Comment Gone Lengthy, CGL VI. *Very long post, even by my standards*

(Refernce: Comment box, CGL V.)

BAQ, thank you again for your valuable comments on the previous post. A reply to over 20 fragmented comments would invariably have come in the form of another 20 odd comments, if not more, and for the convenience of the chance reader of this blog, I have decided to post my reply as a new post. You have covered a lot of ground, and I wonder where I should start from?

Shall we start by stating out the objective of the original discussion? Having gone through your comments rather diligently I feel that my premise for the whole discussion was misunderstood, and my comments often completely misinterpreted. I cannot help but agree with almost everything you have had to say, yet because a lot of it comes on the back of misconstrued opinion, it is not completely germane, and I feel obliged to offer a few clarifications.

The objective of this post, or the comments that followed, was never to absolve the US of its crimes against the many peoples of the world. It was to shed some light on the oft criticized propensity of many fellow Muslim brethren to take severe note of, and issue strict reprimand for the actions of the US when they transgress the morals of humanity; but not to show the same fervor when reprimanding similar actions by people from our nation. Quite a different proposition, you will agree, from discussing the merits and demerits of a certain civilization.

Why does a US criminal act against our people elicit a more animated outcry from us? Yet, we hardly ever go up in arms against similar, or sometimes even worst atrocities, committed by our own people, and ironically on our own people. Why does it seem to give the impression that we are more comfortable being wronged by our own people? Isn't a crime just that - a crime? Does it matter who commits it?

By drawing a comparison between the present day civilizations of both the West and Islam, I had sought to underline the fact that the Americans as well as the Western world are doing at least some things right, while we are not doing anything right. This is the reason they are ahead of us in so many fields. I did not advocate blatant aping of the West, but merely wanted to highlight areas where we could learn from the West. One can, and actually will, always argue that the values, which are instrumental in putting the West ahead of us, are those espoused by Islam, and hence we should follow Islam in spirit. Well, I have two comebacks for that - first of all, isn't it a given anyway that as Muslims, we follow these values and teachings? Second, how many of our people actually follow those teachings? Worse, how many will follow these teachings after this implied, yet deceptively candid, admission that if we follow these teachings we could excel also?

Because we are talking of the values, which have helped propel these societies into world leadership, we are obviously not talking of the shortcomings of these nations. I know as well as you do that the US is not leading the world, because it has one of the highest crime rates in the developed and developing world, or because a mockery has been made out of the institution of marriage in the country. I do not need to be told that emancipation of women from their clothing; rampant drug abuse, domestic violence and many other ills that plague the American society have had no part to play in the development of the US Civilization. So, if we delve into these details, we are obviously digressing.

Our failures, ADMITTED OR NOT, are failures; failures that continue to haunt our daily lives. They cannot just be brushed aside - not when they can be addressed and rectified immediately. Unfortunately, we are quick to move on to condemnation of others after our own candid admission - as if this admission absolves us from the crime of having failed to follow the way of life we were ordained to adopt. Ironically, what would propel us to prosperity, and pull us out of our misery is not the blind and rhetorical condemnation of others, but an active interest in, and a direct effort at addressing these ADMITTED failures as you call them.

The objective, therefore, was to categorically state on the one hand that there is no justification for our people to treat or react to a crime differently based on the nationality and religion of the perpetrator, thus implying that when the criminals are from our ranks, we should take as much exception to their crimes as we do to US actions against our brethren; and more importantly, to show on the other hand that part of the reason the US actions elicit a stronger reaction from our circles as well as from world over is that the world looks up to the US nation because of the importance this nation attaches to the right ideals (Freedom, Liberty, Equality, Peace, Compassion...)

The world, therefore, least expects this nation to perpetrate such cruelty and such atrocities, especially with such disregard for international opinion. So, when this nation does stoop to bombing of entire nations on fabricated pretences, the world loses a sizeable chunk of hope in the future of the world. The whole world becomes apprehensive, and afraid.

It is simple to see why. If an acknowledged and self proclaimed savior of human values, however dismal its record in defending and upholding these values be, itself regresses into a remorseless monster, there is little one can expect from the already less humane people of the world, people who do not even have any pretensions of being morally correct. If you delve into the dismal record of this nation's colonial past, you will be surprised to know that even when the US forces were committing the worst outrages in Korea, Vietnam Chile, Iraq, and Afghanistan, to name but a few, the Americans genuinely believed that their forces were liberating the very people they were attacking. Stupid? Yes, very.

However, please understand that I am not defending the stupidity of a nation that buys wholesale into the excuses and farces its government presents in defense of its heinous acts elsewhere. I just wish to highlight the fact that as naive as they may be, these people have to be sold the idea that their government is doing the "right thing" before their governments go out and do the "right thing". The "right thing" the Americans often think their Government is doing is almost always different from the "right thing" the American Government has often actually done.

We are therefore talking about two different topics, hence the mutual feeling that the other digresses. You talk of the American history, the actions of the Americans affecting the world, and the moral decay reflected in rampant marital infidelity, sexual anarchy, domestic violence, and such.

I talk about the fact that the American people do actually believe that they should stand by the right thing, and are willing to offer their sons in doing that right thing for another nation. No American government has gone to its people, and told them the real motive of its latest invasion of a country. Even the crazy cow boy does not just stand up and admit that there is a lot of Oil to be had in the Middle East, that the Jew agenda needs to be carried out by the American stooges, that there will be monetary, financial and commercial benefits (Booty?) for the nation if it goes on rampage on another nation. He wouldn't be able to sell a war to his people if he did not tell them that they were doing the right thing - standing up for lofted ideals.

We can again throw a tangent here and digress into debating why do the American people buy into such blatant lies. However, it could only be pertinent to discuss if we could establish that the American public actually is discerning and knows the truth, is aware of the farcical pretences presented to them by their government to attack other countries, and yet lends its support to the government's actions and atrocities. You and I both know this is not true.

I have seen many a fool on Faramin's and Laura's blogs who thinks Bush and Co. are doing the noble thing in Iraq in "trying to bring true democracy, liberty, freedom, peace and what not" by bombing the country into oblivion. My discussion is not on how naive and media-affected (read infected) these people are, neither is it an attempt at justifying anything. My discussion is just highlighting the point that here is nation who if led to believe is doing the right thing, will do the right thing, and will be ready to bear the costs. Can the same be said about our nations?

You have often criticized the American nation for giving a second term to butcher Bush, but you have failed to extol the virtue of the nation half of which voted against bB. We cannot point fingers at them when our own people elected the likes of Nawaz Sharrif and Benzir Bhutto twice, and would gladly elect one of them for the third time, despite the fact that each had plundered the nation each time he/she was elected to office in the past.

The discussion, as I have explained was not about the merits/demerits of the American civilization. It was more a comparison of the present day American Civilization with ours. A comparison meant to bring out and highlight aspects where the Americans excel, and because of which are expected to be more responsible, and held more accountable. I do not think I need to defend myself against your charge of wizardry after the above clarifications. You will agree there were no diversionary tactics of the magician employed at any point. I think I have also fairly established that at no point did I wish to present any justifications for any of the US government's actions.

In the end I would like to sum up the discussion with a few specific clarifications for your comments. To make matters less ambiguous, I have colored your comments in blue, any of my comments you quoted in green, and have stuck to black for my own clarifications.

"Because at the end of the day, their leadership and their media consist of their own people..."

"So, now we have a full implication that the American people and their government and their media are all inherently ONE in this whole drama by any means!"

Not exactly what I had meant. All I was trying to say was that because the American leadership and media institutions are run by their fellow Americans, Americans are not skeptical of what they are told by these people, and that it contrasts sharply with the state of affairs at our own end where we take everything our leaders and media tell us with a pinch of salt, if not a handful of salt. The difference in attitude stems from a people's view of themselves. You have found a completely different implication in my statement.

"So if that's the progress we are talking about where the most educated fools are routinely produced from the best universities in the world, we wouldn't want such progress for our children, would we now?"

The progress I was talking about was one of going from a genocidal nation responsible for wiping out the native Americans to a nation willing to sacrifice its own in the name of upholding the freedom and liberty of others; of a nation unrepentantly "licking" people for their color growing into a nation that is exceedingly watchful of any discrimination on the basis of colour; and of a nation capable of putting its own president on trial for having an illicit affair. You may respectively argue that US actions have seldom brought freedom and liberty to a people, or that racism is still a reality in the US, or that putting a president on trial was more a political circus than anything else. But then you will miss my point again - the point being that the people of America on all three counts could not be found in the wrong. They will lend their genuine support to an action once convinced that it is for the betterment of another people, they will always be watchful of racism, and they were able to put their own president in the stand for what was or was not a crime. I hope you see the distinction I make.

Secondly, you may hold the view that the universities churn out the most wel-educated fools in the world, yet it remains a fact that a seat in these universities is coveted world over, that these universities churn out world leaders in various fields including Sciences, Arts, Literature, Music, Medicine, Economics, Psychiatry and Philosophy. You have yourself admitted these universities do provide an excellent education. If we wouldn't want such progress for our children, why pray do we continue to strive day and night to get them into these universities?

You make some very interesting observations in your reminders also, and I have a lot to add in that department, but given that this post is already exceedingly lengthy, let me try and limit my queries to just a few lines.

"Ever since, and because of weaker military capacities, at least in part, they lost out their nations one after the other to the inhuman, colonialist movement of the Europeans..."

And what do you think brought about the weakness in our military capacities when we were at the zenith? I would think it was our deviation from the ordained path, infighting, power struggles and distortion of the Islamic way of life. Who is to be blamed for this?

"So much so that it was the science and technology developed by the Muslims that became the guiding light that brought Europe out of the darkness and gloom of its 'Dark Ages'. "

This, I think, is a flawed argument. Actually, the implications of this argument are flawed. Often, our people present this argument implying that the West’s progress in the fields of science and technology would not have been possible without the contributions of Muslims. Well, a lot of scientific progress had been made by the earlier civilizations too, on whose work the Muslim scholars had based their work. Achievements of Muslim scholars and scientists in no way diminish the progress their western counterparts of later centuries made, just as the advancements in the previous civilizations take nothing away from the Muslim luminaries of the past. My question is much simpler: What kept from Muslims from benefiting from this "guiding light" themselves?

"The vices you mention are not only rampant in the US, they are equally there in our societies. The worst part is those vices are not all vices by definition in the US society, but they are so in ours. Moral and legal transgressions - and yet our societies indulge in many of them en masse."

"It must be confessed that at no point in Islamic history was there ever an entire community of Muslims who were regarded as immaculate angels by any standards. Not even was this so in the time of the Prophet for he had to contend with the hypocrites and the doubters within the community himself...."

I had not meant to make the unrealistic declaration that the Muslim society is totally free of all vices, though I believe an ideal one should be as close as possible. I am just drawing your attention to the fact that while we are quick to crucify the western societies for the moral debacle, we seem to forget that the very same vices are rampant in our societies. What is more, the western societies have removed the immoral or illegal tag from most of these vices, while in our societies they are still considered immoral and illegal. Hence while they are moral (or at least not morally offensive) and legal in the western society, they are immoral and illegal in our societies, looked down upon officially, yet these same vices are equally rampant in our societies. The emphasis again is on the fact that we are neither moral nor law abiding, so it does not do to point fingers at others.

"Add to this the fact that the western media, in its attractive projection of immorality directly into homes in third world countries, and we have one of the greatest moral catastrophes in man's history taking place right in front of our eyes. "

This fact might be mitigated simply by taking the decision not to watch Western media. We are not forced to watch these "Immoral" programs, and the West does not specifically make them for us. The brunt of responsibility thus we must bear.

'you are the best of communities raised up for mankind, (since) you encourage the Good and prohibit the Evil. And you believe in God.'

So all said and done, while we believe in God as one must, the developed nations at least at the people’s level seem to be doing the encouraging the good and prohibiting the evil part as one must.

  ¶ 12/02/2004 03:00:00 AM