'Clash Of Civilizations': Research
- Thread starter rastinny
- Start date
apocalypse77
Junior Member
*edited*
i realise there are some cinspiracies in the questions..from one extreme to another of polar opposites
i realise there are some cinspiracies in the questions..from one extreme to another of polar opposites
Who do u work for...MOSSAD??????????!!! ........................^well spotted bro 
Whats with these questions...?
What do you think about the Iraq insurgency?
Freedom fighters / Terrorists
What do you think about the Taliban?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about women in burqa?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about Salafism?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about Sufism?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about the American government and the ‘coalition of the willing’?
Freedom fighters / Terrorists
^ now look here...
these are inherently biased questions....things arent as black and white as ure making out, but for the sake of ure project im sure u need definitive answers like this...but im not going to answer cos otherwise id be lying either way and we and muslims arent allowed to lie!
besides who am i to call sufis and salafis fanatics or pious??? im in no position to judge someones level of faith.
feel free to open up a thread for discussion and u will get an idea of what we think....i dont think u relaise the diversity of opinion amongst us.
sorry cant help anymore than that.
Whats with these questions...?
What do you think about the Iraq insurgency?
Freedom fighters / Terrorists
What do you think about the Taliban?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about women in burqa?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about Salafism?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about Sufism?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about the American government and the ‘coalition of the willing’?
Freedom fighters / Terrorists
^ now look here...
these are inherently biased questions....things arent as black and white as ure making out, but for the sake of ure project im sure u need definitive answers like this...but im not going to answer cos otherwise id be lying either way and we and muslims arent allowed to lie!
besides who am i to call sufis and salafis fanatics or pious??? im in no position to judge someones level of faith.
feel free to open up a thread for discussion and u will get an idea of what we think....i dont think u relaise the diversity of opinion amongst us.
sorry cant help anymore than that.
I realize that the answers are black and white. You are very right to make that commend. However I just trying to measure if the experience of discrimination and inequality in society has an effect on attitudes towards different forms of dedication to religious and political life. I do thank you for you positive criticism. God bless.
justoneofmillion
Junior Member
HI, let`s put it the other way around i think it is finally time to do so !how would you answer your own questions
if you have no idea than you have to get used to it because in a couple of years it will be the non muslims who will have to answer the questions of the muslims and learn how to justify themselves i promise you this, what do you think about the war in Iraq what do you think about prostitution , anorexia, divorce ,rape, suicide rates the exploitation of women sitting naked on a chocolate bar to sell products on tv , women who are used and put naked to sell beer cars music,what do you think about abortion or women killing their babies in the "sophisticated " countries ,putting them in the fridge or kidnapping them everyweek we get bombarded with news of that nature! what do you think about young people killing in masses in schools , universities, how do you explain that after 30 years of feminism there are more women in the sexindustrie than in business and politics how do you explain that you find the so called emancipated women peeing in the streets after getting out of the clubs! pedophilia what do you think about that? there is no clash of civilization there is a clash in a "civilization" called west that is strangling itself with it`s own hands launching wars not to survive but to keep it`s luxury because it`s citizens can not control their greed they are not used to it they are too sophisticated ,dispicable to live like the rest of the world does!there is a lack of moral virtues to balance their material aspirations.
in this context of high competition in the global market we are noticing the end of the supremacie of the western civilisation that is all ! due to this disease in the western society that only Islam can cure and if some still can not see that they will at the latest when the elephant will start moving to the west and Mercedes will be heading to the India for example ! what do you think about 80% of the world population living with 20% of resources and 20% living with 80% of the resources? while the NASA is celebrating Africa is starving! these are a couple of questions that the west is going to be held accountable for in a couple of years so it is worth to take the time i think and ponder about them!
peace
if you have no idea than you have to get used to it because in a couple of years it will be the non muslims who will have to answer the questions of the muslims and learn how to justify themselves i promise you this, what do you think about the war in Iraq what do you think about prostitution , anorexia, divorce ,rape, suicide rates the exploitation of women sitting naked on a chocolate bar to sell products on tv , women who are used and put naked to sell beer cars music,what do you think about abortion or women killing their babies in the "sophisticated " countries ,putting them in the fridge or kidnapping them everyweek we get bombarded with news of that nature! what do you think about young people killing in masses in schools , universities, how do you explain that after 30 years of feminism there are more women in the sexindustrie than in business and politics how do you explain that you find the so called emancipated women peeing in the streets after getting out of the clubs! pedophilia what do you think about that? there is no clash of civilization there is a clash in a "civilization" called west that is strangling itself with it`s own hands launching wars not to survive but to keep it`s luxury because it`s citizens can not control their greed they are not used to it they are too sophisticated ,dispicable to live like the rest of the world does!there is a lack of moral virtues to balance their material aspirations.
in this context of high competition in the global market we are noticing the end of the supremacie of the western civilisation that is all ! due to this disease in the western society that only Islam can cure and if some still can not see that they will at the latest when the elephant will start moving to the west and Mercedes will be heading to the India for example ! what do you think about 80% of the world population living with 20% of resources and 20% living with 80% of the resources? while the NASA is celebrating Africa is starving! these are a couple of questions that the west is going to be held accountable for in a couple of years so it is worth to take the time i think and ponder about them!
peace
Proud2BeHumble
Seek Truth, Be Happy
Survey
Dear Martin Naarendorp,
In your first question you have asked the religion (Christianity / Islam / Hindu / Jewish / Other / None), so it appears that you have targeted your survey not only to Muslims but to Non-Muslims as well. For clash of civilization to occur more than one civilization must be involved and in order to identify the potential causes of such clash, you need to study all the possible points that can lead to it.
Your questionnaire however only asks questions related to Muslims (which may be possible indication that you have already assumed Muslims responsible for the occurrence of clash of civilization, if it occurs). Your questions also indicate that you want to study how fanatic Muslims are and how their life has changed after recent events. You also seem to study how imminent is the clash of civilization but you have ignored to ask some questions like how they feel about western countries occupying Muslims countries and how their opinion has affected due to this. You may also add some questions regarding Palestine-Israel problem.
Additionally, I think such online survey may be less reliable as people may not trust you and give wrong answers. If you are doing your masters, then such information will be very basic/unrealistic for such level.
West is no longer the only dominant culture, as Islam and the growing Chinese population are showing their presence in the world. West is not only trying to retain its top post but also trying to increase influence (economic / military etc).
Clashes have happened before and there are lessons to be learned to prevent the tragedy of clash and others from happening again. Need of the hour is:
• Respecting the sovereignty of nations.
• More people to people contact, Mutual respect, Developing understanding of other civilizations, Honouring individual human freedom (off course not misusing it),
• To avoid pride, arrogance and racism that have blinded man to the lowest level
Our world is marred by injustice and dishonesty and all kinds of atrocities at both the individual as well as the communal level. This is because people feel free to do as they please quite unfettered by moral considerations. The wrongdoers renounce such ways only when there is no other option. The freedom—which they abuse—has been given to mankind, because our world is a testing place. And on Doomsday, all without exception will be called to account for how they have used the freedom. If they have ignored and denied the truth in this world, they shall be obliged to accept it on the Day of Reckoning, because all of their options will have run out and subterfuge and pleas for mercy will be of no avail; by that time it will be too late either to beg for forgiveness or to attempt to make amends.
Why do people wait until they are forced to submit to the truth? If one accepts the truth because one is forced to, one’s acceptance has no value. Why again do people wait until they are forced to treat others with justice? Being just to others because one is forced to is likewise an action bereft of honour or human kindness.
Why wait until we are on the brink of Doomsday before we act with human concern for individuals and a proper respect for society? Why wait until the Day of Judgement before we act as bidden in the Qur’an, as honest, upright, responsible individuals? So, if you are giving any recommendations /solutions in your study (for clash of civilization not to occur) please make a list of countries and number of wars they have fought in last 300 years or so, lets see from where the problem is arising, why people are becoming so intolerant and violent.
Dear Martin Naarendorp,
In your first question you have asked the religion (Christianity / Islam / Hindu / Jewish / Other / None), so it appears that you have targeted your survey not only to Muslims but to Non-Muslims as well. For clash of civilization to occur more than one civilization must be involved and in order to identify the potential causes of such clash, you need to study all the possible points that can lead to it.
Your questionnaire however only asks questions related to Muslims (which may be possible indication that you have already assumed Muslims responsible for the occurrence of clash of civilization, if it occurs). Your questions also indicate that you want to study how fanatic Muslims are and how their life has changed after recent events. You also seem to study how imminent is the clash of civilization but you have ignored to ask some questions like how they feel about western countries occupying Muslims countries and how their opinion has affected due to this. You may also add some questions regarding Palestine-Israel problem.
Additionally, I think such online survey may be less reliable as people may not trust you and give wrong answers. If you are doing your masters, then such information will be very basic/unrealistic for such level.
West is no longer the only dominant culture, as Islam and the growing Chinese population are showing their presence in the world. West is not only trying to retain its top post but also trying to increase influence (economic / military etc).
Clashes have happened before and there are lessons to be learned to prevent the tragedy of clash and others from happening again. Need of the hour is:
• Respecting the sovereignty of nations.
• More people to people contact, Mutual respect, Developing understanding of other civilizations, Honouring individual human freedom (off course not misusing it),
• To avoid pride, arrogance and racism that have blinded man to the lowest level
Our world is marred by injustice and dishonesty and all kinds of atrocities at both the individual as well as the communal level. This is because people feel free to do as they please quite unfettered by moral considerations. The wrongdoers renounce such ways only when there is no other option. The freedom—which they abuse—has been given to mankind, because our world is a testing place. And on Doomsday, all without exception will be called to account for how they have used the freedom. If they have ignored and denied the truth in this world, they shall be obliged to accept it on the Day of Reckoning, because all of their options will have run out and subterfuge and pleas for mercy will be of no avail; by that time it will be too late either to beg for forgiveness or to attempt to make amends.
Why do people wait until they are forced to submit to the truth? If one accepts the truth because one is forced to, one’s acceptance has no value. Why again do people wait until they are forced to treat others with justice? Being just to others because one is forced to is likewise an action bereft of honour or human kindness.
Why wait until we are on the brink of Doomsday before we act with human concern for individuals and a proper respect for society? Why wait until the Day of Judgement before we act as bidden in the Qur’an, as honest, upright, responsible individuals? So, if you are giving any recommendations /solutions in your study (for clash of civilization not to occur) please make a list of countries and number of wars they have fought in last 300 years or so, lets see from where the problem is arising, why people are becoming so intolerant and violent.
My own replies
Questioner
Dear respondent would you mind helping me answer these questions by highlighting what you find appropriate or by underlining it? Feel free to expand or forward to your Muslim friends. Please email me your responses on [email protected]
What is your religion?
Christianity / Islam / Hindu / Jewish / Other / None Rastafarian
Where do you live?
Netherlands Ireland Other European country Non European country
My society is becoming more equal / less equal?
What do you think about Culture (Please chose only one of the options)?
• My culture is important; every one should stick to their culture to preserve it.
• My culture is important; but we should pick and choose what we like between de different cultural traits available to us.
• Culture is not so important; we should adapt to the values of rationality, democracy, science and technology.
• Other view:
What do you think of science?
Blessing / Curse / Beneficial / only sometimes beneficial / only sometimes a curse
Do you experience discrimination against your faith?
Often / Regularly / Seldom / Never
If yes, in what form?
Employment Education Housing Other:
How did it affect your dedication to religious life?
Increased dedication / No Effect / Less dedication
What do you think of the treatment of Muslims by the government of Holland?
Good / Bad / Normal / I don’t know.
What do you think of the treatment of Muslims by the government of Ireland?
Good / Bad / Normal / I don’t know
What do you think of the treatment of Muslims by the government of the USA?
Good / Bad / Normal / I don’t Know
Please choose only 1 answer. If you don’t know which go to the next question.
What do you think about the Iraq insurgency?
Freedom fighters / Terrorists
What do you think about Al Qaeda?
Freedom fighters / Terrorists
What do you think about the Taliban?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about women in burqa?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about Salafism?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about Sufism?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about the American government and the ‘coalition of the willing’?
Freedom fighters / Terrorists
Thank you very much!!!!!!
Martin Naarendorp
Questioner
Dear respondent would you mind helping me answer these questions by highlighting what you find appropriate or by underlining it? Feel free to expand or forward to your Muslim friends. Please email me your responses on [email protected]
What is your religion?
Christianity / Islam / Hindu / Jewish / Other / None Rastafarian
Where do you live?
Netherlands Ireland Other European country Non European country
My society is becoming more equal / less equal?
What do you think about Culture (Please chose only one of the options)?
• My culture is important; every one should stick to their culture to preserve it.
• My culture is important; but we should pick and choose what we like between de different cultural traits available to us.
• Culture is not so important; we should adapt to the values of rationality, democracy, science and technology.
• Other view:
What do you think of science?
Blessing / Curse / Beneficial / only sometimes beneficial / only sometimes a curse
Do you experience discrimination against your faith?
Often / Regularly / Seldom / Never
If yes, in what form?
Employment Education Housing Other:
How did it affect your dedication to religious life?
Increased dedication / No Effect / Less dedication
What do you think of the treatment of Muslims by the government of Holland?
Good / Bad / Normal / I don’t know.
What do you think of the treatment of Muslims by the government of Ireland?
Good / Bad / Normal / I don’t know
What do you think of the treatment of Muslims by the government of the USA?
Good / Bad / Normal / I don’t Know
Please choose only 1 answer. If you don’t know which go to the next question.
What do you think about the Iraq insurgency?
Freedom fighters / Terrorists
What do you think about Al Qaeda?
Freedom fighters / Terrorists
What do you think about the Taliban?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about women in burqa?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about Salafism?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about Sufism?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What do you think about the American government and the ‘coalition of the willing’?
Freedom fighters / Terrorists
Thank you very much!!!!!!
Martin Naarendorp
Good evening,
Thank you all very much for responding and for your positive criticisms. Justoneofmillion You posted a lot of questions and I would like to answer them but out of your questions I think the following answer will maybe give you an Idea bout the way I think. I think that Science including sociology which I am studying is sometimes benificial to humans. However the application of science as we have come to know it in western societies has brought human kind to the brink of extinction. It has resulted in the exploitation and mass murder of millions of humans worldwide and continues to do so. I study the so called clash of civilizations for the following reason: The view that Islam and ‘western’ culture are at loggerheads has long been subject of controversy. Professor Bernard Lewis was the first one who used the term ‘clash of civilizations’ to describe the conflict between Christianity and Islam. In the book ‘Clash of Civilizations’, Samuel P. Huntington used the same term to argue that the primary axis of future conflicts would be along cultural and religious lines. In the 1993 Foreign Affairs article, Huntington writes:
It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural (Huntington, 1993).
This view influenced states who had previously endorsed policies in support of cultural plurality to review their commitment to a multicultural society and to introduce an increasing amount of legislation to forcibly integrate or even assimilate different cultures. The aim became thus to reduce conflict by reducing cultural divisions or cultural differences. This project challenges this notion and suggests that conflict does not result from differences in culture but from attitudes shaped by inequality in the socio-economic order. Both Islamic fundamentalists and western states continued to be preoccupied with ‘differences in culture’ and propose varying models of cultural assimilation as the way forward. By analyzing Islamic fundamentalism as a social movement this project proposes that constructing the conflict in terms of differences between cultures and enforcing cultural assimilation is both, unhelpful to a resolution and inaccurate. Focus should remain instead on how the social construction of the worldviews produced 2 cultures whose members express dissatisfaction about mutually shared societal problems but apply conflicting forms of political action. This project will argue that the criticisms of Islamic fundamentalists are shared by individuals within many different cultures and societies -Muslims and non - Muslims alike. Cultural differences need therefore to be separated from real sources of societal and political conflict. A solution needs to be focused on reducing socio-economic inequalities between cultural groups by increasing participation, understanding and tolerance and by taking problems such as discrimination, corruption, alienation, neocolonialism and exploitation serious. These societal problems are not unique to a single culture but overlap different cultures which renders a focus on differences in cultures useless. The role of culture needs to be understood and appreciated but instead of being viewed as a source of conflict, it needs to be viewed as a tool to tackle the real societal problems endemic to the many societies in which both ‘western’ culture and Islamic fundamentalism are imbedded. Contrary to Huntington this project views ‘the great divisions’ or sources of conflict among humankind not related to differences in culture but in differences in social and economic positions between and within most cultures.
Thank you all very much for responding and for your positive criticisms. Justoneofmillion You posted a lot of questions and I would like to answer them but out of your questions I think the following answer will maybe give you an Idea bout the way I think. I think that Science including sociology which I am studying is sometimes benificial to humans. However the application of science as we have come to know it in western societies has brought human kind to the brink of extinction. It has resulted in the exploitation and mass murder of millions of humans worldwide and continues to do so. I study the so called clash of civilizations for the following reason: The view that Islam and ‘western’ culture are at loggerheads has long been subject of controversy. Professor Bernard Lewis was the first one who used the term ‘clash of civilizations’ to describe the conflict between Christianity and Islam. In the book ‘Clash of Civilizations’, Samuel P. Huntington used the same term to argue that the primary axis of future conflicts would be along cultural and religious lines. In the 1993 Foreign Affairs article, Huntington writes:
It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural (Huntington, 1993).
This view influenced states who had previously endorsed policies in support of cultural plurality to review their commitment to a multicultural society and to introduce an increasing amount of legislation to forcibly integrate or even assimilate different cultures. The aim became thus to reduce conflict by reducing cultural divisions or cultural differences. This project challenges this notion and suggests that conflict does not result from differences in culture but from attitudes shaped by inequality in the socio-economic order. Both Islamic fundamentalists and western states continued to be preoccupied with ‘differences in culture’ and propose varying models of cultural assimilation as the way forward. By analyzing Islamic fundamentalism as a social movement this project proposes that constructing the conflict in terms of differences between cultures and enforcing cultural assimilation is both, unhelpful to a resolution and inaccurate. Focus should remain instead on how the social construction of the worldviews produced 2 cultures whose members express dissatisfaction about mutually shared societal problems but apply conflicting forms of political action. This project will argue that the criticisms of Islamic fundamentalists are shared by individuals within many different cultures and societies -Muslims and non - Muslims alike. Cultural differences need therefore to be separated from real sources of societal and political conflict. A solution needs to be focused on reducing socio-economic inequalities between cultural groups by increasing participation, understanding and tolerance and by taking problems such as discrimination, corruption, alienation, neocolonialism and exploitation serious. These societal problems are not unique to a single culture but overlap different cultures which renders a focus on differences in cultures useless. The role of culture needs to be understood and appreciated but instead of being viewed as a source of conflict, it needs to be viewed as a tool to tackle the real societal problems endemic to the many societies in which both ‘western’ culture and Islamic fundamentalism are imbedded. Contrary to Huntington this project views ‘the great divisions’ or sources of conflict among humankind not related to differences in culture but in differences in social and economic positions between and within most cultures.
justoneofmillion
Junior Member
hi dear friend i wish you the best with your project however i don`´t think there is any western country that has really adopted secularism ignoring any exlusivity for a certain religion! and the absense of ideology is also an ideologiy itself! on the other hand if one wants to understand the sources of conflict i think the least one can do is to try to understand for example concerning Islam what muslims and how muslims understand their religion not how others view it or what special terminologies they choose to give to certain social reforme movements for instance calling a muslim a "fundamentalist" is a western invention an a word game that is probably shared by those money thirsty corrupt intellectual bastards that some invented the name for as "moderate" muslims, which doesn`t even exist in the muslim perception of things because if we define the word fundamentalism from it`s primary meaning the belief in the Quran and sunna as the fundament of ones life behaviour social interaction and aspiration than my friend every muslim is a fundamentalist that is nonsens!the west is jailed in it`s own understanding and experience of religious life and institutions and tries innacuratly to use them when talking about islam!we see it for example in the use of words like holy war, clergy,fundamentalism turned to obscurantism, renaissance,reformation..etcthe problem is that this terminology is totaly incompatible with Islamwe have another experience with religion rationality and knowledge have always been in the spirit of islam itself from the beggining.for example in relation to science the prophet pbuh said"asking for knowledge is a must for every muslim" islam for example doesn`t recognise any hierarchical institution the holy Quran never uses words like "Holy war" the west is influenced by the bad experience it had with Christianity that seemed to be an obstacle for progress and science in general as it considered them as Blasphemic and a source of alienation from ones spirituality and dedication to god and to the church foremost$$$ an attitude that has developed into systems that deify the human being because from the moment that god was to be seen as a simple Human projection religion had to loose it`s credibility there was not limit anymore to consider the human being as the center fo creation this appeared in a political form with systems like Communism, socialism,capitalism,Nazism...etc with its prominent apostles and thinkers Darwin,Marx,voltaire, Freud,Kant,Nietzch,wittgenstein,Decartes....etc
An in a social form in consecquence through individualism , materialism , selfishness,idol film stars worshiping...etc
The so called illumination since then hasn`t been at all the realisation of rationality and social justice in the contrary it made possible things like two world wars
racial and ethnic cleansing slavery,(holocaust, archipel gulag)the invention of the nuclear bomb hiroshima,chernobyl..et colonisation the spreading of chemical and biological weapons ...etcAllhamdulillah islam never knew anything like that and muslims do not want that to ever happend and reject that sort of developement! and if the west really understands that it is in their interest that Islam remains healthy and strong because the west has certainly contributed to the recent insurgence and development of violence of muslims!no brainer
so muslims have no problem with modernity but they have to be picky technology only in relation with spirituality and moral values is the key of success that can regulate human behaviour through the sens of accountability towards god and responsibility towards their fellow
human beings that is the only way to achieve justice equality and mutual respect the only way to achieve a certain degree of dignity for the human existence by setting a balance between Human "rights" and "DUTIES(hope it is big enough)".this is what Islam proposes for the whole mankind and more and more people understand it and embrace it in proportion to the negative propaganda ! allhamdulillah !(women more than men!)it is stronger than ever and this is just the begginig and there is nothing to stop it as long as god keeps the world spinning and time will witness that soon.
[vg]-1261386381879128096[/vg]
best regards
Sindbad
An in a social form in consecquence through individualism , materialism , selfishness,idol film stars worshiping...etc
The so called illumination since then hasn`t been at all the realisation of rationality and social justice in the contrary it made possible things like two world wars
racial and ethnic cleansing slavery,(holocaust, archipel gulag)the invention of the nuclear bomb hiroshima,chernobyl..et colonisation the spreading of chemical and biological weapons ...etcAllhamdulillah islam never knew anything like that and muslims do not want that to ever happend and reject that sort of developement! and if the west really understands that it is in their interest that Islam remains healthy and strong because the west has certainly contributed to the recent insurgence and development of violence of muslims!no brainer
so muslims have no problem with modernity but they have to be picky technology only in relation with spirituality and moral values is the key of success that can regulate human behaviour through the sens of accountability towards god and responsibility towards their fellow
human beings that is the only way to achieve justice equality and mutual respect the only way to achieve a certain degree of dignity for the human existence by setting a balance between Human "rights" and "DUTIES(hope it is big enough)".this is what Islam proposes for the whole mankind and more and more people understand it and embrace it in proportion to the negative propaganda ! allhamdulillah !(women more than men!)it is stronger than ever and this is just the begginig and there is nothing to stop it as long as god keeps the world spinning and time will witness that soon.
[vg]-1261386381879128096[/vg]
best regards
Sindbad
Proud2BeHumble
Seek Truth, Be Happy
Survey
Science has been quite useful to humans. It has given believers new light, new sense of understanding their creator. The more we study the creation of God, more we are convinced of his existence. Day to day life has become more comfortable as well. However, as you have already said the misuse of the same science has brought humankind to the brink of extinction.
Thanks to God Muslims were not the inventors of atomic bomb, hydrogen bombs or other conventional arms etc. Thanks to God Muslims were not involved in 1st and 2nd world war. Thanks to God Muslims did not drop any atom bomb on any nation till date. Thanks to God they were saved from being called inventor of such evils.
I think Huntington theory can not be proved 100% wrong, but your point is also valid that conflict arises from attitudes shaped by inequality in the socio-economic order. Perhaps your point is more basic one – at root level.
I think you have to differentiate between the words fundamentalist and extremist.
In brief, five basic fundamentals of Islam are: Tawheed (Belief in one God), Prayers, Fasting, Charity and Hajj
So, if someone follows his religon's fundamentals whats wrong in it? As long as fundamentals are good, nothing is wrong!
In my opinion, first a problem appears at is socio-economic level but if dealt unjustly by ruling powers for a long period of time, it have tendency to transforms into religious/cultural issue.
The solution you are mentioning above must be adopted before a problem becomes a religious issue. But million dollar question is, who will tie the bell in the neck? Injustice or discrimination at micro level can not lead to something called clash of civilization (in a short period of time) until such terms are applied on mass level to a nation or society.
My humble suggestion is that you must also focus various flash points / flash issues on earth that may cause clash of civilizations to occur e.g. Iraq, Iran, Israel-Palestine, Korea, China, Kashmir (India-Pak) etc.
* List the flash point / issues on earth
* List cultural issues (e.g. nationalism etc)
* List social ineqality issues (discrimination, neo-colonialism)
* List the root cause of friction in each flash region (social inequality vs. culture). This is the proper way to challenge Huntington theory as you need to put cultural options in your survey also.
* Support your hypothesis with backup data (including the new questionnaire as stated above)
* Draw pie charts and see where your hypothesis stands
Also, I don’t agree with your present questionnaire because it doesn’t fit to your scope of survey. Moreover as someone said in above post that your answers have only two extremes, Let us discuss one example.
What do you think about the Taliban?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What if someone thinks that they were good people but made some mistakes? So any answers he or she chooses you get a wrong opinion. The same thing applies to all other questions.
Another point,
Suppose if you interview 1000 people, out of which 250 are Muslims, 500 Christians, 100 Hindus, and 150 Jews and ask the same question
What do you think about the Taliban?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
Suppose the answer is:
Muslims: 90%Pius Muslims / 10% Religious Fanatics
Christians: 10%Pius Muslims / 90% Religious Fanatics
Hindus: 5%Pius Muslims / 95% Religious Fanatics
Jews: 0%Pius Muslims / 100% Religious Fanatics
Your average research result will be:
Muslims: 26%Pius Muslims / 74%Religious Fanatics
My question: Is this a right approach for quality research work and what such questions have to do with social inequality (your project hypothesis)?
Science has been quite useful to humans. It has given believers new light, new sense of understanding their creator. The more we study the creation of God, more we are convinced of his existence. Day to day life has become more comfortable as well. However, as you have already said the misuse of the same science has brought humankind to the brink of extinction.
Thanks to God Muslims were not the inventors of atomic bomb, hydrogen bombs or other conventional arms etc. Thanks to God Muslims were not involved in 1st and 2nd world war. Thanks to God Muslims did not drop any atom bomb on any nation till date. Thanks to God they were saved from being called inventor of such evils.
I think Huntington may not be fully wrong in his assumption. Bush has claimed several times that he is receiving guidance from God (about the decisions he makes). So we can see how conflicts can also go along religious lines.
I think Huntington theory can not be proved 100% wrong, but your point is also valid that conflict arises from attitudes shaped by inequality in the socio-economic order. Perhaps your point is more basic one – at root level.
I think you have to differentiate between the words fundamentalist and extremist.
In brief, five basic fundamentals of Islam are: Tawheed (Belief in one God), Prayers, Fasting, Charity and Hajj
So, if someone follows his religon's fundamentals whats wrong in it? As long as fundamentals are good, nothing is wrong!
In my opinion, first a problem appears at is socio-economic level but if dealt unjustly by ruling powers for a long period of time, it have tendency to transforms into religious/cultural issue.
The solution you are mentioning above must be adopted before a problem becomes a religious issue. But million dollar question is, who will tie the bell in the neck? Injustice or discrimination at micro level can not lead to something called clash of civilization (in a short period of time) until such terms are applied on mass level to a nation or society.
My humble suggestion is that you must also focus various flash points / flash issues on earth that may cause clash of civilizations to occur e.g. Iraq, Iran, Israel-Palestine, Korea, China, Kashmir (India-Pak) etc.
* List the flash point / issues on earth
* List cultural issues (e.g. nationalism etc)
* List social ineqality issues (discrimination, neo-colonialism)
* List the root cause of friction in each flash region (social inequality vs. culture). This is the proper way to challenge Huntington theory as you need to put cultural options in your survey also.
* Support your hypothesis with backup data (including the new questionnaire as stated above)
* Draw pie charts and see where your hypothesis stands
Also, I don’t agree with your present questionnaire because it doesn’t fit to your scope of survey. Moreover as someone said in above post that your answers have only two extremes, Let us discuss one example.
What do you think about the Taliban?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
What if someone thinks that they were good people but made some mistakes? So any answers he or she chooses you get a wrong opinion. The same thing applies to all other questions.
Another point,
Suppose if you interview 1000 people, out of which 250 are Muslims, 500 Christians, 100 Hindus, and 150 Jews and ask the same question
What do you think about the Taliban?
Pius Muslims / Religious Fanatics
Suppose the answer is:
Muslims: 90%Pius Muslims / 10% Religious Fanatics
Christians: 10%Pius Muslims / 90% Religious Fanatics
Hindus: 5%Pius Muslims / 95% Religious Fanatics
Jews: 0%Pius Muslims / 100% Religious Fanatics
Your average research result will be:
Muslims: 26%Pius Muslims / 74%Religious Fanatics
My question: Is this a right approach for quality research work and what such questions have to do with social inequality (your project hypothesis)?
Thanks for the beautiful speach about the purpose of life Will check the websites. My 2 sons are Muslim and I will send the link to their mother. She will appreciate it too. I am really trying to write this piece and support it with the views of Muslims in particular That's why most of my interview have been with Muslims. There by I have gained the friendship and the help from many Muslims that I had never met before. That is also why I have posted my questions on different Islamic websites. It is based on the theory of the Islamic scolar Bassam Tibi about the (divine) order or 'Nizam'. I do also not agree with the term Muslim Fundamentalist but it is the widest known name for the movement I described. I will make notice of your (and many others) view about the term. Thank you.
My lit review is available on the following link.
http://www.intinnsound.net/Essays/Research Project - Text.doc
I have done my best to make a balanced argument against the notion of a 'Clash of Civlizations' and welcome all criticizm.
Thanks again
My lit review is available on the following link.
http://www.intinnsound.net/Essays/Research Project - Text.doc
I have done my best to make a balanced argument against the notion of a 'Clash of Civlizations' and welcome all criticizm.
Thanks again
justoneofmillion
Junior Member
hi rastiny you are most welcome we hope to hear from you soon but please forget people like Bassam Tibi in germany and Mohammed Arkoun in FRance they try to promote more of a euroislam with a lot of euro and less islam unnfortunatly try with muhammad asad , murad wilfried hofmann, tarik ramadan,.fathi ossman..etc may Allah guide you and guide us inschalla be safe
best regards
Sindbad
best regards
Sindbad
:salam2:
^^^u sure ure not shiekh khalid yasin in disguise???!!! ^^^
i dont think ive learned tht much in 10 minutes in all my years of secular education...geez!
thnx!
wasalam
^^^u sure ure not shiekh khalid yasin in disguise???!!! ^^^
i dont think ive learned tht much in 10 minutes in all my years of secular education...geez!
thnx!
wasalam
justoneofmillion
Junior Member
assalami aleikum dear sister, iused to be a musician dancer singer an entertainer a real passionate inschallah i like people like deedat(rahimahullah) khalid yassin zakir naik and others may Allah swt grant them success and i wanna concentrate my hole passion now inschallah to learn more about islam it is my life now when am done with school inschallah wish to be like them one day spread the message travel the world man that is so fascinating we need more like them!yallah
wassalam
Sindbad
wassalam
Sindbad
I give Thanks for the interest you have shown in my work
The variable ‘differences in culture’ shows a relationship to ‘conflict’ (Research question 1). A period characterised by the introduction of policies to reduce ‘differences in cultures’ (by integration/assimilation) in the Netherlands has coincided with a reversal of a downwards trend and shows an increase of racist and extremist violence. This may support Simmels proposition that heterogeneous groups turn outwards and promote more inter-group contact. However, this relationship depends heavily on other variables.
The perception of ones ability to influence social and economic positions also showed a strong relationship.
Evidence to support it:
How do differences in culture affect social conflict between groups?
The recent attempts to reduce the differences between immigrants and Dutch natives through measures of involuntary integration have produced the following results:
Results: Efforts by Dutch minister Verdonk to forcibly reduce differences in culture have failed to achieve less conflict. Contrarily, a 2006 report from ‘Monitor Racisme & Extremisme’ shows that a period of decreasing numbers of reported instances of racist and extremist violence (2000 – 406 cases to 2003 – 260 cases) has reversed to shows in 2006 an increase to 296 cases. The period characterised by increased racist and extremist violence 2003 – 2006 coincides with the period Verdonk was appointed Minister for Integration and Immigration (05/2003 – 02/2007). This and the attitudes from the interviewees might support the notion that the measures have actually increased conflicting behaviour. (van Donselaar, 2006).
I understand your concern. However the questionaire does not measure the quantity of an opnion but the qualities of an attitude. In this case I try to find out if the experience of discrimination among different cultures leads to the same reactions. eg attitude towards the government, attitude towards those who oppose the government systems violently, or those who devote their selfs to a non secular order. I looked at certain policies such as the sanctions on Iraq and their effects on attitudes towards the UN, The USA, and the coalition of the willing. I looked at gender and the way policies to achieve gender equality in areb countries have influced male attitude and it's influnce on attitudes towards resistence groups. I might have use a bit of a different perspective but I support many of your vieuwpoints. I have to disagree with Huttingon for the following reson I quote:
the refusal to explain societal or political problems like colonialism and exploitation in a secular way does not justify their practice. The critique directed at colonialism is also not exclusive to Islamic fundamentalism or even religion. The way a coherent critique of society is constructed can be different between religions, cultural and political movements in both religious and secular societies. But using the way this critique is constructed (in one culture) to devaluate the validity of the critique itself is misleading. Some have argued that such an attitude caused policies such as the ‘war on terror’ to become a ‘carte blanche’ for the oppression of opposition members by authoritarian regimes. Regimes that were coming under pressure from democracy groups and Islamic fundamentalist political opposition, have used the ‘Terrorist’ and ‘Religious Fanatic’ tag on opposition groups, often in a manner that made the populace despise the regime and the ‘west’, for what they feel is removing their control over their own destiny. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamist)
To avoid this misuse of ‘differences in culture’ by those who want to maintain the status quo it might be important to highlight that all the above mentioned examples of action from Islamic fundamentalists are aimed at resisting or calling for change in the existing socio-economic relations. The interview with the British Jihadists showed how participation in Jihad empowered them against alienation and disenchantment but more important, to come to the aid of fellow Muslims who were perceived to experience occupation (e.g. from Israel) and genocide (e.g. from the Serbs). They clearly criticize the social relationships characterized by individualism and apathy exhibited by some members of their society and they propagate a more collectivist approach. A micro sociological approach, focusing on the intricate network of personal relations reveals that the attraction to Islam fundamentalism might also be due to the moral superiority that the acquisition of specialist knowledge and personal sacrifice confers. Daniel Benjamin suggested that the pursuit of the ‘Divine order’ such as in Salafism confers a sense of moral superiority (Benjamin, 2005). Salafi knowledge and dedication can be viewed in a Bourdieu-ian sense as a form of ‘religious specialism’ therefore not only as an acquisition but a disposition. This theory aids to the understanding of the Salafists need to distance themselves from a community in which individualism and apathy had come to dictate social behavior. Finally an analysis of the teachings of the founding intellectuals of the Salafi School shows a critique; primarily directed at unequal power relations within and between states who were subject to colonialism. Neither these challenges nor their means of expression are unique to Islamic culture but have been central to many social movements in western and non western societies. Contemporary Islamic fundamentalism can therefore more accurately be identified as a social movement of which participants individually or collectively challenge and redefine a wide range of socio-economic relations.
......
One can conclude that the change from the caliphate system to the secular state system did not go hand in hand with a secularization of the wider Arab population and led Arab governments or the ‘secular order’ into a serious crisis of legitimacy. But the failure of Islamic fundamentalist to express their dissatisfaction with the social order in secular ways does not justify the negation of the reasons for dissatisfaction. The results from the research done in the context of this project support the conclusion that reasons for socio-economic inequality and conflict are exacerbated by:
1. The devastating effects of ill conceived, ill executed and exploitative interventions from secular institutions like European (neo) colonial states, the UN and the US led Coalition concerning:
• The establishment and support of a secular Westphalian state system of ‘Democratic’ governments accommodating the economic exploitation and repression of the regions populations, without regard to the levels of popular resistance against this system and these governments.
• The deadly effects of sanctions on Iraq by the UN.
• The deadly and destructive effects of invasion of ‘Democratic’ Arab nations by coalition-, Zionist- and fellow Arab forces.
• The erosion of trust in the integrity of the international legal order by democratic governments regarding the invasion of Iraq.
2. The crisis of legitimacy of ‘Democratic’ Arab governments resulting from their failures to:
• Uphold human rights by allowing freedom of opinion, popular expression and an independent judiciary.
• Curb corruption and inequality
• Uphold territorial integrity by protecting their populations from invasion (from western states but also fellow Arab states and Israel)
3. The failure of Islamic fundamentalists to eradicate discrimination of non-Muslims (‘kufr’) and women, condoning their exploitation, oppression and murder.
4. The failure of Democratic governments internationally but particularly in the ‘West’ to eradicate discrimination especially in the fields of employment, housing and education while (in the case of the US and The Netherlands) even proposing and secretly applying measures that are deemed violating human rights enshrined in the European and UN Constitution.
‘Western’ and Islamic fundamentalist organizations who refuse to acknowledge their role in maintaining socio-economic inequality and exclusion, often blame ‘fanaticism’ or ‘differences in culture’ for the eruption of violence. So called ‘terrorists’ or ‘crusaders’ are accused of aiming to destroy either ‘western’ or Islamic culture while both parties fail to recognize that an increase of violent conflict is never the result of ‘differences in cultures’ but always the result of politics in support of social and economic inequality and injustice. Simmel predicted that fostering equality and socio-economic participation (social parity) will promote interpersonal contact and the more heterogeneous a group becomes the more likely the members will interact with other groups. Harmony among people from different cultures will therefore only be achieved when socio-economic equality and justice is achieved internationally and may lead to a society that celebrates differences in culture.
One perfect love
I was not able to focus on all the flash points but I did dealth extensively with a few such as the palestinian conflict. I also lookd at instances of religious and extremist violence and how they related to a certain policy inspired by Huttingtons thesis. My conclusions is thus:
The variable ‘differences in culture’ shows a relationship to ‘conflict’ (Research question 1). A period characterised by the introduction of policies to reduce ‘differences in cultures’ (by integration/assimilation) in the Netherlands has coincided with a reversal of a downwards trend and shows an increase of racist and extremist violence. This may support Simmels proposition that heterogeneous groups turn outwards and promote more inter-group contact. However, this relationship depends heavily on other variables.
The perception of ones ability to influence social and economic positions also showed a strong relationship.
Evidence to support it:
How do differences in culture affect social conflict between groups?
The recent attempts to reduce the differences between immigrants and Dutch natives through measures of involuntary integration have produced the following results:
Results: Efforts by Dutch minister Verdonk to forcibly reduce differences in culture have failed to achieve less conflict. Contrarily, a 2006 report from ‘Monitor Racisme & Extremisme’ shows that a period of decreasing numbers of reported instances of racist and extremist violence (2000 – 406 cases to 2003 – 260 cases) has reversed to shows in 2006 an increase to 296 cases. The period characterised by increased racist and extremist violence 2003 – 2006 coincides with the period Verdonk was appointed Minister for Integration and Immigration (05/2003 – 02/2007). This and the attitudes from the interviewees might support the notion that the measures have actually increased conflicting behaviour. (van Donselaar, 2006).
I understand your concern. However the questionaire does not measure the quantity of an opnion but the qualities of an attitude. In this case I try to find out if the experience of discrimination among different cultures leads to the same reactions. eg attitude towards the government, attitude towards those who oppose the government systems violently, or those who devote their selfs to a non secular order. I looked at certain policies such as the sanctions on Iraq and their effects on attitudes towards the UN, The USA, and the coalition of the willing. I looked at gender and the way policies to achieve gender equality in areb countries have influced male attitude and it's influnce on attitudes towards resistence groups. I might have use a bit of a different perspective but I support many of your vieuwpoints. I have to disagree with Huttingon for the following reson I quote:
the refusal to explain societal or political problems like colonialism and exploitation in a secular way does not justify their practice. The critique directed at colonialism is also not exclusive to Islamic fundamentalism or even religion. The way a coherent critique of society is constructed can be different between religions, cultural and political movements in both religious and secular societies. But using the way this critique is constructed (in one culture) to devaluate the validity of the critique itself is misleading. Some have argued that such an attitude caused policies such as the ‘war on terror’ to become a ‘carte blanche’ for the oppression of opposition members by authoritarian regimes. Regimes that were coming under pressure from democracy groups and Islamic fundamentalist political opposition, have used the ‘Terrorist’ and ‘Religious Fanatic’ tag on opposition groups, often in a manner that made the populace despise the regime and the ‘west’, for what they feel is removing their control over their own destiny. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamist)
To avoid this misuse of ‘differences in culture’ by those who want to maintain the status quo it might be important to highlight that all the above mentioned examples of action from Islamic fundamentalists are aimed at resisting or calling for change in the existing socio-economic relations. The interview with the British Jihadists showed how participation in Jihad empowered them against alienation and disenchantment but more important, to come to the aid of fellow Muslims who were perceived to experience occupation (e.g. from Israel) and genocide (e.g. from the Serbs). They clearly criticize the social relationships characterized by individualism and apathy exhibited by some members of their society and they propagate a more collectivist approach. A micro sociological approach, focusing on the intricate network of personal relations reveals that the attraction to Islam fundamentalism might also be due to the moral superiority that the acquisition of specialist knowledge and personal sacrifice confers. Daniel Benjamin suggested that the pursuit of the ‘Divine order’ such as in Salafism confers a sense of moral superiority (Benjamin, 2005). Salafi knowledge and dedication can be viewed in a Bourdieu-ian sense as a form of ‘religious specialism’ therefore not only as an acquisition but a disposition. This theory aids to the understanding of the Salafists need to distance themselves from a community in which individualism and apathy had come to dictate social behavior. Finally an analysis of the teachings of the founding intellectuals of the Salafi School shows a critique; primarily directed at unequal power relations within and between states who were subject to colonialism. Neither these challenges nor their means of expression are unique to Islamic culture but have been central to many social movements in western and non western societies. Contemporary Islamic fundamentalism can therefore more accurately be identified as a social movement of which participants individually or collectively challenge and redefine a wide range of socio-economic relations.
......
One can conclude that the change from the caliphate system to the secular state system did not go hand in hand with a secularization of the wider Arab population and led Arab governments or the ‘secular order’ into a serious crisis of legitimacy. But the failure of Islamic fundamentalist to express their dissatisfaction with the social order in secular ways does not justify the negation of the reasons for dissatisfaction. The results from the research done in the context of this project support the conclusion that reasons for socio-economic inequality and conflict are exacerbated by:
1. The devastating effects of ill conceived, ill executed and exploitative interventions from secular institutions like European (neo) colonial states, the UN and the US led Coalition concerning:
• The establishment and support of a secular Westphalian state system of ‘Democratic’ governments accommodating the economic exploitation and repression of the regions populations, without regard to the levels of popular resistance against this system and these governments.
• The deadly effects of sanctions on Iraq by the UN.
• The deadly and destructive effects of invasion of ‘Democratic’ Arab nations by coalition-, Zionist- and fellow Arab forces.
• The erosion of trust in the integrity of the international legal order by democratic governments regarding the invasion of Iraq.
2. The crisis of legitimacy of ‘Democratic’ Arab governments resulting from their failures to:
• Uphold human rights by allowing freedom of opinion, popular expression and an independent judiciary.
• Curb corruption and inequality
• Uphold territorial integrity by protecting their populations from invasion (from western states but also fellow Arab states and Israel)
3. The failure of Islamic fundamentalists to eradicate discrimination of non-Muslims (‘kufr’) and women, condoning their exploitation, oppression and murder.
4. The failure of Democratic governments internationally but particularly in the ‘West’ to eradicate discrimination especially in the fields of employment, housing and education while (in the case of the US and The Netherlands) even proposing and secretly applying measures that are deemed violating human rights enshrined in the European and UN Constitution.
‘Western’ and Islamic fundamentalist organizations who refuse to acknowledge their role in maintaining socio-economic inequality and exclusion, often blame ‘fanaticism’ or ‘differences in culture’ for the eruption of violence. So called ‘terrorists’ or ‘crusaders’ are accused of aiming to destroy either ‘western’ or Islamic culture while both parties fail to recognize that an increase of violent conflict is never the result of ‘differences in cultures’ but always the result of politics in support of social and economic inequality and injustice. Simmel predicted that fostering equality and socio-economic participation (social parity) will promote interpersonal contact and the more heterogeneous a group becomes the more likely the members will interact with other groups. Harmony among people from different cultures will therefore only be achieved when socio-economic equality and justice is achieved internationally and may lead to a society that celebrates differences in culture.
One perfect love
I give Thanks for the interest you have shown in my work
The variable ‘differences in culture’ shows a relationship to ‘conflict’ (Research question 1). A period characterised by the introduction of policies to reduce ‘differences in cultures’ (by integration/assimilation) in the Netherlands has coincided with a reversal of a downwards trend and shows an increase of racist and extremist violence. This may support Simmels proposition that heterogeneous groups turn outwards and promote more inter-group contact. However, this relationship depends heavily on other variables.
The perception of ones ability to influence social and economic positions also showed a strong relationship.
Evidence to support it:
How do differences in culture affect social conflict between groups?
The recent attempts to reduce the differences between immigrants and Dutch natives through measures of involuntary integration have produced the following results:
Results: Efforts by Dutch minister Verdonk to forcibly reduce differences in culture have failed to achieve less conflict. Contrarily, a 2006 report from ‘Monitor Racisme & Extremisme’ shows that a period of decreasing numbers of reported instances of racist and extremist violence (2000 – 406 cases to 2003 – 260 cases) has reversed to shows in 2006 an increase to 296 cases. The period characterised by increased racist and extremist violence 2003 – 2006 coincides with the period Verdonk was appointed Minister for Integration and Immigration (05/2003 – 02/2007). This and the attitudes from the interviewees might support the notion that the measures have actually increased conflicting behaviour. (van Donselaar, 2006).
I understand your concern. However the questionaire does not measure the quantity of an opnion but the qualities of an attitude. In this case I try to find out if the experience of discrimination among different cultures leads to the same reactions. eg attitude towards the government, attitude towards those who oppose the government systems violently, or those who devote their selfs to a non secular order. I looked at certain policies such as the sanctions on Iraq and their effects on attitudes towards the UN, The USA, and the coalition of the willing. I looked at gender and the way policies to achieve gender equality in areb countries have influced male attitude and it's influnce on attitudes towards resistence groups. I might have use a bit of a different perspective but I support many of your vieuwpoints. I have to disagree with Huttingon for the following reson I quote:
the refusal to explain societal or political problems like colonialism and exploitation in a secular way does not justify their practice. The critique directed at colonialism is also not exclusive to Islamic fundamentalism or even religion. The way a coherent critique of society is constructed can be different between religions, cultural and political movements in both religious and secular societies. But using the way this critique is constructed (in one culture) to devaluate the validity of the critique itself is misleading. Some have argued that such an attitude caused policies such as the ‘war on terror’ to become a ‘carte blanche’ for the oppression of opposition members by authoritarian regimes. Regimes that were coming under pressure from democracy groups and Islamic fundamentalist political opposition, have used the ‘Terrorist’ and ‘Religious Fanatic’ tag on opposition groups, often in a manner that made the populace despise the regime and the ‘west’, for what they feel is removing their control over their own destiny. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamist)
To avoid this misuse of ‘differences in culture’ by those who want to maintain the status quo it might be important to highlight that all the above mentioned examples of action from Islamic fundamentalists are aimed at resisting or calling for change in the existing socio-economic relations. The interview with the British Jihadists showed how participation in Jihad empowered them against alienation and disenchantment but more important, to come to the aid of fellow Muslims who were perceived to experience occupation (e.g. from Israel) and genocide (e.g. from the Serbs). They clearly criticize the social relationships characterized by individualism and apathy exhibited by some members of their society and they propagate a more collectivist approach. A micro sociological approach, focusing on the intricate network of personal relations reveals that the attraction to Islam fundamentalism might also be due to the moral superiority that the acquisition of specialist knowledge and personal sacrifice confers. Daniel Benjamin suggested that the pursuit of the ‘Divine order’ such as in Salafism confers a sense of moral superiority (Benjamin, 2005). Salafi knowledge and dedication can be viewed in a Bourdieu-ian sense as a form of ‘religious specialism’ therefore not only as an acquisition but a disposition. This theory aids to the understanding of the Salafists need to distance themselves from a community in which individualism and apathy had come to dictate social behavior. Finally an analysis of the teachings of the founding intellectuals of the Salafi School shows a critique; primarily directed at unequal power relations within and between states who were subject to colonialism. Neither these challenges nor their means of expression are unique to Islamic culture but have been central to many social movements in western and non western societies. Contemporary Islamic fundamentalism can therefore more accurately be identified as a social movement of which participants individually or collectively challenge and redefine a wide range of socio-economic relations.
......
One can conclude that the change from the caliphate system to the secular state system did not go hand in hand with a secularization of the wider Arab population and led Arab governments or the ‘secular order’ into a serious crisis of legitimacy. But the failure of Islamic fundamentalist to express their dissatisfaction with the social order in secular ways does not justify the negation of the reasons for dissatisfaction. The results from the research done in the context of this project support the conclusion that reasons for socio-economic inequality and conflict are exacerbated by:
1. The devastating effects of ill conceived, ill executed and exploitative interventions from secular institutions like European (neo) colonial states, the UN and the US led Coalition concerning:
• The establishment and support of a secular Westphalian state system of ‘Democratic’ governments accommodating the economic exploitation and repression of the regions populations, without regard to the levels of popular resistance against this system and these governments.
• The deadly effects of sanctions on Iraq by the UN.
• The deadly and destructive effects of invasion of ‘Democratic’ Arab nations by coalition-, Zionist- and fellow Arab forces.
• The erosion of trust in the integrity of the international legal order by democratic governments regarding the invasion of Iraq.
2. The crisis of legitimacy of ‘Democratic’ Arab governments resulting from their failures to:
• Uphold human rights by allowing freedom of opinion, popular expression and an independent judiciary.
• Curb corruption and inequality
• Uphold territorial integrity by protecting their populations from invasion (from western states but also fellow Arab states and Israel)
3. The failure of Islamic fundamentalists to eradicate discrimination of non-Muslims (‘kufr’) and women, condoning their exploitation, oppression and murder.
4. The failure of Democratic governments internationally but particularly in the ‘West’ to eradicate discrimination especially in the fields of employment, housing and education while (in the case of the US and The Netherlands) even proposing and secretly applying measures that are deemed violating human rights enshrined in the European and UN Constitution.
‘Western’ and Islamic fundamentalist organizations who refuse to acknowledge their role in maintaining socio-economic inequality and exclusion, often blame ‘fanaticism’ or ‘differences in culture’ for the eruption of violence. So called ‘terrorists’ or ‘crusaders’ are accused of aiming to destroy either ‘western’ or Islamic culture while both parties fail to recognize that an increase of violent conflict is never the result of ‘differences in cultures’ but always the result of politics in support of social and economic inequality and injustice. Simmel predicted that fostering equality and socio-economic participation (social parity) will promote interpersonal contact and the more heterogeneous a group becomes the more likely the members will interact with other groups. Harmony among people from different cultures will therefore only be achieved when socio-economic equality and justice is achieved internationally and may lead to a society that celebrates differences in culture.
One perfect love
I was not able to focus on all the flash points but I did dealth extensively with a few such as the palestinian conflict. I also lookd at instances of religious and extremist violence and how they related to a certain policy inspired by Huttingtons thesis. My conclusions is thus:
The variable ‘differences in culture’ shows a relationship to ‘conflict’ (Research question 1). A period characterised by the introduction of policies to reduce ‘differences in cultures’ (by integration/assimilation) in the Netherlands has coincided with a reversal of a downwards trend and shows an increase of racist and extremist violence. This may support Simmels proposition that heterogeneous groups turn outwards and promote more inter-group contact. However, this relationship depends heavily on other variables.
The perception of ones ability to influence social and economic positions also showed a strong relationship.
Evidence to support it:
How do differences in culture affect social conflict between groups?
The recent attempts to reduce the differences between immigrants and Dutch natives through measures of involuntary integration have produced the following results:
Results: Efforts by Dutch minister Verdonk to forcibly reduce differences in culture have failed to achieve less conflict. Contrarily, a 2006 report from ‘Monitor Racisme & Extremisme’ shows that a period of decreasing numbers of reported instances of racist and extremist violence (2000 – 406 cases to 2003 – 260 cases) has reversed to shows in 2006 an increase to 296 cases. The period characterised by increased racist and extremist violence 2003 – 2006 coincides with the period Verdonk was appointed Minister for Integration and Immigration (05/2003 – 02/2007). This and the attitudes from the interviewees might support the notion that the measures have actually increased conflicting behaviour. (van Donselaar, 2006).
I understand your concern. However the questionaire does not measure the quantity of an opnion but the qualities of an attitude. In this case I try to find out if the experience of discrimination among different cultures leads to the same reactions. eg attitude towards the government, attitude towards those who oppose the government systems violently, or those who devote their selfs to a non secular order. I looked at certain policies such as the sanctions on Iraq and their effects on attitudes towards the UN, The USA, and the coalition of the willing. I looked at gender and the way policies to achieve gender equality in areb countries have influced male attitude and it's influnce on attitudes towards resistence groups. I might have use a bit of a different perspective but I support many of your vieuwpoints. I have to disagree with Huttingon for the following reson I quote:
the refusal to explain societal or political problems like colonialism and exploitation in a secular way does not justify their practice. The critique directed at colonialism is also not exclusive to Islamic fundamentalism or even religion. The way a coherent critique of society is constructed can be different between religions, cultural and political movements in both religious and secular societies. But using the way this critique is constructed (in one culture) to devaluate the validity of the critique itself is misleading. Some have argued that such an attitude caused policies such as the ‘war on terror’ to become a ‘carte blanche’ for the oppression of opposition members by authoritarian regimes. Regimes that were coming under pressure from democracy groups and Islamic fundamentalist political opposition, have used the ‘Terrorist’ and ‘Religious Fanatic’ tag on opposition groups, often in a manner that made the populace despise the regime and the ‘west’, for what they feel is removing their control over their own destiny. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamist)
To avoid this misuse of ‘differences in culture’ by those who want to maintain the status quo it might be important to highlight that all the above mentioned examples of action from Islamic fundamentalists are aimed at resisting or calling for change in the existing socio-economic relations. The interview with the British Jihadists showed how participation in Jihad empowered them against alienation and disenchantment but more important, to come to the aid of fellow Muslims who were perceived to experience occupation (e.g. from Israel) and genocide (e.g. from the Serbs). They clearly criticize the social relationships characterized by individualism and apathy exhibited by some members of their society and they propagate a more collectivist approach. A micro sociological approach, focusing on the intricate network of personal relations reveals that the attraction to Islam fundamentalism might also be due to the moral superiority that the acquisition of specialist knowledge and personal sacrifice confers. Daniel Benjamin suggested that the pursuit of the ‘Divine order’ such as in Salafism confers a sense of moral superiority (Benjamin, 2005). Salafi knowledge and dedication can be viewed in a Bourdieu-ian sense as a form of ‘religious specialism’ therefore not only as an acquisition but a disposition. This theory aids to the understanding of the Salafists need to distance themselves from a community in which individualism and apathy had come to dictate social behavior. Finally an analysis of the teachings of the founding intellectuals of the Salafi School shows a critique; primarily directed at unequal power relations within and between states who were subject to colonialism. Neither these challenges nor their means of expression are unique to Islamic culture but have been central to many social movements in western and non western societies. Contemporary Islamic fundamentalism can therefore more accurately be identified as a social movement of which participants individually or collectively challenge and redefine a wide range of socio-economic relations.
......
One can conclude that the change from the caliphate system to the secular state system did not go hand in hand with a secularization of the wider Arab population and led Arab governments or the ‘secular order’ into a serious crisis of legitimacy. But the failure of Islamic fundamentalist to express their dissatisfaction with the social order in secular ways does not justify the negation of the reasons for dissatisfaction. The results from the research done in the context of this project support the conclusion that reasons for socio-economic inequality and conflict are exacerbated by:
1. The devastating effects of ill conceived, ill executed and exploitative interventions from secular institutions like European (neo) colonial states, the UN and the US led Coalition concerning:
• The establishment and support of a secular Westphalian state system of ‘Democratic’ governments accommodating the economic exploitation and repression of the regions populations, without regard to the levels of popular resistance against this system and these governments.
• The deadly effects of sanctions on Iraq by the UN.
• The deadly and destructive effects of invasion of ‘Democratic’ Arab nations by coalition-, Zionist- and fellow Arab forces.
• The erosion of trust in the integrity of the international legal order by democratic governments regarding the invasion of Iraq.
2. The crisis of legitimacy of ‘Democratic’ Arab governments resulting from their failures to:
• Uphold human rights by allowing freedom of opinion, popular expression and an independent judiciary.
• Curb corruption and inequality
• Uphold territorial integrity by protecting their populations from invasion (from western states but also fellow Arab states and Israel)
3. The failure of Islamic fundamentalists to eradicate discrimination of non-Muslims (‘kufr’) and women, condoning their exploitation, oppression and murder.
4. The failure of Democratic governments internationally but particularly in the ‘West’ to eradicate discrimination especially in the fields of employment, housing and education while (in the case of the US and The Netherlands) even proposing and secretly applying measures that are deemed violating human rights enshrined in the European and UN Constitution.
‘Western’ and Islamic fundamentalist organizations who refuse to acknowledge their role in maintaining socio-economic inequality and exclusion, often blame ‘fanaticism’ or ‘differences in culture’ for the eruption of violence. So called ‘terrorists’ or ‘crusaders’ are accused of aiming to destroy either ‘western’ or Islamic culture while both parties fail to recognize that an increase of violent conflict is never the result of ‘differences in cultures’ but always the result of politics in support of social and economic inequality and injustice. Simmel predicted that fostering equality and socio-economic participation (social parity) will promote interpersonal contact and the more heterogeneous a group becomes the more likely the members will interact with other groups. Harmony among people from different cultures will therefore only be achieved when socio-economic equality and justice is achieved internationally and may lead to a society that celebrates differences in culture.
One perfect love
justoneofmillion
Junior Member
hi have you tried at all to focus on the points i made one the first post i think it would be very helpful for your project to realise also that the western system has failed to fulfill the needs of the human being forget about the international perspective just remember Katherina for example!what a shame the country that wants it`s model to be followed by the whole world and is so generous to feel concerned for other populations! is not even able to take care of it`s own people i think the real issue is this the western civilisation has arrived to it`s summit and is on it`s way down right at this moment! the first generation that used to work hard for success at the beginning of industrialisation and the spirit it was driven by doesn`t exist in the youth today anymore it is not their fault they have been raised up like this as simple as that!today all the youth in the west is motivated by is to become quickly rich no mather what it costs psychologists are getting richer and richer mothers and fathers do not even know how to behave with their children,the family structure has been banalised and marginalised the social interaction of the individual in the family and in relation to the society in general has been seriously damaged, , criminality,drug and alcohol consume with all it`s tragic consequences is increasing, analphebetism among youth is getting more and more alarming, they would rather become rockstars footballstars or spend their time watching music shows playstation instead of doctors and spending time reading books, watching documentaries..etcthis is worse than WMD`s the perception of success is being changed if people used to look at doctors engineers architects as role models they see now that these people have to immigrate from the western countries to find work in DUbai,india, singapore, as a result of unemployment or low payment i mean what is the west doing to it`s own youth have these individuals become so selfish and greedy to the cost of their own children? and what futur is to be expected?the prisons are full the psychiatric hospitals also the XXl generation is dying young from heart disease from them missing of having proper meals at home together with their famillies instead of eating junk food because mummy and daddy don`t have time too busy with thier carriers! little girls are dying from anorexia by watching the catwalks in paris , milan, Newyork it has become literally a sickness
how many people are throwing themselves from Las vegas hotels after loosing all their possessions in gambling how much do you and i have to pay for the maintenance of murders for a life time in prison how is it that nobody gives a damn about that how can parents have come to the point where they put their lives in prerogative to their children's,? state man their interest before the well being if their populations,what about global warming what system of life is more likely to reduce all of this Islam or capitalism? these are the questions that need to be askedthe western system is certainly not going to be the one to be successful in leading humanity throughout this century it can`t !
the western individual has all the human rights wealth social security life security ever imagined from the baby bed to the grave yet he feels a certain emptiness he is in search of warmth and belonging the statistics can not lie the real mystery behind that is "the purpose"why is the western individual so stubborn to finally realise that he is not just a materialistic oriented being he is in need of spirituality to bring order in his life what is he waiting for to get in the streets and manifest his desenchantement to the system together with the african, the indian, the arab,the chinese to garantee the future of his own children a future of hope of peace, tranquility of mind and souls,of love of
universal community feeling under the will of Allah swt because he is the only one who can unite us i under his law in this life as in the day of judgement there is enough for everybody enough resources but it is the distribution that is unequal why? because human beings sometimes can behave worse than animals!and are obsessed with self destruction and perversely controlled by their greed and vanity instead of elevation so what is civilisation anyways! a term pronounced in clear consciousness or just another marketing gag? go to a capitalist web site to enlarge your perspective and ask them how they are gonna solve all of this with human laws only they have failed!
regards
Sindbad
how many people are throwing themselves from Las vegas hotels after loosing all their possessions in gambling how much do you and i have to pay for the maintenance of murders for a life time in prison how is it that nobody gives a damn about that how can parents have come to the point where they put their lives in prerogative to their children's,? state man their interest before the well being if their populations,what about global warming what system of life is more likely to reduce all of this Islam or capitalism? these are the questions that need to be askedthe western system is certainly not going to be the one to be successful in leading humanity throughout this century it can`t !
the western individual has all the human rights wealth social security life security ever imagined from the baby bed to the grave yet he feels a certain emptiness he is in search of warmth and belonging the statistics can not lie the real mystery behind that is "the purpose"why is the western individual so stubborn to finally realise that he is not just a materialistic oriented being he is in need of spirituality to bring order in his life what is he waiting for to get in the streets and manifest his desenchantement to the system together with the african, the indian, the arab,the chinese to garantee the future of his own children a future of hope of peace, tranquility of mind and souls,of love of
universal community feeling under the will of Allah swt because he is the only one who can unite us i under his law in this life as in the day of judgement there is enough for everybody enough resources but it is the distribution that is unequal why? because human beings sometimes can behave worse than animals!and are obsessed with self destruction and perversely controlled by their greed and vanity instead of elevation so what is civilisation anyways! a term pronounced in clear consciousness or just another marketing gag? go to a capitalist web site to enlarge your perspective and ask them how they are gonna solve all of this with human laws only they have failed!
regards
Sindbad
MOSABJA
Junior Member
CLASH OF CIVILIZATION
AS MUSLIMS WE SHOULD BELIEVE IN HADITH AND several HADITH TALK ABOUT CLASH OF CIVILIZATION.Clash is bound to happen.
But it is not because of MUSLIMS .CLASH is enforced upon us.
THEY DID 911 themselves and put the blame on Muslims .And then BUSH declared CRUSADE against Islam and said his MESSIAH will come after war.NOW WHO IS FANATIC .
WHO STARTED THE CLASH .
I am a Muslim living in Pakistan.
ALQAEDA
Its just a fiction no Bin Ladin did 911 He said after 911 in an interview to UMMAH magazine"The thing they accuse me of doing I can never think about that.Islam does not allow killing of innocent people."
and then A VIDEO TAPE appears in which he confesses .The video tape is itself PHONY .BIN LADIN WEARING A GOLD RING(prohibited) WRITING WITH RIGHT HAND(left hander) and He does not look like bin ladin
www.whatreallyhappened.com
TALIBAN
They are pious Muslims .Some people accuse them of being against development which is wrong. THEY signed agreement with UTN(an organization formed by two Pakistan nuclear scientist few army officers industrialist and a religious scholar DR ISRAR AHMED) to build ROADS,INDUSTRIES,COLLEGES IN AFGHANISTAN
More over YVONNE RIDLEY reverted to Islam because SHE WAS TREATED SO WELL BY TALIBAN IN CAPTIVITY.
IRAQ INSURGENCY
The one that targets Americans is right Others are wrong
AMERICAN COALITION
They are real terrorist
WOMEN IN BURQA
Al most all scholars agree that veil if not obligatory is MUSTAHAB so wearing veil is a good thing.
I am not someone who should judge about SALAFIS or SUFIS
AS MUSLIMS WE SHOULD BELIEVE IN HADITH AND several HADITH TALK ABOUT CLASH OF CIVILIZATION.Clash is bound to happen.
But it is not because of MUSLIMS .CLASH is enforced upon us.
THEY DID 911 themselves and put the blame on Muslims .And then BUSH declared CRUSADE against Islam and said his MESSIAH will come after war.NOW WHO IS FANATIC .
WHO STARTED THE CLASH .
I am a Muslim living in Pakistan.
ALQAEDA
Its just a fiction no Bin Ladin did 911 He said after 911 in an interview to UMMAH magazine"The thing they accuse me of doing I can never think about that.Islam does not allow killing of innocent people."
and then A VIDEO TAPE appears in which he confesses .The video tape is itself PHONY .BIN LADIN WEARING A GOLD RING(prohibited) WRITING WITH RIGHT HAND(left hander) and He does not look like bin ladin
www.whatreallyhappened.com
TALIBAN
They are pious Muslims .Some people accuse them of being against development which is wrong. THEY signed agreement with UTN(an organization formed by two Pakistan nuclear scientist few army officers industrialist and a religious scholar DR ISRAR AHMED) to build ROADS,INDUSTRIES,COLLEGES IN AFGHANISTAN
More over YVONNE RIDLEY reverted to Islam because SHE WAS TREATED SO WELL BY TALIBAN IN CAPTIVITY.
IRAQ INSURGENCY
The one that targets Americans is right Others are wrong
AMERICAN COALITION
They are real terrorist
WOMEN IN BURQA
Al most all scholars agree that veil if not obligatory is MUSTAHAB so wearing veil is a good thing.
I am not someone who should judge about SALAFIS or SUFIS
Hi Justone of a Million
Just woke up and read your commend. I fully agree with you that western civilization is experiencing a deep crisis right now. Many like you are more and more coming to the realization that the rational and bureaucratic applications of science have created a monster and although idiots like Bush are either to greedy or too stupid to see there are many who are like you very concerned. I am a devout Rastafarian but have to sons who are raised in the Islamic tradition by their mother, that means they go to the Mosque and the Koran school and they learn Arabic. Really I would not like to see them grow up in a world with GM crops, nuclear weapons or a world having no respect for the life of their Muslim Brothers. I hope they grow up to be just as devout Muslims as I am a Rastafarian but I too am concerned about the future. I write and reason to promote real love and understanding between all peoples but I also try not to close my eyes for what is wrong. Thats why I strongly criticize the attitudes in the west but I also see many a thing wrong in the 'east'. The endemic discrimination and exploitation of black people by so called 'wahabi' muslims in states like Saudi Arabia is just as evil as what the Dutch have done to us. This is no critisizm towards Islam; just as slaves fighting against slave masters in Suriname is not against Christianity. Exploitation and disrimination is done by Christians and Muslims and othe culture as both fail to live up to the religious I deals. By focussing on what is different between the cultures and clashing over it we leave the once who are dicriminating and exploiting us for wealth and power and dont really care about culture go free while we are killing each other for country and culture. People like Bush and Huttington do not care about either christianity or Islam. But they can use the love for God, culture and country to motivate their soldiers to go and die for them in wars while they fill their pockets and keep their Jewish and European friends interests save. They constantly indoctrinate us about the how we should fight to protect our culture and countries and how incompatible our cultures are so we can slaughter our self protecting their intrests. I swear to God. NOT ME!!! I can live in peace and harmony with all other cultures and I do not believe in a clash of cultures. My best friends are Muslims, Catholics, and Hindu's and if their is one thing I will never do is hate one of them because they are different than me. No Huttington nor Bush nor any politician is going to use my live so he can continue drinking champagne and fornicate. But I will pick up any weapon to defend my self against people trying to enslave and exploit me and the defenseless in society regardless of which civilization they are from. I think its time for civilizations to unite against those who have used the clash of civilizations myth to divide and rule us.
One perfect love
Just woke up and read your commend. I fully agree with you that western civilization is experiencing a deep crisis right now. Many like you are more and more coming to the realization that the rational and bureaucratic applications of science have created a monster and although idiots like Bush are either to greedy or too stupid to see there are many who are like you very concerned. I am a devout Rastafarian but have to sons who are raised in the Islamic tradition by their mother, that means they go to the Mosque and the Koran school and they learn Arabic. Really I would not like to see them grow up in a world with GM crops, nuclear weapons or a world having no respect for the life of their Muslim Brothers. I hope they grow up to be just as devout Muslims as I am a Rastafarian but I too am concerned about the future. I write and reason to promote real love and understanding between all peoples but I also try not to close my eyes for what is wrong. Thats why I strongly criticize the attitudes in the west but I also see many a thing wrong in the 'east'. The endemic discrimination and exploitation of black people by so called 'wahabi' muslims in states like Saudi Arabia is just as evil as what the Dutch have done to us. This is no critisizm towards Islam; just as slaves fighting against slave masters in Suriname is not against Christianity. Exploitation and disrimination is done by Christians and Muslims and othe culture as both fail to live up to the religious I deals. By focussing on what is different between the cultures and clashing over it we leave the once who are dicriminating and exploiting us for wealth and power and dont really care about culture go free while we are killing each other for country and culture. People like Bush and Huttington do not care about either christianity or Islam. But they can use the love for God, culture and country to motivate their soldiers to go and die for them in wars while they fill their pockets and keep their Jewish and European friends interests save. They constantly indoctrinate us about the how we should fight to protect our culture and countries and how incompatible our cultures are so we can slaughter our self protecting their intrests. I swear to God. NOT ME!!! I can live in peace and harmony with all other cultures and I do not believe in a clash of cultures. My best friends are Muslims, Catholics, and Hindu's and if their is one thing I will never do is hate one of them because they are different than me. No Huttington nor Bush nor any politician is going to use my live so he can continue drinking champagne and fornicate. But I will pick up any weapon to defend my self against people trying to enslave and exploit me and the defenseless in society regardless of which civilization they are from. I think its time for civilizations to unite against those who have used the clash of civilizations myth to divide and rule us.
One perfect love
I mean there is difference between a cruzade and a robery, neocolonialism is no cruzade. Neo colonializm is not directed against religion. Bush can only keep on sucking Arab oil because he is backed by Arab state officials who are claiming to be Muslims themselfs. They can only stay in power because they are backed by Christian regimes who supply them weapons and power and technology. While we Jewish, Christian and Muslim populations are slaughtering ourselfs Individual Jews, Christians and Muslims are working together laughing all the way to the bank!! Please let us start working together and unite against them.
You Muslims have been nothing but good and kind to me, critical but alway righteous, so let me share one bit of my culture with you my bothers:
Until the philosophy that holds one race superior and another inferior is finally and permanantly discredited and abandoned there will be war...
Bob Marley by HIM Haile Selassi
Every time they have tried to ignite the fire of war Allah has stopped it and they have tried to create confusion on earth but Allah does not love trouble makers (Koran 5:64) (Pls forgive my poor effords to translate this verse. If you know it in English pls post it as I only know it in Dutch and I have no English koran)
One perfect love
You Muslims have been nothing but good and kind to me, critical but alway righteous, so let me share one bit of my culture with you my bothers:
Until the philosophy that holds one race superior and another inferior is finally and permanantly discredited and abandoned there will be war...
Bob Marley by HIM Haile Selassi
Every time they have tried to ignite the fire of war Allah has stopped it and they have tried to create confusion on earth but Allah does not love trouble makers (Koran 5:64) (Pls forgive my poor effords to translate this verse. If you know it in English pls post it as I only know it in Dutch and I have no English koran)
One perfect love