Your Thoughts Exactly

Stuart and I got into a debate a few days ago about ideologies, sparked by his assertion, that the Islamic religion itself is inherently causes violence and oppression as a result of the natural implementation of the precepts of the ideology, (or something like that, I will let K clarify on his own.) What really irked me was his assertion that Islam was in some way more of an instigator of violence and therefore in some way “eviler,” than Christianity.

There are two ways to settle this debate, one is to go into a debate of the principles of the major religions and come to a conclusion as to whether or not one or the other has some moral high ground on the others. This is a personal choice however, one which in a society of free religion, we all should get to make, and respect that of the other, (ideally, I will admit this does not happen.) I believe this to be a fruitless exercise, because individuals are the one’s who end up making the decision as to how they are going to interpret how their religious choice (or lack there of) will affect their lives. In any religion, one can make the choice to practice in peace, to show devotion to principles of equality and non-violence, or make the choice to be exclusionary and violent towards those who do not share the same beliefs and practices as themselves. Unfortunately, one of the many dark truths about all religions is that people often make the latter choice.

Islam is getting a very bad rap right now; if open-minded religious skeptics like Stu are questioning its inherent values or viewing it as flawed I shudder to think what the Jesus freaks in the White House are saying to each other after morning Bible study. Following 9/11, it was easy to dismiss Al Qaeda as a bunch of wackos: but nowadays we are seeing a global rise in power of Muslim fundamentalists into positions of political power. Ahminehjad’s rise in Iran and Hamas’ electoral victory have both enhancedthe visibility of the right-wing hard-liner Muslims.

This isn’t the first time fundamentalists of an ideology have risen to power. The Nazis were what I would call “Nationalist Radical Fundamentalists,” they embraced the ideology of nationalism and took it to extremely radical conclusions, which included the deification of the Aryan super-race, the extermination of Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, communists and other undesirables (with the Slavs probably being next in line,) and attempting to set up the Third Reich throughout Europe. What would the U.S. look like if elements of the Christian right got their hands on the instruments of power? I do not know to what level there would be a crackdown on civil liberties, but I hope I never get to find out.

The more important question, in my mind, is what causes such fundamentalist organizations to rise to power. Hitler was elected. Hamas was elected. The revolution of 1979 in Iran was a popular one overthrowing a US-supported Monarch, and Ahminehjad was elected and draws much of his support from Iran’s young, supposedly reformist population. Without the consent of the populations, these people could not rule. What makes these alternatives viable?

Fundamentalist ideologues seem to rise to power following a period of desperation, oppression, and economic suffering. The major examples of the 20^th century are the rise of Lenin in Russia, Mao in China, and Hitler in Germany. Germany after World War One and the Great Depression was in total disarray, the mark devalued, billions in reparations owed to France and Great Britain due to the Treaty of Versailles. Lenin took the work of Marx and applied it to overthrow the Tsar who had only recently moved out of the serf-based economy.

So why are people in Iran and Palestine turning to more right-wing fundamentalists? What do they represent? Perhaps they offer a chance to return to an idealized past, the Persian Empire in the case of Iran, or the caliphate in the case of the PLO.

But really I think it comes down to the effect that outside states, especially the U.S. have had on the region. When faced by constant pressure from the outside, peoples tend to turn inward, to those who will defend their people’s and won’t back down in any way to the invading outsiders. If I am a Palestinian I know that Hamas will not back down to Israel. If I am Iranian, it’s nice to hear someone not backing down from the U.S., especially if that leader also has not curtailed our social freedoms.

These leaders are running on the same ideas as the Republican Party. The duality of right and wrong, and the fear of the outsider. The need to “show strength,” and saber-rattle (or invade another country.) The politics of fear are now being used by both sides. And just like I don’t believe for a second that George Bush and the Iraq war represent American, liberal, or my values, I don’t believe that Hamas or Iran represent those of Islam.

# posted by Marmaniac @ 3:02 PM