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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (233452)	4/4/2003 12:00:41 PM
From: benwood	Respond to of 436258

As we seek to remove the religious grip in foreign nations, we are actively seeking to increase the religious grip here. Of course, when I say, "remove the religious grip" I really mean "replace the religious grip" but that will take a few more years. The attitude & behavior and goals are very similar to 150 years ago as the eastern US pushed into lands occupied by native peoples, who also happened to control natural resources that were our "manifest destiny." At some point, it was just smash them, bring in the missionaries, and take over the resources.

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (233452)	4/4/2003 12:09:59 PM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Haim - With all due respect, I feel you do not have a good enough understanding of Middle Eastern traditions and POV to make a judgement on just how easy it will be to install democracy in Iraq. There was a good article in this month's Prospect magazine on the traditional system of governance in the Middle East. I suggest you read it all, but here are a few paragraphs that I feel are quite insightful: ----------------------------------------------- For millennia, most middle easterners lived in moderately-sized villages whose organising principle was usually that of the clan or tribe. They also lived in an insecure world of many dangers, putting a huge premium on preventing rifts within tribal society. Governance invariably revolved around a form of consensus-building. Leadership, usually centralised and hereditary, engaged in open-ended negotiation with the dominant males representing the main branches of the clan; problems were discussed, compromises and understandings reached, and in return all swore personal loyalty to the leader. This methodology was absorbed into and sanctified by Islam, wherein a leader comes to his position through a consensus of elders (ijma) and remains in power through the acquiescence of the community (umma). Now consider in this light the idea that someone who wins 54 per cent of the vote in an election should get 100 per cent of the power, while the person who wins 46 per cent should get none. This strikes those used to consensus decision-making as not only illogical but dangerous-an invitation to civil strife. This is why when Hafez Assad used to win 98.5 per cent of the vote-which we saw as perverse-it did not strike a typical Syrian as very odd. Historically speaking, too, it is worth noting that consensus forms of decision-making have been far more prevalent than democratic ones. Nor do consensus forms of decision-making equate to tyranny or despotism. Traditional Arab and Muslim governance has been patriarchal and authoritarian, but it has been law-based, participatory at some level, and viewed as legitimate by most of the ruled most of the time. Finally, there is the matter of equality before the law. The idea of the legal equality of all citizens conflicts with nearly all traditional authority. In Islamic civilisation, men are "more equal" than women, the educated more than the illiterate, the noble or Sherifian more than the commoner, the pious more than the reprobate, and the elder more than the youth. Most Arabs find absurd the idea that the vote of a 22-year-old illiterate peasant woman should be equal to that of a 70-year-old qadi. The presumption of natural hierarchy in society is neither parochial nor ridiculous, and it was, after all, true of typical westerners only a historically short time ago. So is "Arab democracy" an oxymoron? Of course not. Things change. Other cultures need not become western in order to become democratic; it is vapid historicism to point to the cultural particularity of the Reformation and the Renaissance and then proclaim the authoritarian fate of others. There is nothing "wrong" with Arabs cognitively or morally, and there certainly are theological and cultural predicates for democracy within Islam-and they are neither minor nor obscure should anyone wish to use them. Some do: there are genuine Arab democrats, and they deserve support. Certainly, given the manifest dangers to the west of the status quo in the Arab world, we cannot do nothing. The problem is that, for a variety of historical reasons, there are few democrats there and, in the end, there must be widespread indigenous interest in democracy for help from abroad to "take." To push democracy onto the Arabs before they want it and are ready for it is to stoke precisely their fears of failure, and their resentment of the west, that we should wish to minimise. Dealing with the pathologies of the Arab world is one of the great challenges of our time. But there are no quick fixes, and ultimately, the solution must arise from among the Arabs themselves. The west can help; it cannot mandate. prospect-magazine.co.uk ---------------------------------------------- I have lived in various parts of the Middle East most of my life. You might like to listen to what I say on this subject. you can install democracy more easily in a secular society and therefore Iraq is a much better choice than Saudi Arabia for example Possibly. Still, this possible relative ease does not say anything about whether Iraqis are ready for democracy. And of course, this has nothing to do with whether or not the invasion and subsequent converion to democracy by force of Iraq will do anything at all in weakening Islamist fundamentalism. In fact, my feeling is that it will grow in Iraq after this invasion, as a reaction. It will not be the first time a nation turns to religion as a reaction to outside influences.