such as Awrazan and the Khark Island. His research, even though he was neither a trained sociologist or a cultural studies expert, leads the way to a better understanding of those regions of Iran. Finally, Al Ahmad has translated a number of important works from French into Persian. These include Dostoevsky's The Gambler, Camus's L'Etranger, and Sartre's Les Mains Sales. Ahmad's 1962 essay called "Weststruckness" or "Fascination with the West" is even more critical of the regime. Addressing Iran's mounting social problems directly for the first time in Iranian literature, "Weststruckness" takes western intrusion into Iran's traditional Islamic educational system to task. Teaching about the various ways to serve a hot dog to students who have never seen a hot dog, Al Ahmad says, is a waste of time for both the teacher and his wards.
Here is some other interesting articles. The first is from the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists. It does not talk particularly about the backlash towards America. Rather it discusses the communication trends and some of their socio-political ramifications. The second article is about the roots of Muslim rage. It raises some interesting points and is not without merits. But I don't agree with the overall picture it paints. To be sure there are elements within the Islamist camp which fit the description presented well. But that article, like so many others, fails to discuss the contribution of other cross currents to the fundamentalist's cause.
enjoy,
Sun Tzu
bullatomsci.org
Globalization is but another word for the impending triumph of American culture: entertainment, fashion, and the American way of life, all combined in one package. It seems that soon globalization will be complete, and McDonald's will be able to send its commercials to every man, woman, and consumer, anywhere in the world, any time of day.
But globalization is more than the worldwide marketing battles of Coca Cola and Pepsi, more than the promotion of Hollywood religion and-well-Hollywood itself. Two decades ago, another man in another culture, with new communications technologies and a totally different message in mind, not only revolutionized his country but also signaled the return of an old tradition. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the spiritual leader of Islamic Iran, then residing in suburban Paris, combined his access to networks of mosques and bazaars with that of electronic communication and cassette tapes in his successful long-distance overthrow of a secular, Western-oriented monarchy.
Indeed, the Iranian revolution-and later, the downfall of the Soviet Union by similar means- not only ushered in some of the most profound and wide-ranging developments of twentieth-century international politics, but also the dawn of a new era in global communications.
.
theatlantic.com
THIS revulsion against America, more generally against the West, is by no means limited to the Muslim world; nor have Muslims, with the exception of the Iranian mullahs and their disciples elsewhere, experienced and exhibited the more virulent forms of this feeling. The mood of disillusionment and hostility has affected many other parts of the world, and has even reached some elements in the United States. It is from these last, speaking for themselves and claiming to speak for the oppressed peoples of the Third World, that the most widely publicized explanations -- and justifications -- of this rejection of Western civilization and its values have of late been heard.
The accusations are familiar. We of the West are accused of sexism, racism, and imperialism, institutionalized in patriarchy and slavery, tyranny and exploitation. To these charges, and to others as heinous, we have no option but to plead guilty -- not as Americans, nor yet as Westerners, but simply as human beings, as members of the human race. In none of these sins are we the only sinners, and in some of them we are very far from being the worst. The treatment of women in the Western world, and more generally in Christendom, has always been unequal and often oppressive, but even at its worst it was rather better than the rule of polygamy and concubinage that has otherwise been the almost universal lot of womankind on this planet.
. |
