Islam and the West ~ Finding Common Ground (the Non-DIR thread)

[*Anne*]

(I started this so we could chat about this without accidently flooding the Islam DIR.)

I can't improve upon Not4me's questions so...

What common ground do they have?
How do you describe the relation between them?
What common ground should we look and work for?

I'll be back after I give this some thought.

 

[*Anne*]

Current common ground:

Aside from the obvious, which is wanting to live and love in peace, I would say we're all at the mercy of our governments. The actions and reactions of our leaders push and pull us in different directions, and I think a lot of us feel helpless. I know I do, and I can't imagine I'm the only one.

Current relations:

Within my culture, I see two camps: Those who clearly separate violent extremists and wacky fundamentalists from the general Muslim population, and those who think we're at war with Islam itself. I feel the former should be encouraged, otherwise we run the risk of creating a much bigger problem.

What to work for:

#1 Getting troops out of the Middle East.

I don't think much can be accomplished until we do this first.

(Just some initial thoughts.)

 

[*Anne*]

^ *bump*

 

[kai]

what common ground? what common ground is there particular to Islam. and "the west" that we in the west can relate to?

 

[Tiapan]

It would need a logical basis to begin with, so there is your first hurdle.
A democratically elected leader who is bad can be got rid of next election so there is a natural negative feedback mechanism in western society. In islam everything earthly appears unimportant and the only things worthwhile are decided by the Quran and Surats which being vague and nonspecific leads to many different interpretations, all of which must be right since they are derived from god.
Unfortunately god is not a neighbor of mine so I don't know or trust him, he seems to kill friends of mine regularly instead, from afar. I prefer local government, not one run from the other side of the universe or where ever. So I see little compatibility frankly.

Cheers

 

[Onkara]

There is little need to relate them. Live together and respect them. It doesn't stop with Islam, Islam is great whilst it is not alone, it needs to tolerate as much as it is tolerated. The change needs to be internal with you (the reader) in that we come to accept difference. To accept difference we need to come to accept ourselves as being something more than flesh and blood.

The question assume difference is a barrier and it is not unless the reader makes it one in the mind's eye. Difference is not a coincidence.

Peace

 

[kai]

as far as politics go, i don't think an Islamic government could possibly do anything other than prevent any other form of government from succeeding them in any kind of democratic process. That means a totalitarian regime which is not compatible with "the west"

 

[Caladan]

How do you describe the relation between them?

During the 16th century, Western nations such as the English, Portuguese and the Dutch worked hard to build a foothold in India and Asia and to open commercial traffic to Europe. the powerful Islamic forces of the time, the Muslims in India, the Ottomans, and the Persians could not stop what the European powers have established. a century later the Ottomans and their enemies in central Europe began shaking the status quo which followed the bloody campaigns before this period, Vienna was under a Turkish siege which failed in the later part of the 17th century, the Turks who knew military successes before this renewal of hostilities were beginning to feel the change in the balance of power. the new scenario between Europeans and the Ottomans stimulated an arms race in which the Ottomans had to adapt to the Western capabilities, as usual war was the factor which inspired contact which began in military technology and spread to other elements. while the Turks adopted Western technologies, this brought an exposure to European society, in which the Ottomans and the people in the Middle East entered a long period of taking in and rejecting various Western elements, the Islamic world used the Western elements that were found useful and rejected other elements, the sensitive process which can be seen today is the interplay between trying to somewhat keep up with the West and with the modern phenomena in the west while rejecting the Western way of life.
The European upper hand over the seas and commercial enterprises together with the West's modern and military advantages changed international economy, economic centers which were under the influence of the Islamic powers were now in the hands of European powers.
The contact between the West and the Islamic powers stimulated changes in Turkish and Middle Eastern society, Turkey of the early 20th century under Ataturk saw great reforms which were inspired by European achievements.
Like today, Western powers fulfilled the military demands and needs of the Turks and Islamic powers which were thirsty for Western technology and edge. the military factor expanded to many other elements which the Islamic world adopted from the West. what began with naval power and military technology, moved to education, and moderizing various aspects of Islamic areas inspired by the West.
Islamic elements began to adapt and incorporate Western political systems.
A very complex interplay between the West, modernity and adaptation has taken place over the last centuries, the sensitive process of adopting Western modern elements but rejecting Western culture. other elements in the Islamic world see a necessity to not shy away from being inspired by Western successes and claim that if the Muslim world is to keep up it needs to be opened to Western ideas, this was mainly expressed in Turkey in the first part of the 20th century in the modernization of the country and the establishment of the Republic. this example is perhaps understood when placed infront of the Iranian regime which thrives on demonization of the West.
Islamic nations like Iran reject the culture of the West on many levels and propagate Western influence as a force of corruption.
another factor that many of us debate on the forum from the context of this very thread is science, we can see the differences in scientific approach, while modern science began in the last centuries in the West, it is now internationally accepted, and is a norm around the world, however the Islamic world is still not accepting the scientific norms that are now widespread around the world.
I've only touched several aspects in this post, but as the thread goes we can expand it teremndously.

What common ground should we look and work for?

Economic contacts. in order to empower a social layer in the Islamic world that can maintain relations with the West. Western nations need to establish healthy economic relations with a rising middle class in Islamic countries, a class which will have the desire to maintain relations with the West and which will push out extremism which thrives in poverty.

 

[*Anne*]

what common ground? what common ground is there particular to Islam. and "the west" that we in the west can relate to?

I was thinking more along the lines of people relating to each other, minus government and religion. I realize that you cannot totally separate Muslims from Islam, but I think we all must share some basic feelings and desires.

Economic contacts. in order to empower a social layer in the Islamic world that can maintain relations with the West. Western nations need to establish healthy economic relations with a rising middle class in Islamic countries, a class which will have the desire to maintain relations with the West and which will push out extremism which thrives in poverty.

I agree. Your entire post was a great contribution ~ thank you!

Do you thinking having troops in the Middle East helps or hurts our chances of developing stronger economic contacts?

There is little need to relate them. Live together and respect them.

Wouldn't relating a some level help a bit?

 

[Caladan]

Current common ground:

Aside from the obvious, which is wanting to live and love in peace, I would say we're all at the mercy of our governments. The actions and reactions of our leaders push and pull us in different directions, and I think a lot of us feel helpless. I know I do, and I can't imagine I'm the only one.

There is a limit to the idea that we are helpless numbers in a dystopian universe. many citizens are politically conscious, are opinionated and are active in domestic political landscape or even the international landscape. I don't like the idea of distancing the political world and international relations into another dimension from which the citizenry is separated from. in many ways it is a way to shake off responsibility from being socially aware. we are all part of nations. one of the first things I learned when I joined RF was that no matter my good intentions I would be cataloged. many Muslim members chose to enter 'Anti-Zionist' in their title line. so no matter if I chose to join the forum to discuss world religions (believe me discussing the 'Israeli-Palestinian conflict was last on my mind), I now had to open another frontier as an explnatory element for my society and to make my case on political issues.
so no, there is a point to how we can separate individuals from politics, especially when all of us want to make our case, and when many of us feel passionately about several issues. I do not feel helpless, I'm willing to discuss just about anyone on just about any topic. people need to shift from the idea that there are governments and there are simple people, after all we discuss and debate very political issues, and many of us are very opinonated about it. its easier for me to take people who do not try to tell me 'we all need to get along and leave politics aside' more seriously. politics is reality and if people really want to find common grounds with others they need to understand the politics.
its far too easy to say that I want to live in one big happy world and to ignore political realities. its a form of passive aggressiveness, which puts the burden of the desire to understand the world on one side who is willing to go to great lengths in political analysys, and not just say 'Kumbaya'.
Sorry if you find this offensive in anyway, its an honest piece of my mind.

 

[Caladan]

Do you thinking having troops in the Middle East helps or hurts our chances of developing stronger economic contacts?

The American presence in Iraq or Afghanistan is not a new phenomenon. the Americans are doing what the British and the French did before them. its a geopolitical reality, the middle east has long been a focus of interest and great powers have competed over influence on the region, the British and the French fought over it, it was part of the battle field of the cold war between the US and the Soviet union, both invested alot in maintaining their influence on the region.
I think we need a change in international politics and economy before we can approach such issues. so its hard for me to separate the hypothetical from the practical about this question. as Western citizens we should all strive for the transparency of our governments and their political affairs which is a fair and healty place to begin. the American government has implemented its agendas in the middle east for decades, through Israel, Iran under the Shah, and other elements, it has tried to secure the resources of the middle east, do I think this caused strife in the region and in the world? of course. but its nothing new, many of the disturbing realities of the middle east have roots from before the American involvement in the middle east, the way the modern middle east was arbitrarily drawn for example was rooted in the colonial enterprises of the British and the French, much of the political strife in the region came about from the colonial era. so we will all wise up when we turn our focus to understand international processes before we make an ideological stance.

 

[*Anne*]

its far too easy to say that I want to live in one big happy world and to ignore political realities. its a form of passive aggressiveness, which puts the burden of the desire to understand the world on one side who is willing to go to great lengths in political analysys, and not just say 'Kumbaya'.

Ah, but I don't ignore political realities. I just think it's important to focus on more than politics. You don't have to give up one to explore the other.

I do feel helpless, mainly because I am only one vote. That doesn't stop me from voting or from discussing issues, but ultimately I watch what goes on in the world and feel overwhelmed.

 

[kai]

I was thinking more along the lines of people relating to each other, minus government and religion. I realize that you cannot totally separate Muslims from Islam, but I think we all must share some basic feelings and desires.

If you minus government and religion then you are not a Muslim.

 

[kai]

Do you thinking having troops in the Middle East helps or hurts our chances of developing stronger economic contacts?

i am not sure! time will tell if Iraq and Afghanistan grow or falter.

 

[*Anne*]

as Western citizens we should all strive for the transparency of our governments and their political affairs which is a fair and healty place to begin.

How realistic is a transparent government though? I'm not saying I wouldn't like one, but I can't imagine it ever happening.

If you minus government and religion then you are not a Muslim.

I should have reworded that: I realize you cannot totally separate the people from Islam.

 

[Caladan]

How realistic is a transparent government though? I'm not saying I wouldn't like one, but I can't imagine it ever happening.

Its a process. states by their very nature centralize power, but organizations, individuals or political parties in the West and the developed world work relentlessly to close the gaps between the goverments decision making and the ordinary citizen.

 

[MSizer]

I think we're missing the entire problem. I know people will think I'm simple for this, but I am convinced that the root of the problem is that most humans are irrational. As long as they both think that the "afterlife" is so much more important than the corporal life, and that eternal grace depends on culturally specific notions of piety, it's impossible for them to reconcile. Our species as a whole is much less intelligent that for which we give ourselves credit.

 

[*Anne*]

As long as they both think that the "afterlife" is so much more important than the corporal life, and that eternal grace depends on culturally specific notions of piety, it's impossible for them to reconcile.

I think the more moderate members of society can get along. In time, they can, as Caladan said, crowd out the extremists who are unwilling to cooperate.

 

[dust1n]

If you minus government and religion then you are not a Muslim.

That's funny... because if you minus religion and keep government, you are still not a Muslim.

But if you minus religion and keep government, you are not a Muslim.

Which leaves me to believe.. that Islam has nothing to do with government in and of itself.

 

[Sahar]

as far as politics go, i don't think an Islamic government could possibly do anything other than prevent any other form of government from succeeding them in any kind of democratic process. That means a totalitarian regime which is not compatible with "the west"

Do you think that a secular political system in a Western state would save any effort in preventing say a Shari'a based government from succeeding in a democratic process?

Does that also mean Kai, that the secular regimes in many Muslim countries that prevent participation of the Islamic political groups are incompatible with the West?