- 28 Oct 2017 12:58
#14856763
@Oxymandias my ideas might well be described as opinion or interpretation. It is a process in understanding. I’m not sure I have completely achieved an understanding of Western politics quite yet. But I don’t seem to be able to give up on this thinking.
Given your primary concern is your own nation’s fate (which is fine. I think the same way), this is mainly of acedemic interest to you. To me, I am concerned about Western ideologies as those ideologies do impact everyday life for many people around the world and directly effects the balance of political power within my own country. And, as a result, I feel it necessary to contest those ideas.
Having established intention, there will be a noticeable degree of bias in my views consistent with challenging status quo thinking.
If we look closely at the people who want to attack Iran, we find that there are among them people who present themselves as progressive rather than conservative. Hillary Clinton, for example. She well represents what I mean by the supposed left actually being centre right. She claims to represent the liberal humanist ideal of emancipation for women, yet she has followed an aggressive foreign policy involving some serious strategic blunders such as the attack on Libya. She is really a neocon. But it does show that those who hold power in the West are both liberal progressive and aggressive hegemonists.
On a different tac, let’s look at the idea many on this forum seem to support of a Westernised Islam. They want to see women as Imams, acceptance of gays, etc. in short an Islam that is an expression of those liberal progressive values espoused by people such as Clinton. Now I don’t see anything wrong with the idea of female Imams, after all there have been historically and are today female scholars. On the face of it, this seems OK. But in practice, since it is Western liberal progressivism we are talking about here, the result will be the same as with other applications of this belief system. The social structure will be inverted and males will suffer. The idea being to isolate and marginalise any potential resistance to the doctrine.
For all their talk of fairness and equality, the result is always a jump from one extreme to the other. The reason, in my opinion, is that they are motivated by a desire for power rather than justice. This is unavoidable for them as the belief system is hegemonic. It is, after all, the moral legitimation of contemporary Western power which this belief system is structured. Which is why you will find plenty of American generals and strategy experts espousing these beliefs. It’s also why supposed conservatives get upset with Trump, as he threatens to destroy their favourite soft power instrument.
And I make the outrageous claim that this progressive liberal ideology is analogous to Salafism. Well, both are hegemonic belief systems aimed to replace all other beliefs systems, and thus unable to accept alternatives. They are both totalitarian, involving penetration of every day life and reorganising relations between people. Both ideologies are about total control for those who preside over those belief systems.
So I suggest caution when it comes to dealing with those on this forum who like the idea of a Westernised Islam, Westenised as in a progressive liberal sense. Just because they sound supportive of Muslims doesn’t mean they are better than those who are critical of Islam. Really, what they want would just be an exercise in appropriating Islamic form as another means of advancing a hegemonic liberal agenda. Rejecting Salafism in favour of progressive liberalism is “jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire”.