Battle around secularism in the Arab world?

[Something completely different]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23700663

The situation in Egypt is getting worse and worse, it seems as if a civil war is only a few steps away of becoming reality.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/worl...16137.html

At the same time tentions in Tunisia between secular and islamist forces are rising aswell.



It seems as if after the Arab spring, the next hurdle to be overcome in the Arab world is a conflict between secular and islamist forces, not just over the question of rule itslef but over the structures of society.

[Chas]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23700663

The situation in Egypt is getting worse and worse, it seems as if a civil war is only a few steps away of becoming reality.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/worl...16137.html

At the same time tentions in Tunisia between secular and islamist forces are rising aswell.



It seems as if after the Arab spring, the next hurdle to be overcome in the Arab world is a conflict between secular and islamist forces, not just over the question of rule itslef but over the structures of society.

Well, isn't it about time? Really, they have to work out whether they want to be modern or medieval.

[Minimalist]

One has to look back in history in the West to find the point where reason triumphed over dogma. As can be expected, it was the excesses of religion which proved their downfall. Between 1618 and 1648 Europe was ripped by the 30 Years War.

http://www.history.com/topics/thirty-years-war

The cost, however, had proved enormous. Perhaps 20 percent of Germany's total population perished during the war, with losses of up to 50 percent along a corridor running from Pomerania in the Baltic to the Black Forest. Villages suffered worse than towns, but many towns and cities also saw their populations, manufacture, and trade decline substantially. It constituted the worst catastrophe to afflict Germany until World War II. On the other hand, the conflict helped to end the age of religious wars. Although religious issues retained political importance after 1648 (for instance, in creating an alliance in the 1680s against Louis XIV), they no longer dominated international alignments. Those German princes, mostly Calvinists, who fought against Ferdinand II in the 1620s were strongly influenced by confessional considerations, and as long as they dominated the anti-Hapsburg cause, so too did the issue of religion. But because they failed to secure a lasting settlement, the task of defending the "Protestant cause" gradually fell into the hands of Lutherans, who proved willing to ally (if necessary) with Catholic France and Orthodox Russia in order to create a coalition capable of defeating the Hapsburgs. After 1630 the role of religion in European politics receded. This was, perhaps, the greatest achievement of the Thirty Years' War, for it thus eliminated a major destabilizing influence in European politics, which had both undermined the internal cohesion of many states and overturned the diplomatic balance of power created during the Renaissance.

Not coincidentally, the horrors of the 30 Years War which ended in 1648 led to the Enlightenment which is generally dated to 1650.

The Arab world is going through the same problem. There are religious fanatics who are willing to kill anyone who wishes to stop them from dragging everyone back to the 11th century and there are secularists who want to join the rest of the world in the 21st. I doubt they will do this without massive bloodshed any more than the West was able to do. Sadly, enough blood has to be shed so that people stop listening to the religious assholes. How much blood that takes is up to them.

Egypt is an excellent example of an islamic state without oil money to gloss over its failure to move into the modern world. It is up to the progressives to stand up to the ignorant. Same as it is here in the US.

[kılıç_mehmet]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23700663

The situation in Egypt is getting worse and worse, it seems as if a civil war is only a few steps away of becoming reality.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/worl...16137.html

At the same time tentions in Tunisia between secular and islamist forces are rising aswell.



It seems as if after the Arab spring, the next hurdle to be overcome in the Arab world is a conflict between secular and islamist forces, not just over the question of rule itslef but over the structures of society.

Well, there are "islamist forces" in those countries, true, but I'm not sure about an exclusive "secularist force".
Most people who define themselves as "secularists" are generally people who wish to enjoy life without being restricted by religious laws, they do not really follow any set of real ideals. They generally run away from such conflicts, or just hide, and conform with the outcome.
There is a force in Egypt and Tunisia that battles the Islamists, and they might be secular in nature, but I believe that they're simply less-islamist than the others.

Arabs are a people that love to kill eachother. I generally accept it as that.
If either the Islamists or the "other forces" win, then the battle will be fought over tribal associations.

[Minimalist]

I believe that they're simply less-islamist than the others.

Baby steps, Mehmet. You have to break the stranglehold of the clerics as a start.

[Anomalocaris]

One has to look back in history in the West to find the point where reason triumphed over dogma. As can be expected, it was the excesses of religion which proved their downfall. Between 1618 and 1648 Europe was ripped by the 30 Years War.

http://www.history.com/topics/thirty-years-war

The cost, however, had proved enormous. Perhaps 20 percent of Germany's total population perished during the war, with losses of up to 50 percent along a corridor running from Pomerania in the Baltic to the Black Forest. Villages suffered worse than towns, but many towns and cities also saw their populations, manufacture, and trade decline substantially. It constituted the worst catastrophe to afflict Germany until World War II. On the other hand, the conflict helped to end the age of religious wars. Although religious issues retained political importance after 1648 (for instance, in creating an alliance in the 1680s against Louis XIV), they no longer dominated international alignments. Those German princes, mostly Calvinists, who fought against Ferdinand II in the 1620s were strongly influenced by confessional considerations, and as long as they dominated the anti-Hapsburg cause, so too did the issue of religion. But because they failed to secure a lasting settlement, the task of defending the "Protestant cause" gradually fell into the hands of Lutherans, who proved willing to ally (if necessary) with Catholic France and Orthodox Russia in order to create a coalition capable of defeating the Hapsburgs. After 1630 the role of religion in European politics receded. This was, perhaps, the greatest achievement of the Thirty Years' War, for it thus eliminated a major destabilizing influence in European politics, which had both undermined the internal cohesion of many states and overturned the diplomatic balance of power created during the Renaissance.

Not coincidentally, the horrors of the 30 Years War which ended in 1648 led to the Enlightenment which is generally dated to 1650.

The Arab world is going through the same problem. There are religious fanatics who are willing to kill anyone who wishes to stop them from dragging everyone back to the 11th century and there are secularists who want to join the rest of the world in the 21st. I doubt they will do this without massive bloodshed any more than the West was able to do. Sadly, enough blood has to be shed so that people stop listening to the religious assholes. How much blood that takes is up to them.

Egypt is an excellent example of an islamic state without oil money to gloss over its failure to move into the modern world. It is up to the progressives to stand up to the ignorant. Same as it is here in the US.

It's not so simple as a struggle between reason and dogma. A proximal cause of the current conflict in the Arab world is those who represent themselves as champion of reason and progress, such as the Baathist in Syria and Iraq, the Mubarak regime in Egypt, have failed to delivery on the promises implied by reason and progress, as far as key demographic segments are concerned. Further more, the ultimate offshore self-proclaimed champion of progress - the US, have if anything further sullied the reputation of reason and progress as far as street Arabs are concerned.

People who are testing the water of reason and progress don't generally do systematic surveys of the relative merits of the theoretical underpinnings of the different world views. They act on the emotional - does it make me feel better about myself in relation to my peers, does it make my group feel better about itself in relation to other groups, does it make me more hopeful for my future, and the material - am I better off under this system than what I can remember of the last system, am I safer. In these the alternatives to dogma in the Arab world hasn't delivered much.

[Minimalist]

I agree on the side of the secularists. The allah freaks have it easier. They simply throw their silly book around and insist that everyone adhere to what they determine to be what it says.

Egypt is an excellent example. 90% are islamic of one stripe or another. The difference is that some are content to memorize the fucking koran while others want a real future. They have no oil money flowing in to paper over the inequities in the country.

It may be harder for the secularists to organize seeing as how they are united by what they do not want ( islamic nuttiness ) rather than what they do, but it is important to remember that it is not just the army gunning down the muslim brotherhood. There are substantial numbers who wanted Morsi out which is how the current crisis started. They are lucky that the army sided with them instead of the government - as armies usually do.

As the Egyptians are finding out, Mubarak was not the cause of their economic problems. I imagine that business at the camel rides on the Giza Plateau is pretty slow right now.

[kılıç_mehmet]

I believe that they're simply less-islamist than the others.

Baby steps, Mehmet. You have to break the stranglehold of the clerics as a start.

Bah, I really don't care what they do, my friend. Baby steps are for babies. These people are not babies, they've seen countless counquerors come and go, and have been through numerous different administrations.
The only real steps are those who are the most radical ones.
Anything else will not do.
Both sides are quite radical. Do you think that being secular makes you somewhat more european like?
Nay, my friend.
Their agenda might have a secular nature or undertone, but that certainly doesn't mean that they meet the criteria of what you deem to be secular.
They'll probably place the clergy under gov. control, just like here.

[Minimalist]

Any control of the clergy is good.

Ataturk was a long time ago - and he was a general too - and there are still islamic problems in Turkey. For some reason invoking 'god' works well with the ignorant. Happens all the time over here.

[kılıç_mehmet]

Any control of the clergy is good.

Ataturk was a long time ago - and he was a general too - and there are still islamic problems in Turkey. For some reason invoking 'god' works well with the ignorant. Happens all the time over here.

Well, Atatürk was not a *secularist*, he didn't seperate the church and state. Instead of putting religion in charge of the state, he used the state to regulate religion. Indeed, religion was not able to mingle into state affairs, but the state was able to do the opposite, mingle into religious affairs.
Invoking "god" is nothing. The Ottoman government invoked "god" by the proxy of the Caliphate in the aftermath of WWI, in order to stop Turks from joining the nationalist forces. It certainly did not work.

And most of the Turkish peasantry who were the main source of manpower in the war of independence were quite iliterate.
Yet they understood one thing. Sovereignity, liberty and independence.

This is what really motivates people. Invoking God is useless unless your enemies are of another religion. But why really invoke religion in order to fight your own people?
The Salafists and Wahabis are the kind of people who even declare other sunnis to be heretics just because we have shrines to famous moslem saints in our lands. Their beliefs are the kind of beliefs that pit brother against the brother. A government with a firm hand on religion is required.