As with other mirage, as one in fact draws closer to the object sought, the shimmering stops and more solid details maintain their appearance with solidity.
Update – October 15, 2014
The most striking as well as encouraging finding is that ISIS has almost no popular support in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, or Lebanon – even among Sunnis. Among Egyptians, a mere 3 percent express a favorable opinion of ISIS. In Saudi Arabia, the figure is slightly higher: 5 percent rate ISIS positively. In Lebanon, not a single Christian, Shiite, or Druze respondent viewed ISIS favorably; and even among Lebanon’s Sunnis, that figure is almost equally low at 1 percent.
http://fikraforum.org/?p=5608 – Distributed 10/14/2014 by The Washington Institute. The web page summary has attached to it the full PDF report.
The BackChannel’s page “Shimmer” launched to suggest that factual data should exist somewhere between the apologist’s “ISIS does not represent Islam” and the strident anti-Jihadist’s “Islam is represented by ISIS”.
It should be noted that Islam-defending apologist and the strident Jihad watcher share the same abhorrence as regards what ISIS represents. In contest, however, one argues that Muhammad the Messenger and the Qur’an are okey dokey and some Muslims are nutty (and need to be dealt with) and the other’s analysis suggests Muhammad’s battlefield history — with the Banu Qurayza signal to what was to come — plus the contradictions within the Qur’an plus patently vicious Hadith, including the counsel to deceive the infidel, are just plain ugly all the way through.
Now we’re starting to see numbers.
From a dimensional perspective, fog floats with them: the reduction “ISIS bad : Brotherhood good : Hamas very good” (suggested by facets of the Fikra Forum report) is a head scratcher: what central beliefs and tenets and related attitudes constitute irreducible surveyed objects of interest?
While the “Islamic Small Wars” burn everywhere beneath the surface or on it, the want to address those “beliefs, tenets, and related attitudes” as candidly, completely and specifically as possible remains compelling.
Related and Recommended Reading
One woman gestured to her hijab, her face flushed, shouting: “Who are you to talk about these victims, when you aren’t even visibly Muslim?” For good measure, she added that I was personally responsible for the post 9/11 escalation in the harassment of veiled Muslim women.
The most general thing that might be done with Syria has to do with the development of the Army of the Middle Temperament, which General Idris possibly represented. The reality is it’s not going very well, and the deeply fragmented character of revolutionary forces (anti-Assad) may be additionally hampered by anti-Semitism, anti-Zionism, anti-western thought . . . in short a whole complex of attitudes and beliefs that having made clear what the revolution is against — i.e., the Assad dictatorship and the horror it has brought to Syria, and the entire free world is against that (by reduction: the kleptocratic Putin-Assad-Khamenei art of power) — it may be having a more difficult time articulating what it is FOR.
Perhaps much of the twisting nature of the conflict may be approached in terms of the divide or split between traditional loyalties, including that implied by Arab pan-nationalism, and dawning principles about mankind. It takes a lot of work on the inside to become coherent about what the revolution is fighting for. The extremists have a ready-made program, or believe they day, but they are of the same malignantly narcissist personality as the Assad regime.
The reader may imagine the prompt for the comment.
Of course, what is happening to Syria and the Syrian People in their totality has to stop.
Getting power to the people, however, proves just about impossible given 1) the fragmentation of the revolution, 2) the requirement that a revolution must be fought FOR the installation of better ideas and healthier people as well as against a tyrannical presence, and then 3) in the less than perfect world, with good relationships forged atop strong foundations, the kind of commitment to common cause sorely compromised by the self-defeating habit of a heady contempt and enmity for others who might have been more helpful otherwise.
For BackChannels readers, the hyphenated troika noun “Putin-Assad-Khamenei” should by now need no introduction: Trés Amigos Dictador.
My blogging has similarly pinned the Shiite-Sunni conflict within the Syrian Civil War as “two mad wasps in a bell jar”.
On the matter of post-Soviet linguistic hangovers and inherent anti-western cant and agitprop, one notes the same for the anachronism that, say, “imperialist Yankee scum” has become, especially now that that the old pro-Soviet useful have become by default useful to reinvigorated Russian Imperialism and deeply dependent on the vertical of power in Moscow for arms supply and trusty RT-supported anti-western propaganda.
The hangup for the west, the cause of somewhat covert arms resupply to “moderate” Syrian rebels: the “moderates” retain the facets of immoderate scripting when it comes to Jews, Israel, and the west, and (here we go), they seem not to have a strong script of their own, at least not one that competes with the zealot’s investment in Islamic jihad and sectarian legacy. With some kind of fortitude and guts, the Free Syrian Army has yet a place on the field, God bless ’em, but in fighting against the criminal dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad and the three amigos of political crime generally, they appear not to have “got it” yet when it comes to “Liberté, égalité, fraternité”.
Didn’t that come with colonialism?
Wasn’t that part of the oppression brought by western imperialists?
* * *
My childhood friend arrived on my doorstep in Damascus, bottle of wine in hand and grinning ear to ear, and told me how he enjoyed hearing the “snap” of his victims’ bones.
When I first heard the rumours that he had become part of the shabiha, militia man who torture and rape at will in the name of saving President Bashar al-Assad, I didn’t believe them.
It would seem the barbarians are all around: in Assad’s paid Shabiha, in al-Nusra’s zealots, in Khamenei’s sponsored Hezbollah, in nobody-owns-em ISIS.
Who are the modern?
Who are the moderate?
The “Free Syrian” (add the next “Noun”) define themselves out of their own mouths, and if they define themselves only by way of the contempt they harbor for others — start with the Jews of Israel — they haven’t yet in their heads what they need to leverage more enthused and open cooperation from “the west”: i.e., a modern attitude toward their fellow man and themselves.
It’s easy to criticize, and from an armchair, no less, so let’s get beyond that and on to the passions involved in denouncing a modern day Pharaoh and leaving all of that behind — and everything in complicity, fear, weakness, and passivity that may be associated with it — never to look back.
Catholics may wish to differ as regards the ownership of Rome.
Saudi Arabia rakes in $30 billion annually from the Haj — and all, of course, are welcome to return.
However, there are many Muslim-majority states worldwide, and so the issue is somewhat disingenuous as regards where a Muslim may feel at home or where a longer-lived tribesman whose cultural legacy far predates Islam and to whom conversion (even if sold as “reversion”) surviving some elements in Islam would seem to be a local issue this day.
As an ethno-religious presence, the Jews have a broad community and many arguments about being Jewish come up as much as they do in Islam.
My direction as regards ethnography, governance, and religion are involve just two or three themes: 1) let’s meet somewhere around monotheist humanism and agree to peace; 2) global cultural diversity may be as important to humanity as global biological diversity — let’s preserve one another by recognizing that others are “First People” and “Original People” and “Chosen People” too — the condition is not exclusive!; and 3) if we adopt as overarching values the pursuits of compassion, humility, inclusion, and integrity, our own humanity and the “humanity of humanity” will do just fine, and it may do just as much despite ourselves.
As-salamu alaykum!
Every child born is born with ready made ethnicity, family, language, and religion.
Not every child born, however, gets to enjoy them or keep them, and there are many reasons for that, but in that we lose a few of our approximately 7,000 living languages each month, the matter of cultural diversity and preservation should be taken as seriously as that of biological diversity. We do not know what or whom may hold some secrets beneficial to the world’s overall survival, experience of life, and qualities of living.
We need us.
There is an old world obsessed with resource competition and deficit, but here one may argue, this given that food distribution, for example, presents economic, logistical, and political issues and proves as much or more of a challenge than producing raw food supply to cover hunger in the world, that the same are “problems in the head” and partly related to emotional deficit and social self-concept.
Heighten cooperation, integration, and trade across space, and one might find economic and resource development benefits concomitant.
Can we change the way we do business?
Well, we’re finding out.
Our despots gather and tie up wealth primarily to expend the same in the worst ways imaginable; our NGOs and assorted nonprofit service organizations stretch dollars practically into infinity, or so they may try on behalf of the welfare of their fellow humans.
Jolie said in a written statement issued to mark World Refugee Day, “I appeal to the world leaders — please, set aside your differences unite to end the violence, and make diplomacy succeed. The UN Security Council must live up to its responsibilities. Every 14 seconds someone crosses Syria’s border and becomes a refugee. And by the end of this year half of Syria’s population — ten million people — will be in desperate need of food, shelter and assistance. The lives of millions of people are in your hands. You must find common ground.”
I do not understand why we are so desperate to exculpate an ideology which, at the very least, lends itself too easily to a messianic authoritarianism and viciousness. There may be much in Islam which is agreeable — a respect for the elderly, a commitment to charity, a certain high seriousness, self-discipline and so on — but many of its tenets are simply antithetical to much that we believe in and cherish.
There is such a thing as “intellectual poisoning”, and the above quoted and cited piece tells a part of the process.
I elaborate on “Social Grammar” in the Coins and Terms section here — and probably I will break out topics into separate sections quite soon:
My hypothesis and theory is that a) there is such a thing as the development of “social grammar” accompanying language uptake, b) that it is part of the learning of a language and subsequent navigation of a related language culture, and c) it has gravitational sway on formulations associated with perception and expression.
This goes back to attitude-behavior studies and theories, formulating as the basis for attitude the possession of one more beliefs and their valence (good thing / bad thing) and the intensity of the valence.
Attitude f/ belief x (affect x intensity)
And some beliefs are either more primary or more powerful than others, so multiple aligned and competing beliefs may form a mosaic with a center of gravity: deeply rooted but inexplicable, irretrievable, and indefensible beliefs and belief systems that nonetheless determine subsequent speech and behavior over time.
Jews bad / Christians bad / Muslims bad / Hindus bad / Atheists good — whatever the message, I think the child gets the drift and outline of it before uttering his first sentence: “Not mother’s milk,” I have often said: “Mother’s tongue.”
I’ll have more to say on the formation of attitudes and their expression in language after the Jewish Sabbath.
Carol M. Highsmith’s photograph shows not only those towers but a sense of the site’s proximity to the Beltway, which is about 1,000-ft. The mosque complex under construction today will be about twice that distance (judging from the Google map).
About that visual impression off what is called the “outer loop of the beltway”, we shall see, literally.
* * *
Here is my question at the moment: how do Americans who are not Muslim feel about Islam today?
* * *
While the news gets around the terrorism-inspired “anti-Jihad” and “Islamophobe” communities, it also provides a moment for very loose social science measurement.
“It will be a place that will help counter an epidemic of “Islamophobia” in the United States, according to Turkish government officials who recently visited the construction site. The delegation was led by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whose goals include increasing Islamist influence in America.”
“The leaders of two U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entities in attendance included Naeem Baig, is the president of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA). A 1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo lists ICNA as one of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.” The memo says its “work in America is “a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.” The memo even refers to meetings with ICNA where there was talk about a merger.”
From YouTube poster “Joseph Rudyard Kipling” whose attitude (with what sounds like the music from Platoon) needs no interpretation of the fine points:
“This monument will be a symbol of our understanding of culture and civilization,” Erdogan said.
The center will be a good way to show how wrong Islamophobia is by giving messages of Islam’s brotherhood and tolerance, Erdogan noted.
With the completion of the center, the state of Maryland will have a different richness, Erdogan said.
“With its multi functional character, the center would be a source of pride for the Turkish nation,” Erdogan indicated.
The Turkish American Culture and Civilization Center would be an expression of co-existence based on love and tolerance, Erdogan also said.
On the other hand, a blog titled “Stop Turkey” has a page devoted to remarks made by the state sponsor of the Turkish Culture and Civilization Center, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan — “Favourite Erdogan Quotes” — and those are not so friendly.
Ramp it up, as may The Thinking Mom — “Imagine a $100 million facility devoted to Nazi-ism on American soil with the complicity of the American government. The Turkish American Culture and Civilization Center is every bit as dangerous as that” — or wind it down as so many of decent and good conscience — and without reference to race, creed, color, or religion — may try, that mosque is under construction in my backyard.
If it were a synagogue of similar scale with some houses planted around it, no one would bat an eyelash.
* * *
“Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.”
I repeatedly drag in Quran 9:29 for its being unambiguous and sticky, at least, and may be representative of the conversation that it will take great courage to have as regards the goodness and validity of an Islamic civilization clinging to the above and other off-putting and seemingly explicit instructions.
Here’s David Wood marching up to and through the talking points in relation to the recent beheading in Woolwich, UK:
When are we going to have this conversation?
My Muslim friends all over the world may approach this line in a different way, all of them well noting the persecuting character of the Taliban, Al-Nusra (an Al-Qaeda group in Syria today) and others around the fringes of their own lives and, tragically, sometimes in close and direct.
In the more central areas of the Islamic Small Wars, events like the “Boston Marathon Bombing” — an insult to all civilized hearts globally — hit the newspapers on a daily to weekly basis, and the same are similarly repudiated en masse, and yet . . . the text remains embraced, even if passively.
“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”
Ali preferred the term “subdued” to merely “humbled”.
May one of the “People of the Book” or other “kafir” ask why not “conquered”, “enslaved”, or “subjugated”?
May an insider, a believer, ask, “Why attack the autonomy and dignity of another on the basis of faith at all?”
* * *
Maryland has a reputation as a deeply liberal and moderate state, one in which Catholics and Protestants learned to get along right quick, and so I have no doubt the citizenry will welcome the new mosque and regard it as a good sign of the power of development and investment in keeping life around the Capitol Beltway ever affluent, hopeful, and pleasant.
The Awesome Conversation promotes a kind of response about which I am certain and that I copy-and-paste over here, where there is so much less chit-chat. Nonetheless, I regard each of these as a little gem having, potentially, uncertain but positive effects as regards stimulus for insight and for peace.
The scholarly will recognize something akin to the first three hours of grad school — not exactly a contribution to the field . . . perhaps more of a transposition from efforts in social science proper toward efficacy in more open political and social environments having by necessity interest in basic research and theory.
Attitudes (about or toward anything and anyone) may have structure reducible to noun : beliefs x affect (+/- emotion). So a “bixl”, which I believe related to catching colds, might be a bad thing (even though no such noun exists). 🙂 This way of looking over attitudes becomes more interesting, of course, when assorted kafir, infidels, Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Jews, and Muslims become the focus of interest — i.e., how does one feel about _________ (fill in the blank).
While chewing on that, it may help to entertain another thought: across our gregarious species, the presence of language and some irreducible aspects and components associated with it (like the existence of the names of things) may be predictable, but from anthropological and related linguistic perspectives, the invention and evolution of languages — and all they endorse or inhibit — may be quite wild.
The whole world is not English.
Thank God.
But it — God, nature, and mankind — may have a needful and useful investment in differentiation and co-evolution. Our present inability to more effectively deal with cross-cultural issues in content of mind — and recognize them as such — may lead to a lot of confusion and tragedy.
On top of that: I don’t believe that differences in religious outlook are the sole cause or sufficient cause for conflicts in the name of religion. I think that for some the cloak of an idea may be made to serve as shield and sword enabling darker designs and impulses.
A part of the modern person’s responsibility may be to be careful of the earth and her children and to see to it that those “darker forces” become more contained across time as other avenues and challenges open up on the horizon.
