The Richard Dawkins Tweet

Richard Dawkins's infamous Tweet that the entire Muslim world has had fewer Nobels (10) than Cambridge University's Trinity College (32) has invited both support and opposition. Political correctness might dictate that he should not have spoken, but as an atheist whose scientific/socially liberal viewpoints line up with popular sentiment his tweet is pointed out as one example of Western irreverence towards religion. The coin has a flip-side too; we live in a world where Islam is feared and Muslims are vilified. It is easy to target Muslims and get away with it.

Dawkins is not alone in attacking Muslims for their lack of achievements; I know many  Muslims who share the  same critical view of themselves. At the present time, Muslims do not export their cultural achievements well. We live, at best in a nostalgic past. Our human rights records, as an example, is little more to be proud of than our list of Nobel honours and more Muslims are dying at the hands of other Muslims in a kind of fratricidal in-war than directly at the hands of Western interventionist forces. Elsewhere, Muslims are caught up in a loop of blame, low achievement, bad governance, cultural destruction and self-pity. In summary, we're on something of a downer. Something is deeply wrong and for Muslims this requires some deep and sober appreciation.

The low ebb for Muslims sits within a much larger context (of power, control and prejudice). For a start, Dawkins could have easily substituted 'Muslims' in his Tweet for any other group or demographic. According to the Christian Monitor, other large (billion-plus) religious, gender and ethnic groups have won even fewer Nobels than the ten won by Muslims. Hindus have won four, the Chinese have won eight and Africans have won nine. Note also that women have only won 44 Nobel Prizes, compared with 791 for (mostly) white men. Frankly, Nobel Prizes are a largely Western affair - all the more grating since one of four people in the world are Muslim.

The Nobel Prizes were inaugurated in 1901 at a time when Muslims were still under the long shadow of colonial rule. Alfred Nobel (inventor of dynamite) may have emphasised recognition of scientific and technological discoveries and inventions, but since its launch, the awarding of the prizes have never truly been a universal affair. They can't be. What do the committees who offer the Nobel Prizes measure, except a particular (socially skewed) view of scientific achievement? 

Not everyone can consume or pollute at the rate of the US and Western Europe and the number of nuclear bombs discovered, developed and used by the West outweighs the number used by the entire planet. Money talks. Muslims may not have invented nuclear weapons - but when there are other pressing matters, should Muslims put all their energies and focus into winning Nobel Prizes?

Logically speaking, if Muslims do not lead in the inventiveness that creates weapons of mass destructions that devastate the planet, then the flip-side is they don't lead in the responsibility for the overall damage. Dawkins, like many atheists and agnostics falls into a trap of targetting Islam under the impression that their scientific credentials put them above simplistic prejudice. There are agendas dressed up in 'facts' underlying deeper prejudices are masked by pseudo-rationalism.

Read more at Religion Dispatches and the Guardian.

Innocence of Muslims

Two things. First, it would appear that we still need a 'bogeyman'. To be able to define our own values, it seems easier to be able to point to the values that make us nervous. Secondly, history is written by those in power and power today is in the collective hands of the 'western' media. Whether this is print media or the various forms of digital media - internet, television and so on; those who control the media undoubtedly have the greatest influence on collective thought. In a media climate where sensation sells and profits comes before anything else; nothing is really sacred.

As we have previously seen and have often discussed on these pages, Muslims are repeatedly cast as the 'bogeyman' in the current media narrative. We are easily portrayed as irrational, volatile and confrontational or hopeless victims trapped by faith and in need of liberal intervention to uplift us. It's a simplistic media view and is formed by the majority with power. 

It therefore surprises few then, that an obscure amateur film targeting Islam with ridicule should now be the focus of considerable public attention. Protests linked to the film in Benghazi, Libya led to an attack on the US embassy and the killing of the US ambassador and similar protests have taken a grip in many other major cities in the Muslim world, and here in London too.

The reaction by Muslims itself generates debates on whether a response that is a violent reflex action, is wise. Do Muslims themselves send out the right signals and is this in accordance with the commonly agreed teachings of Islam? Muslims, of course, are diverse and the truth is there is little chance of a uniform response - even at the individual level, we do not all respond in the same manner to the challenges that face us. However, there is a vacant space between the those in power and the Muslim masses, so I guess, it matters not. The film was a deliberate jibe and the violence in protest to the film was fairly predictable especially since many Muslims are frustrated by injustices - some internal and stemming from the societies in which they live and others external - anti-Islamism coming from a media machinery that continues to reinforce stereotypes and irreligiosity. I think left alone, Muslims are more than able to find their own way.

Ultimately the unequal relationship between the Muslim world and the west hurts Muslims the most. From where we stand this is likely to continue to be a long and protracted power struggle.

May Allah keep us all safe and in faith.

Human Rights; Human Wrongs

For a couple of days now I have wanted to explore a thought or two on the subject of human rights. Coinciding with the official UN Day that celebrates the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights I have a question that asks if the UDHR applies to all. Would it be right, given the tile, to describe the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as truly universal?  

This is where perceptions matter on the intention of Human Rights matter. Perhaps in many traditional societies, the human rights movements associations with individualism don't always fit with the social importance placed on the collective (that is, families and communities etc.). Should we be surprised therefore, that in the heart of Africa and Asia, and across the Muslim world, public sensibilities mean that the interpretation of aspects of the UDHR often it lines up with 'western' social attitudes? This is perhaps why governments 'get away' with violations.

And what of those societies that supposedly espouse the Universal Declaration of Human Rights but that ignore the rules themselves? The UK's obsession with electronic surveillance and the US detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, for example, operate in a human rights 'grey area'. Both these are examples when, presumably, the 'collective' interest is put before the 'individual' interest.

Considering that many years have passed since 1948, and most the world still remains tied to cultures that reject individualism, can the notion of Universal Human Rights truly have universal support?

My Name Is Red

Mainly for the reason that I have been slightly less disciplined in my leisure reading this past twelve months (though I have picked up other reads in between), it took me a year to read My Name is Red by Orhan Pamuk (translated by Erdağ Gökna).  The book itself is one where you must concentrate because each chapter of the story is told by one of the characters - a technique that those who have read Bram Stoker will be familiar with. 

I have to say that despite my lack of continuity, I never did lose the thread with the book, so it is, on the whole very well written. It couldn't get better for me - the central character in this book is someone called Black (wink).

The story takes place in Istanbul during 16th Century Ottoman reign over nine winter days and is a murder mystery set amid the world of the miniaturists. There's a romance that forms part of the backdrop, as well as stories from the Shahnameh and through the characters we enter the world of mysticism, religion and the cultural impact of the Turks looking two ways - East and West. We can draw many parallels between the commentary of the book and the direction that Atatürk took Turkey in today.

No spoilers here, one has to go and read the book themselves. I will say however, that I love Turkey and Istanbul as a city - I was there a couple of years back and I really felt the sense of being on the edge of two worlds. Our hotel looked over the Sultan Ahmed Mosque to the West and the Bosphorus to the East. An irony of positioning, no less.

Istanbul? I would easily return in a heartbeat.

Digital Technology: Diffusion and Revolution

continued from previous posting

Technology: Diffusion and Revolution

In 1996, 80 percent of the population in 50 Muslim countries did not have regular access to a telephone. By 2006, this proportion had dropped to 20 percent. The diffusion rates for other information and communication technologies are also high, generally higher than those in non-Muslim developing countries: between 2000 and 2010, the compound annual growth rate of internet users was 32 percent, compared with 24 percent for the rest of the developing world. See here.

Consider “doubling time,” a figure used by demographers to refer to the amount of time it takes for a country’s population to double. Applied to technology diffusion, this reveals rapid trends: on average, since 2000, the number of internet users in Muslim countries has doubled every 8 months.

Understanding technology diffusion in Muslim countries offers some insight into why current political leaderships are being challenged. Mounir Khelifa, a Tunisian literature professor, speaking to Reuters, explains that the uprisings were made possible by the emergence of a generation raised during this information technology age. Both the Internet and Satellite Television undercut the propaganda of state media, creating  the opportunity for people to develop their own consensus on their rights. 

The recent uprisings in the Arab world began with the death of Mohamed Bouazizi, a protesting Tunisian shopkeeper who self-immolated, which activated a cross boundary network of people exhausted by authoritarian rule. Within weeks, digitally-enabled protesters in Tunisia had deposed their dictator after a series of strikes, protests and a mass civil disobedience movement called the Jasmine Revolution. Satellite television and the social media allowed the trend to spread across the Middle East.  Even President Obama has identified technology as one of the key variables that enabled average Egyptians to protest. True, digital media alone didn’t oust Mubarak, but it did provide the medium by which calls for freedom have cascaded across the region.

Technology: Politics of Change

And what of the sands? Where will they settle? It is difficult to know but what is already being called the Arab Spring, it is likely to lead to more political casualties. I remain cautious about what happens next - the western media is rather formulaic in its response and seems to feel that tomorrow the Arabs of the middle east will wake up as free citizens in fully established democracies or that militant theocracies will manoeuvre quick take-overs and send forth an army of radicals.

Nothing is quite certain and in no way am I ambivalent towards what is happening. I live here; I see it through a different lens and in particular, I think solutions need to be local.

There is much to be learned from this. Right now, I feel like I know two things. Firstly, in the modern world that we live in, we should not underestimate the will of people and the power that they have in tapping into the technologies available to them. Secondly, long term, brutal regimes and autocracies cannot survive; change will occur. The sands will continue to shift.

For further reading on Information Technology and Political Islam follow this link.

Madrassah

On a TV news item on the causes of terrorism in Pakistan, the matter of poverty and desperation came up - one comment was that ordinary folk became recruits for militant activity, because they didn't connect with the politicians in Islamabad who were too busy being chauffeured around in brand new Mercedes cars.

I went to a madrassah a couple of days ago where boys and girls are housed free of cost and schooled in an Islamic education. This was quite a 'modern' madrassah with computers as part of the standard education - the students in school were pulled in from varying regions and represented a cross section of the different ethnic groups in Pakistan. Technology classes hadn't started yet, so it would have been interesting to see how this was applied to the students' learning. What was clear was how the school was open about its missionary purpose - it was run by a group of Sunni Gilgitis, themselves a minority in the Ismaili Shia dominated northern tip of Pakistan.

Madrassahs have come under the spotlight, of course, because they are funded by non-government sources and are often pointed at for churning out the next batch of suicide bombers.

Whatever the truth, present and past governments have an abysmal track record on education spending. The education budget counts for peanuts, so surely the blame lies not with the madrassahs but with successive Pakistan governments for whom education has not been a priorty.