Moral Reform for the Muslim World
Without moral reform, political reform empowers the people to be at their worst while they take refuge in the magical thinking that justice will come from an Islamic order rather than from accountable government and common ethics. Mitt Romney has proposed economic reform instead of political reform, but it is not likely that reforming Muslim economies will work any better than reforming their governments did.
Flip through the television channels some night and sooner or later you will hit on a detective show or medical drama where qualified professionals pace around, methodically searching for clues to help them understand the nature of the problem. This great search for answers is one of the strengths of Western civilization fueling its ceaseless culture of inquiry, but where there is a problem that cannot be solved regardless of how many clues are dug up and how many microscopes are adjusted, then that strength can become a weakness.
The Muslim world is the patient that we have tried to cure and the case that we have tried to solve. The problem-solving traditions of our culture told us that if we worked hard enough to unravel the mystery of Muslim violence, we would arrive at a solution that would restore harmony to the order of our world. But after sacrificing blood and treasure to try out our cures in Kabul and Baghdad, in Cairo and Benghazi, it appears that not only are we are nowhere near a solution, but that there is no solution to be found.
The Arab Spring arose from the prescription of political reform as the democracy cure for what ails the Muslim world. But political representation has only made the Muslim world that much sicker. There is certainly no balm to be found in Gaza, where democracy created Hamastan, or in Cairo where the Muslim Brotherhood has already made Egypt more tyrannical than it was under Mubarak, or in Iraq, where the Sunni-Shiite civil war is on the verge of breaking out again.
The prescription of political reform arose from a false diagnosis that the problem lay in a political blockage, and that once the tyrannical blockage was excised, the Muslim world would become a fit member of the human family. The surgery was performed repeatedly, both invasively with bombs and tanks, and non-intrusively with domestic protests, and each time the results have only worsened the illness.
Political reform, whether carried out through external regime change or domestic protests, will not fix what ails the Muslim world; though its advocates will likely not admit that until the Muslim world democratically agrees to form a Caliphate and democratically enforces second-class status on infidels, third-class status on women and free-fire status on the rest of the planet.
Obama had advocated political reform for Egypt as early as his first anti-war speech in 2002. Ten years later the ashes of the Arab Spring are fluttering over American embassies and consulates. Mitt Romney has proposed economic reform instead of political reform as his prescription for change, but it is not likely that reforming Muslim economies will work any better than reforming their governments did.
As in the fable of the blind men and the elephant, each of our blind doctors steps up to feel the ten-ton elephant of Muslim violence and offers his proposed philosophical cure. The blindness of the doctors is in their Western preconceptions which prevent them from seeing the huge beast as anything but a conglomerate of familiar parts. One of the blind doctors sees a lack of democracy and another sees a lack of free enterprise, and they prescribe what they think is lacking in the Muslim world.
Their false sense of familiarity with the Muslim world, akin to the linguistic false friends that deceive us into thinking that a familiar foreign word is the counterpart of a word in our own language, leads them to see the East as the West with a few missing spots that need to be filled in. But the Muslim world cannot be fixed by attempting to graft on a few Western institutions; if it were that easy then British and French colonialism would have already fixed the Middle East.
The Muslim world is not in need of political reform; or rather it has no ability to make any meaningful use of such reforms. Trying to cut open the Muslim world to insert some tubes of democracy inside it is as futile and destructive as trying to run 13th Century England by the legal and moral standards of 21st Century England. The results would have been much the same as those of the equivalent modern attempts in the Muslim world.
What the Muslim world needs is moral reform, not political reform. Without moral reform, political reform empowers the people to be at their worst while they take refuge in the magical thinking that justice will come from an Islamic order, rather than from accountable government and common ethics.
Moral reform is not a problem that can be solved on a timetable or seen through a microscope. It cannot be exported by armies or achieved through social media protests. The Muslim world's problems cannot be solved by Western professionals promoting reform or integration. They can only be solved by Muslims taking moral responsibility for their own behavior.
That does not mean that we should abandon hope for the reform of the Muslim world, but like a cousin with a drug problem we should keep it at arm's length until it stops its abusive behavior and gets its own house in order.
Reader comments on this item
|Media's grip on morality [79 words]||Murray||Oct 10, 2012 12:54|
|This is dangerous [140 words]||Shlomi||Oct 9, 2012 17:04|
|↔ Response to Ms. Shlomi [240 words]||Jerry Kontim||Oct 26, 2012 04:44|
|Islam inhibits moral development [122 words]||Mike Wood||Oct 7, 2012 16:16|
|Reforming the Middle East - moral reforms of Muslims [193 words]||Jerry Kontim||Oct 6, 2012 16:09|
|Excellent [9 words]||D.J.||Oct 6, 2012 00:46|
|This is expected [173 words]||Horace Kindler||Oct 5, 2012 13:11|
|↔ Islam is itself immoral [61 words]||Sally Wilton||Oct 21, 2012 19:57|
|BRILLIANT! [71 words]||The Infidel Alliance||Oct 5, 2012 11:02|
|Arm's length [30 words]||Don||Oct 5, 2012 05:16|
Comment on this item
by Burak Bekdil
Where Turkey stands today is a perfect example of how, when Islamists -- mild or otherwise -- rule a county, even the most basic liberties are systematically suppressed.
"A climate of fear has emerged in Turkey." — Hasam Kilic, President, Turkey's Constitutional Court.
The prosecutor demanded a heavier penalty for the victim than for her torturers.
The European Commission identified government interference in the judiciary and bans imposed on social media as the major sources of concern regarding Turkey's candidacy for full membership.
by Khaled Abu Toameh
To understand what drives a young Palestinian to carry out such a deadly attack, one needs to look at the statements of Palestinian Authority leaders during the past few weeks.
The anti-Israel campaign of incitement reached its peak with Abbas's speech at the UN a few weeks ago, when he accused Israel of waging a "war of genocide" in the Gaza Strip. Abbas made no reference to Hamas's crimes against both Israelis and Palestinians.
Whatever his motives, it is clear that the man who carried out the most recent attack, was influenced by the messages that Abbas and the Palestinian Authority leadership have been sending their people.
by Richard Kemp
Would General Allen -- or any other general today -- recommend contracting out his country's defenses if it were his country at stake? Of course not.
The Iranian regime remains dedicated to undermining and ultimately destroying the State of Israel. The Islamic State also has Israel in its sights and would certainly use the West Bank as a point from which to attack, if it were open to them.
There can be no two-state solution and no sovereign Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan, however desirable those things might be. The stark military reality is that Israel cannot withdraw its forces from the West Bank.
Fatah leaders ally themselves with the terrorists of Hamas, and, like Hamas, they continue to reject the every existence of the State of Israel.
If Western leaders actually want to help, they should use all diplomatic and economic means to make it clear to the Palestinians that they will never achieve an independent and sovereign state while they remain set on the destruction of the State of Israel.
by Louis René Beres
The Palestine Liberation Organization [PLO], forerunner of today's Palestinian Authority, was founded in 1964, three years before Israel came into the unintended control of the West Bank and Gaza. What therefore was the PLO planning to "liberate"?
Why does no one expect the Palestinians to cease all deliberate and random violence against Israeli civilians before being considered for admission to statehood?
On June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States endorsed a "Mandate for Palestine," confirming the right of Jews to settle anywhere they chose between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. This is the core American legacy of support for a Jewish State that President Obama now somehow fails to recall.
A sovereign state of Palestine, as identified by the Arabs -- a Muslim land occupied by "Palestinian" Arabs -- has never existed; not before 1948, and not before 1967. From the start, it was, and continues to be, the Arab states -- not Israel -- that became the core impediment to Palestinian sovereignty.
by Timon Dias
It looks as if this new law is meant to serve as a severe roadblock to parties that would like to dismantle the EU in a democratic and peaceful way from within.
A rather dull semantic trick pro-EU figures usually apply, is calling their opponents "anti-Europe."