Posted on 05/31/2005 7:46:54 AM PDT by Valin
Book explores how other cultures perceive the West
Wisam Younis of Iraq recently told The Associated Press that his ambition was to kill Americans.
So far, all he has managed to do is kill eight of his own countrymen and wound another 80. He's facing murder charges in Iraq and hopefully will never be free to kill again.
Elsewhere in the Islamic world, angry crowds are protesting what they say is abuse of the Quran by American interrogators at the prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
One photograph of Muslim protesters in India showed a man with a sign that said, "Hate America. Love Islam. Crash America. Save Islam."
Killing and mayhem in the name of God. Nations under that sort of attack have no recourse but to defend themselves. Memorial Day is about honoring the soldiers who have died in that defense.
There are all sorts of political, social and economic reasons why those in the developing world resent the West in general and the United States in particular. And the West has much to answer for in its record of colonialism in the past. But much of the hatred of the West is a reaction against things regarded as "modern," and often (but not always) such hatred is justified on religious grounds. One book that can help us understand this phenomenon is titled "Occidentalism: The West in the Eyes of Its Enemies."
In this book, originally published in 2004, two college professors — Ian Buruma from Bard College in upstate New York and Avishai Margalit from Hebrew University in Tel Aviv — contend that the current anti-Western feeling has a long pedigree, going back to centuries of reaction to Western modernity.
It can be seen in adverse reactions to the city, to trading cultures and to anything that does not have religion as an integral part of society.
To many critics of the West, there is no such thing as separation of church and state, and societies that are more urban and secular are seen as decadent and sinful.
Islamic terrorists sought the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York City as a symbol of what they see as Western decadence.
When they succeeded in destroying the Twin Towers in 2001, Osama bin Laden said, "the values of this Western civilization under the leadership of America have been destroyed."
Buruma and Margalit made this comment about the event: "The jihadis had carefully chosen the symbol for their vengeance. New York is the capital of the American empire. The Twin Towers, filled with people of all races, nationalities and creeds, working in the service of global capitalism, represented everything that was hateful to the holy warrior about the greatest modern City of Man."
Part of the problem is that in so much of the Muslim world there is little hope. Nations are mismanaged, wealth is stolen by dictators and ordinary people are left with so little that they are more prone to believe conspiracy theories about who is to blame for their plight.
New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, in his recent book about globalization, "The World Is Flat," said that it all depends on whether people believe they have an opportunity to improve their lives. If they do have opportunity and hope, they are likely to see the rich man's house on a hill and want to emulate him and become wealthy themselves. If there is no hope, they see the rich man's house and want to kill him.
"Occidentalism" is a short book, and it raised some controversy with reviewers. Not everyone agrees that its premises are useful.
But it raises issues that at the very least can be a starting point toward understanding how the West and modernization is perceived in many cultures. It won't help us defend ourselves, but it might help us understand the reasoning behind such attacks so we can address those issues in whatever diplomacy or nation-building is going on in tandem with the military response.
I read it, and nearly got it selected as the common freshman text at my university. I liked the theme of modernity as a brutal upsetter of the existing order, a way of life that forces all tribes and classes to exist on relatively equal terms where they did not before. IIRC they argued that this is one of the things that makes it so upsetting to people who benefit from traditional social ordering.
In summary, we either force the Muslims to leave the seventh century or we destroy them to defend ourselves.
Or we can convert to Islam.
In summary, we either force the Muslims to leave the seventh century
Your assumtion is the vast majority want to live there. This is (IMO) wrong. You only need to look at the last national elections in Malaysia and Indonesia where the radical Islamist parties got their heads handed to them.
or we destroy them to defend ourselves.
(once again IMO) this is the only alterative to the Bush doctrine.
New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, in his recent book about globalization, 'The World Is Flat,' said that it all depends on whether people believe they have an opportunity to improve their lives. If they do have opportunity and hope, they are likely to see the rich man's house on a hill and want to emulate him and become wealthy themselves. If there is no hope, they see the rich man's house and want to kill him."
That's it, in a nutshell.
They? Which they are you talking about? The they that sets off car bombs in Israel, Iraq, Pakistan, or the ones who voted in Iraq, stood beside their Chirstians nieghbors and sent Syria packing with their tails between their legs?
This is news? You have a civilization most of the third world) that is barely a civilization is poor, backward, and largely irrelevant except for the damage and death they can cause to others.
It amazes me that the left still clinges to the idea that they can somehow use sweet reason to influence these barbarians.
I'd say, to add to that, in most of those countries, the "rich man on the hill," using local media control, points to the U.S. and says "he's the rich man on the hill, oppressing you!"
"And the West has much to answer for in its record of colonialism in the past."
The only thing we need to be regretful for is not implementing "Make the World England" sufficently enough in these barbaric outposts.
I like what Bush said, "I believe all these things because freedom is not America's gift to the world, it is the Almighty God's gift to every man and woman in this world."
Except for Muslims
/worldclass sarcam
They're angry with their own dictators/leaders for stealing them blind, and angrier with the US for not preventing it. (Testosterone driven mobs will never admit they've been duped by local mullahs.) Besides, anyone who complains gets his head chopped off.
That explains Muslim thinking...what's Democratic Underground's excuse? ;)
World class stupidity would be my first guess.
Did you know that they know how to swear? It's so cool.
The morality of the West is in the sewer and it's not surprising that conservative cultures are appalled at the idea of it spreading to their societies.
The problem is way to many in the west have forgotten my tagline. Another problem that I've been nagging about is the image of America put out over the airwaves..movies...TV. I'd like to see Madison Ave. get on board. I wonder if any body from the government has asked?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.