"I'd like to advance a hypothesis: Despite all the excitement surrounding social media, the Internet isn't connecting us as much as we think it is. It's largely home to weak, artificial connections, what I call thin relationships."Read more on Harvard Business Review.
Mar 24, 2010
Is this relationship?
Jan 27, 2010
Jan 21, 2010
Jan 9, 2010
Dec 15, 2009
They don’t care about us
One of the pillars of Western democratic societies is tolerance, particularly in issues regarding minorities who have different opinions and lifestyles from the rest of the society. Minorities’ different opinions, though strange for the majority, are normally respected. It is believed this is a right for them because of a possibility of validity for those opinions. However, when it comes to Muslims,this right most of the time is rejected.
On Sunday, October 29, 2009, Swiss voters supported a proposal to ban construction of minarets on Muslim mosques, with 57% in favor of the ban. The ban was initially proposed by the Swiss People’s Party (SVP). “This vote was against minarets as symbols of Islamic power,” says Martin Baltisser, SVP’s General Secretary. There are 400,000 Muslims in Switzerland, and Islam is the second largest religion. However, there are only four minarets in the whole country. Minarets are just parts of an Islamic traditional architecture for mosques remained from centuries ago. No one, in Islamic countries, regards it as a source for power. It’s mere seen from a historical and artistic point of view, and nothing more. However, there could be the danger, in Western societies, if once Muslim minorities are given the concept that minarets on a mosque is an identity for them to separate them from the rest of the society, and a tool for some to leverage in raising Muslim’s religious emotions for using it to reach their illegitimate goals.
Switzerland has been always seen as a peaceful country. The Swiss Muslims are relatively moderate people among other Muslims of the world. Even in recent years, while Islamic extremists have been targeting many parts of the world, yet, we have not witnessed any attack in that country. However, won’t the ban on construction of minarets have the risk of a reaction from the Swiss Muslim community; another reason for Muslim extremists, from around the world, to further justify the West as an enemy; and, raising hatred among moderate Muslims?
It is essential to understand Muslims’ expectations and interpretations of their identity within the western societies. When, I first opened my account on Facebook, I made “friend” with a girl, from Washington D.C. In her profile photo, she had put on a scarf that made her look like an Arab girl. I asked if where she was from. She said she was Afghan. And, when I expressed my surprise, she gave me pages of lectures that, yes, she was a Muslim and Muslim girls must be like this and that. I was more surprised when I saw that how an Afghan girl from Washington D.C. was giving me lecture about Islam, while I have grown up in one of the most religious cities among Islamic countries, and one of the centers of Islamic fundamentalism. In fact, she did not know much about how girls behave in Islamic countries; and it seemed she did not care either. Because, the contradiction is this that in Islamic countries, girls, by their own will or from fear, do not put their photos on a public Website to show off themselves with their scarves! Actually, scarf for that girl was a symbol for the identity by which she had a chance to express herself in the society, from which she had been once rejected. The more the society was banning her from scarf, the more she would be determinant to wear it. Similarly, it seems this is what the French secular government does. By not allowing girls to dress in the way to demonstrate a religious identity in the public sphere, it teaches them that scarf is an identity for the isolated minority group they are living in.
Scarf and minarets are nothing but parts of women’s clothing and Islamic architectural heritage. They are similar to any other kinds of things like them. It would be funny to talk about their danger, the same way it is funny when, in some Islamic countries like Iran, necktie is considered dangerous for the society. Nor scarf neither necktie is dangerous; even if they are considered as symbols for Islamic and Western identity. Even, it is expected they are welcomed as examples of diversity in a Western society; what that essentially makes the Western countries distinguished as democratic and pluralistic societies. However, when minority groups, like Muslims in western societies, are not tolerated for their lifestyles, they will tend to separate themselves from the rest of the society. They will start building their own identities, in the form of clothing in a special way or building minarets; and become isolated more and more in their own communities. In spite of geographically living in a modern Western country, they are living in an island, far from the society.
In Islamic countries, that I have ever lived, people normally do not care about minarets, in their routine lives, as they have become as normal as part of a building. In whole of my life, I do not recall I have ever stopped in front of a mosque and look at its minarets, with pride, and said, yes, this is the reason of my existence! I am wondering to know who tells Muslims in Western societies that minarets are so important.
The ban of construction of minarets in Switzerland is an example, illustrating, how integration of Muslim communities in Western societies is more complicated than other minorities. In addition, it clearly demonstrates how misunderstandings could be easily made. I think most of those young Muslims, who are absorbed in extremist groups, have once experienced a failed effort in being integrated and accepted as citizens of a society, which tolerance is not respected towards them.
On Sunday, October 29, 2009, Swiss voters supported a proposal to ban construction of minarets on Muslim mosques, with 57% in favor of the ban. The ban was initially proposed by the Swiss People’s Party (SVP). “This vote was against minarets as symbols of Islamic power,” says Martin Baltisser, SVP’s General Secretary. There are 400,000 Muslims in Switzerland, and Islam is the second largest religion. However, there are only four minarets in the whole country. Minarets are just parts of an Islamic traditional architecture for mosques remained from centuries ago. No one, in Islamic countries, regards it as a source for power. It’s mere seen from a historical and artistic point of view, and nothing more. However, there could be the danger, in Western societies, if once Muslim minorities are given the concept that minarets on a mosque is an identity for them to separate them from the rest of the society, and a tool for some to leverage in raising Muslim’s religious emotions for using it to reach their illegitimate goals.
Switzerland has been always seen as a peaceful country. The Swiss Muslims are relatively moderate people among other Muslims of the world. Even in recent years, while Islamic extremists have been targeting many parts of the world, yet, we have not witnessed any attack in that country. However, won’t the ban on construction of minarets have the risk of a reaction from the Swiss Muslim community; another reason for Muslim extremists, from around the world, to further justify the West as an enemy; and, raising hatred among moderate Muslims?
It is essential to understand Muslims’ expectations and interpretations of their identity within the western societies. When, I first opened my account on Facebook, I made “friend” with a girl, from Washington D.C. In her profile photo, she had put on a scarf that made her look like an Arab girl. I asked if where she was from. She said she was Afghan. And, when I expressed my surprise, she gave me pages of lectures that, yes, she was a Muslim and Muslim girls must be like this and that. I was more surprised when I saw that how an Afghan girl from Washington D.C. was giving me lecture about Islam, while I have grown up in one of the most religious cities among Islamic countries, and one of the centers of Islamic fundamentalism. In fact, she did not know much about how girls behave in Islamic countries; and it seemed she did not care either. Because, the contradiction is this that in Islamic countries, girls, by their own will or from fear, do not put their photos on a public Website to show off themselves with their scarves! Actually, scarf for that girl was a symbol for the identity by which she had a chance to express herself in the society, from which she had been once rejected. The more the society was banning her from scarf, the more she would be determinant to wear it. Similarly, it seems this is what the French secular government does. By not allowing girls to dress in the way to demonstrate a religious identity in the public sphere, it teaches them that scarf is an identity for the isolated minority group they are living in.
Scarf and minarets are nothing but parts of women’s clothing and Islamic architectural heritage. They are similar to any other kinds of things like them. It would be funny to talk about their danger, the same way it is funny when, in some Islamic countries like Iran, necktie is considered dangerous for the society. Nor scarf neither necktie is dangerous; even if they are considered as symbols for Islamic and Western identity. Even, it is expected they are welcomed as examples of diversity in a Western society; what that essentially makes the Western countries distinguished as democratic and pluralistic societies. However, when minority groups, like Muslims in western societies, are not tolerated for their lifestyles, they will tend to separate themselves from the rest of the society. They will start building their own identities, in the form of clothing in a special way or building minarets; and become isolated more and more in their own communities. In spite of geographically living in a modern Western country, they are living in an island, far from the society.
In Islamic countries, that I have ever lived, people normally do not care about minarets, in their routine lives, as they have become as normal as part of a building. In whole of my life, I do not recall I have ever stopped in front of a mosque and look at its minarets, with pride, and said, yes, this is the reason of my existence! I am wondering to know who tells Muslims in Western societies that minarets are so important.
The ban of construction of minarets in Switzerland is an example, illustrating, how integration of Muslim communities in Western societies is more complicated than other minorities. In addition, it clearly demonstrates how misunderstandings could be easily made. I think most of those young Muslims, who are absorbed in extremist groups, have once experienced a failed effort in being integrated and accepted as citizens of a society, which tolerance is not respected towards them.
Dec 9, 2009
Dec 7, 2009
Nov 14, 2009
Two weeks is not enough for eating democracy
“Sorry mate, but I’m not going to eat it,” the last words, said Stefan Gates, in Cooking in the Danger Zone, a documentary film by BBC.
Stefan Gates is a food “adventurous”. He pops up wherever eating is a challenging task; Afghanistan, Tonga, U.S. Army, India, Venezuela, and this time, South Korea. Maybe, South Korea can’t be considered as a high-risk region in terms of security, but, definitely it is challenging when it comes to eating dog. Well, nothing seems more enjoyable than challenging an undiscovered land for a Westerner. How about when it is the matter of culture? Something deeply engraved on spirit of a human being, grown from hundreds of years of customs. Stefan Gates could not eat dog, within two weeks try during his stay in South Korea. So, why must West expect Afghan people to become democratic only after a few years?
Stefan Gates wants to have an experience of tasting dog’s meat. Koreans, through two weeks, tried their best to convince Stefan that eating dog is something completely normal in their culture. It’s regarded as a “traditional medicine and a cornerstone of the culture.” However, “just like the dog meat industry itself, it wasn't pretty,” concluded Stefan.
I was just wondered how Stefan, who claims “I’m pretty adventurous when it comes to food” , can’t eat dog. Stefan, himself, says, “I don’t see anything particularly wrong with eating dog.” But, he can’t eat it.
We don’t eat dog because dog is a pet. But, cow and sheep can also be pets. So, what’s wrong? Culture. Culture says you shouldn’t eat dog. It is based in hundreds of years of traditions and customs. So, fairly nobody should expect to digest it within two weeks!
Stefan may refuse to eat dog. But, how about our people in Helmand when they are being taught democracy, secularism, women empowerment… in classrooms like Bagwa desert, and with chalks like B-52? They may not refuse to learn. They are condemned to learn democracy.
My aim, here, is not to prove that democracy is something as disgusting as eating dog for Afghan people. However, there would be the danger of such an assumption if they were forced to adopt it within a short period. Such phenomena as democracy and secularism are deeply rooted in Western culture. It has been achieved “gradually over the course of nearly 300 years, allowing new ideas of governance time to filter down to all levels of society.” In Afghanistan, however, Europeans and Americans want the people to learn such concepts during one night.
After 9/11, the U.S. sent troops to Afghanistan to destroy Taliban and eliminate terrorism. This is not the first time that the U.S. tries to remove an anti-American regime, in the international arena. After the World War II, the U.S. removed the Nazism in Germany, and established a democratic government. In Afghanistan, the same strategy is applied. However, establishing democracy requires a considerable time, allowing all democratic institutions to root in a society. In Germany, there was no need for such time since all of its democratic institutions were already in place. In Afghanistan, however, we need to start from the beginning; learning this that democracy is not something bad at all!
For establishing democracy in Afghanistan, Europeans and Americans first need to build an image of themselves for Afghans as if they are here to really help us. (Though, they are doubtful about it, among themselves, as “Is counterinsurgency [in Afghanistan] meant to achieve the goal of counterterrorism or state-building, or both?”) In last semester at American University of Afghanistan, spring 2009, we had a course titled University Success. Part of the course was “service-learning component”, in which “students apply what they have learned by doing a community service project.” What we did was helping the Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs), settled in a camp around Kabul. Through two months work within four groups, we held a Fun Fair Day on campus to raise the initially estimated US$2,000 fund. We got it. Also, by the brilliant initiative of one of the class fellows, we acquired a US$72,000 grant from The United Methodist Committee on Relief (UMCOR), in the form of Hygiene Kit packages. Finally, we went to the camp and distributed the kits. The project was successfully implemented.
“By far […] this has been the most successful project in 7 semesters of my classes,” says Professor Shaw; I agree with him. We did well, but in terms of team working, and not by the end result. To my curiosity and simplicity, I visited that camp another day. I was not surprised when I observed no change in the living conditions of the people. In fact, we spent US$72,000 not to bring an improvement, but to fulfill the feeling of selfishness in ourselves. US$72,000 of the total money, coming to Afghanistan as International humanitarian assistance. I was ashamed of facing those poor people who expected us to help them, not to make them a joke. They needed food, prior to toothbrush!
I can’t describe exactly what grounds the similarity between eating dog and democracy. However, this comparison is inevitable for me, when I have to follow, every night, the news of “today’s number” of killed and injured of Afghan people. I am just wondering how it would be like if Helmandis, too, were allowed not to eat democracy, so fast.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)