Islamic Values Negate the Emergence of New Muslim Middleclass, September 18, 2009 By moorthy Mutuswamy
courtesy: http://www.amazon.com/review/RM117YG5ZI23H
This review is from: Forces of Fortune: The Rise of the New Muslim Middle Class and What It Will Mean for Our World
Vali Nasr has proposed that "it is the rise of capitalism and trade that ultimately made for the success of modernity and democracy and market-based economies in the West. We should trust the same forces that transformed the modern West to transform the Muslim world."
However, for the success of capitalism or trade, a society or nation must be willing to embrace modern education. But Nasr has failed to note that in country after country in the Islamic world, the Islamic value system comes in the way of the successful embrace of modern education in order to create a middleclass that would be the driving force behind the transformation.
This failure makes Nasr's work not particularly credible or meaningful.
India and Pakistan evolved in divergent directions observes Nasr, but fails to adequately explain why. India and Pakistan were created from the same landmass in 1947, and share language, religion, ethnicity and culinary habits. Nasr has overlooked the reality that Pakistan's identification with Islam and the consequent emphasis on the Islamic doctrines acting as the "guiding force" is the only thing that could explain why Pakistan has become a Sharia-shrine and a fountainhead of jihad and terror. In other words, Pakistan invested in Islam, not in modern education.
India has an educated and thriving middleclass, thanks to investing in modern education.
Nasr is hardly convincing in his efforts to showcase the emerging Turkey as a successful marriage of Islam and Capitalism. He has failed to note that the secularists who ruled Turkey for the better part of the last century worked to deliberately downplay its Islamic character and likely made the nurturing and embrace of modern education by millions of Turks possible. Without this education, the emergence of the middleclass-based economic force in Turkey is simply not feasible - a critical point missed by Nasr.
It is true that the ruling secularists in Turkey were not capitalists, but the new rulers in the form of the Islamic Party are. Since this regime came to power in 2002, the nation has averaged 6.5 percent economic growth, compared to the average growth of 2.5 percent in the previous six years under a secular regime.
However, secularists are capable of embracing capitalism. For instance, in India, economic reforms or capitalism was embraced for the first time by secularists.
But the question is whether the Islamic conservatives in Turkey are capable of embracing secular values in the long-term, as opposed to the outdated Islamic values -- which discourage the embrace of modern education and development. For instance, in Britain, the second-generation Muslims there have fallen behind in every measure of development (including education) due to the increasing exposure to the "Islamic values" funded by the Middle Eastern petrodollars.
In fact, in many ways, the ruling Islamic party (the Justice and Development Party) in Turkey at the present time has been systematically promoting Islamism through various means, and undermining the social and the accompanying educational progress achieved for decades. For instance, this party's support for the establishment of religious schools has meant that political Islam is increasingly taught to Turkey's children. This should result in the gradual Islamization of the country and undermining of capitalism and the middleclass.
Dubai's has been an historical trading center in the Middle East. It also benefited from being surrounded by nations which have seen an extraordinary boom in oil revenues (a form of unearned wealth). A good part of the $1.6 trillion earned by the surrounding nations between the years 2001-2007, including by Saudi Arabia, got invested in Dubai. Manufacturing, which has been behind the rise of successful capitalism and wealth creation in all nations, is almost non-existent there. For all of the above reasons, the spectacular rise of Dubai is unlikely to be reproduced in most nations.
More Islamic values in the form of implementing various degrees of the outdated Sharia, which reflects the custom of the Arab tribes of the bygone era, shifts the focus away from development and the embrace of modern education. When 61 percent of the Koran either speaks ill of unbelievers or calls for their violent conquest and subjugation, but only 2.6 percent of the Koran speaks about the overall good of humanity (published by Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam), increasing its exposure is certain not to create conditions for trade with unbelievers or to learn from them. Indeed, the modern Islam-based terrorism itself could be seen as a consequence of the spread of Islamic doctrines, thanks to the backing of billions of petrodollars.
Statistics do not back Nasr when he claims that "fundamentalist strain of Islam is not practiced [in the Middle East] by the vast majority of the population." These are at best convenient opinions not backed by data. As noted before, fundamentalist strain, not the moderate strain constitutes the main body of the Islamic doctrines themselves. The same holds for his claim that "the vast majority of Muslims are moderate and pragmatic when it comes to religion."
Careful study would have shown that Islamic values come in the way of embracing modern education. This, in the end, limits the Islamic world's embrace of capitalism.
Ninth year into the dastardly 9/11 attacks, and after spending about a trillion dollars and losing our precious lives we can hardly afford the kind of deeply flawed analysis Nasr has produced. Unfortunately, this book is poised to deflect the much-needed attention on where our focus should be: the hateful thrust of the Islamic doctrines that are spawning terror and repressing the Muslim societies.
However, for the success of capitalism or trade, a society or nation must be willing to embrace modern education. But Nasr has failed to note that in country after country in the Islamic world, the Islamic value system comes in the way of the successful embrace of modern education in order to create a middleclass that would be the driving force behind the transformation.
This failure makes Nasr's work not particularly credible or meaningful.
India and Pakistan evolved in divergent directions observes Nasr, but fails to adequately explain why. India and Pakistan were created from the same landmass in 1947, and share language, religion, ethnicity and culinary habits. Nasr has overlooked the reality that Pakistan's identification with Islam and the consequent emphasis on the Islamic doctrines acting as the "guiding force" is the only thing that could explain why Pakistan has become a Sharia-shrine and a fountainhead of jihad and terror. In other words, Pakistan invested in Islam, not in modern education.
India has an educated and thriving middleclass, thanks to investing in modern education.
Nasr is hardly convincing in his efforts to showcase the emerging Turkey as a successful marriage of Islam and Capitalism. He has failed to note that the secularists who ruled Turkey for the better part of the last century worked to deliberately downplay its Islamic character and likely made the nurturing and embrace of modern education by millions of Turks possible. Without this education, the emergence of the middleclass-based economic force in Turkey is simply not feasible - a critical point missed by Nasr.
It is true that the ruling secularists in Turkey were not capitalists, but the new rulers in the form of the Islamic Party are. Since this regime came to power in 2002, the nation has averaged 6.5 percent economic growth, compared to the average growth of 2.5 percent in the previous six years under a secular regime.
However, secularists are capable of embracing capitalism. For instance, in India, economic reforms or capitalism was embraced for the first time by secularists.
But the question is whether the Islamic conservatives in Turkey are capable of embracing secular values in the long-term, as opposed to the outdated Islamic values -- which discourage the embrace of modern education and development. For instance, in Britain, the second-generation Muslims there have fallen behind in every measure of development (including education) due to the increasing exposure to the "Islamic values" funded by the Middle Eastern petrodollars.
In fact, in many ways, the ruling Islamic party (the Justice and Development Party) in Turkey at the present time has been systematically promoting Islamism through various means, and undermining the social and the accompanying educational progress achieved for decades. For instance, this party's support for the establishment of religious schools has meant that political Islam is increasingly taught to Turkey's children. This should result in the gradual Islamization of the country and undermining of capitalism and the middleclass.
Dubai's has been an historical trading center in the Middle East. It also benefited from being surrounded by nations which have seen an extraordinary boom in oil revenues (a form of unearned wealth). A good part of the $1.6 trillion earned by the surrounding nations between the years 2001-2007, including by Saudi Arabia, got invested in Dubai. Manufacturing, which has been behind the rise of successful capitalism and wealth creation in all nations, is almost non-existent there. For all of the above reasons, the spectacular rise of Dubai is unlikely to be reproduced in most nations.
More Islamic values in the form of implementing various degrees of the outdated Sharia, which reflects the custom of the Arab tribes of the bygone era, shifts the focus away from development and the embrace of modern education. When 61 percent of the Koran either speaks ill of unbelievers or calls for their violent conquest and subjugation, but only 2.6 percent of the Koran speaks about the overall good of humanity (published by Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam), increasing its exposure is certain not to create conditions for trade with unbelievers or to learn from them. Indeed, the modern Islam-based terrorism itself could be seen as a consequence of the spread of Islamic doctrines, thanks to the backing of billions of petrodollars.
Statistics do not back Nasr when he claims that "fundamentalist strain of Islam is not practiced [in the Middle East] by the vast majority of the population." These are at best convenient opinions not backed by data. As noted before, fundamentalist strain, not the moderate strain constitutes the main body of the Islamic doctrines themselves. The same holds for his claim that "the vast majority of Muslims are moderate and pragmatic when it comes to religion."
Careful study would have shown that Islamic values come in the way of embracing modern education. This, in the end, limits the Islamic world's embrace of capitalism.
Ninth year into the dastardly 9/11 attacks, and after spending about a trillion dollars and losing our precious lives we can hardly afford the kind of deeply flawed analysis Nasr has produced. Unfortunately, this book is poised to deflect the much-needed attention on where our focus should be: the hateful thrust of the Islamic doctrines that are spawning terror and repressing the Muslim societies.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment