Letters to the Editor
Ben Sen
Published Letters: 541 Editor's Choice: 98
-
The Personal and the Public
[Read the article: The religious state of Islamic science]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Much is missing from this interview. "Orthodox." Islam, via the Koran, does not distinquish between the personal and the public. Many commentators on religion have made this point. A Muslim's individual identity is not distinguished from the groups in the eyes of the faithfuls definition of "God." Hence, theocracy is the orthodox form of government and clerics the only acceptable rulers. (There is no "render unto Caesar..." It's all "render unto God..."
In addition to missing a Renaissance that separated culture from religion, they have not yet had a Reformation, where religion is at least nominally separated from the individual so personal freedom becomes a goal--the most precious goal. Sufism came the closest, distinguishing itself from its Islamic source, but the mainstream rejected it. It's not the form anybody speaks of when they talk about Islam today--unless they happen to be spiritually minded--as opposed to religious--regardless of their tradition.
If the Iraq War makes anything clear, it's that no force outside of Islam is going to influence it directly. When it changes (which is inevitable) it will be due to influencial indigenous leaders and groups that do so. Attaturk in Turkey took a secular stand, like so many great early modern leaders, but the question now is how deep his influence was. As the home of the greatest Sunni empire, it is disconcerting to think what could happen if Turkey entered an escalating fundamentalist era.
Hopefully, all the young Muslims coming to this country to learn will take back a message (if they are forced to go back) and the current "crusade," doesn't make their lives miserable while they are in this country. Recent events. however, like the doctors taking part in a terrorist plot in England do not bode well for the immediate future. Are even the most educated and accomplished unable to distinguish the greater issues at stake for them and their culture? (Where is Gandhi when you need him?)
I'm not sure denying the current state of affairs is as wise as entering it into the discussion, and breaking through the ignorance. Reactionary leaders by definition want to cling to the past, and it's not hard to see the power they weld by examining the politics of the US today.
-
Correcting Rove's Damage
[Read the article: Remembering Karl Rove]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]They want to get him out thinking that it will make him less of a target. Who knows what else has been discovered on the Hill at this point about Rove's machinations--in addition to Tim's list.
More important than any of it, Rove is the guy who figured out how to connect the religious right with the Republican party. This is what has changed American politics. He took the genie out of the bottle and gave the bottom fedders a voice. When and how it's ever going to be put back in is the real problem he caused. If America's rascists, bigots, homophobics, xenophobes, and religiously intolerate contiinue to exert as much influence as they have, and attention diverted from the real problems facing the country, the future is going to be a nightmare.
Will the "neo-liberals" learn? Is there anything that can reach out to them--the way abortion coalesed the right? Will they get it after social security runs out of money, the next war has even more deadly consequences, or the oil lobby destroys the planet? The next presidential should tell us something, but it's going to take a long time to correct the damage.
-
The Master of Fear
[Read the article: The man who sold the war]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Rove's "genius" was fear mongering. He figured out how to appeal to a segment of the population that liberals pretended didn't exist, or were so marginalized and cynical they didn't matter.
Now, the reverse is true. So called "liberals" see themselves as disenfrancised, think the system is corrupt, and refuse to participate. By being covert, they're just as responsible for Bush as Rove.
If they stopped demonizing politics and politicians that would be a start.