What
about Us?
We demand that people care about
us, that you notice our suffering and help us end it, but how much do we care
about others and their suffering, even if our ability to help is limited? Yes, the world may
not have paid enough attention to the Beirut bombings, but how much
attention did Lebanese and Arabs pay to the attack on Garissa
University in Kenya? And how
much attention is the world currently giving to the massacre of 2,000 civilians
killed by Boko Haram over the last few days, and the
suicide bombing that just took place? And what was the global reaction to the
killing by the Egyptian army of unarmed Sudanese refugees near the border with
Israel? And the
current conflict in Burundi which no one is talking about? And… And…
We all pay far more attention to
what happens to the rich and powerful and to their adventures and misadventures
than we do to the poor and downtrodden. The Middle East is only important on
account of the interests that the powerful nations of this world have there. In
itself, it’s insignificant and forgettable, its diversity, human potential and
rich history notwithstanding. This damn macabre fascination and obsession with
power and the powerful, this collective lack of empathy, this lingering
tribalistic tendency still buried deep in our conscientiousness, and perhaps in
the very structure of our DNA, is all too human I’m afraid, for better or
worse.
*
Organized
Crime vs. Organized Terrorism
We’re fascinated by organized
crime, and its psychopathic bosses, and horrified by terrorism, but the former
kills more people and destroys more lives than the latter. It’s all in the
staging. Terrorists advertise their operations and their ethos, and revel in
them. Therefore, in certain localities around the world, Jihadis can play the
romantic role that mobsters do in American lore. Organized crime bosses, on the
other hand, prefer to maintain low key profile. It’s better for business you
see. There are exceptions of course, as Hollywood keeps reminding us, but there
is nothing romantic about either activity, especially today as bonds and ties
between them, and between and dictatorial regimes, grow more and more intimate.
Terrorism is growth industry with billions of dollars poured into it every
year. But it’s a unique industry where the returns expect by the direct
entrepreneurs involved are not material or financial. How can the psychopathic
lot running organized crimes resist the temptation of partnering with such
investors, where they are only expected to provide certain “services?”
*
ISIS
Is Not Waging a War against Western Civilization. Or is it? Now I
understand and applaud Peter Beinart’s motives for writing this peace, and he
makes many good arguments meant to school Marco Rubio. In this, he does a good
job. But the title of the article dos give me pause, because, ultimately, and
as hard it is to believe considering the balance of power involved, IS/Daesh is
waging war against Western civilization. The fact that everybody uses the Daesh
label for their own purposes sometimes, from the Assad regime, to the Iranian
Mullahs, to Turkish security services, to their Saudi counterparts, does not
meant that Daesh’s core leadership does not have its own mind, vision and plan.
But, irrespective of all this, there could be no clash of civilizations for two
reasons: one, Daesh is a fringe fascist group that could not even represent
Muslims, not to mention a civilization; and, two, what other civilization are
we talking about here? Can anyone really see in the here-and-now a civilization
other than Western civilization? But to understand this point, we need to ask
first, what is civilization, at least to me?
Civilization: A complex
network of institutions, political, military, economic, financial, social,
religious, cultural and educational, that seeks to influence and regulate the
customs and manners of multiple peoples far beyond the borders of the
geographic entities hosting these institutions. This definition, I believe,
makes clear that Western civilization is the only civilization at this stage,
its influence on customs and manners is global. Even rejectionist cultures are
heavily influenced by it as they offer no real alternative to its institutions,
and often replicated them as they are with minor changes in nomenclature. More
dramatic differences are noticeable in the realm of cultural and religious
practices, but even here, western influence can be seen in variety of ways:
manner of dress, choice of music, calls for reforming or even abashing certain
cultural and religious practices, with people often changing their habits and
ways in manner that reflect western influence even if they are unconscious of
the fact, or unwilling to acknowledge it.
The current global competition we
witnessing today is more of an interest-based conflict, with ideology, often
rejectionist in nature drawing heavily on nationalist, cultural and religious
terminology, playing a mobilizing role. But the knowhow and institutions
involved in this conflict, barring certain appearances and differences in
nomenclature, are all Western-inspired. Rejectionism matters little. Ideology
is merely a functional cover, even if the ideologue is not aware of this.
The reality is simple: we live in
an almost thoroughly Westernized world, a fact that shouldn’t matter much for
those who understand how this came about. In a series of small haphazard steps,
the West became open to input from other civilizations, as its scholars
examined them, and their own, as objectively as they could, over a long period
of time, and repeated reassessments, finally allowing for input from members of
those cultures we all. In time, however, Western knowhow and philosophy
developed to the point where it was almost exclusively relying on input from
Western scholars, as input from others became too dated. With this, Western
civilization became the dominant civilization, then, with the collapse of the
Ottoman, Persian, Chinese and Russian empires, it became the only civilization,
a global civilization, the legitimate heir of all previous civilizations, and
more. An alternative has to be elaborated from within. Only by embracing its
values can we truly aspire to perfect it. Perfection is perfectibility.
No comments:
Post a Comment