"Civil disobedience is not only the natural right of a people, especially when they have no effective voice in their own Government, but that it is also a substitute for violence or armed rebellion."
Mahatma Ghandi
If there was any lesson that Dr. King may have taken from Ghandi, it was the effectiveness of civil disobedience to address social wrongs and set them right. Is there anyone who today would doubt the effectiveness of the message these two men brought to the world?
Apparently there are a fair number of people who have failed to learn the lessons of civil disobedience; specifically, Palestinians and other Arabs. Their reliance upon suicide bombers and their indiscriminate killing of men, women and children has become the focus of the world, not the issues that they themselves wish to have addressed.
Until such a leader emerges in the Arab world, even when there is legitimacy in the wrongs enumerated, the world will continue to focus on the psychotic actions of the zealots instead of the issues that have an everyday impact on the lives of millions of Arabs.
Remember President Nixon's "Silent Majority"? His supposition was that more Americans supported the Vietnam War than opposed it, but those that supported it were silent in their support - they didn't take to the streets like those opposed to the war. Many pundits and political observers seem to want apply this mantel of passive support to the Muslims around the world who never seem to protest the atrocities their brothers in Islam commit. We are assured that Islam is not a religion of violence and that the vast majority of Muslims are peace loving people.
If the rest of the world is ever to believe that, then a proponent of civil disobedience must arise in the Arab world and replace Bin Laden's message of hatred and killing. If the Arabs ever hope to swing world opinion and address the grievances they have suffered, the violence must end and a leader of uncommon fortitude and perseverance will be needed to achieve the peace that has eluded the region for the past two thousand years or so.
14 comments:
Watson,
How inappropriate can you be? Using Dr. King and Gandhi to perpetuate your xenophobia is downright sinister.
By the way - get your facts straight.
The historical fact is that Islam is responsible for creating the enormous trade networks that brought incredible knowledge to backward Europeans.
Islam basically follows the same books that Christianity does. They were the first to provide women with a small measure of personal power (like divorce), and they were the only religion of the three to recognize the others as equal under god (ever hear the phrase "people of the book"?).
Did you ever think to wonder why in general Jews know very little about Christianity and almost nothing about Islam while Muslims know a great deal about Judaism and Christianity?
Islam follows the tenets of Jesus (who appears in the Koran) more closely than Mormonism, Protestantism, and a number of other so-called Christian denominations. Moses appears in the Koran more frequently than Mohammad.
When was the last time the Christian nations stood up against the millions killed in the name of Christianity, capitalism, or American "interests"?
Have you ever met a Muslim? Ever been to a Muslim country? You probably couldn't find Indonesia (the largest Muslim country) on a map and had no idea that there were different sects (like Sunni and Shiite) until your failed war forced you and the rest of the neo-cons to actually think about what they were doing.
You want us to remember Nixon's silent majority, but forget the hardhats that beat people exercising free speech in the streets. Nixon tried to eliminate his political competition and was the first disgraced president driven from office - that's some hero.
And one last thing - only the ill-informed or disingenuous would claim that there has not been peace in the Middle East for 2,000 years. Get a history book! Read it!
America has a longer and more brutal history of violence than either religious group living in Palestine. "Palestinians" is a name given to people who were thrown out of their lands and homes after the establishment of Israel, the fighting began there in the 1940s. Put your knee-jerk politics aside for a minute and learn about what you think you know.
Or I guess by your logic America has had a history of violence for about 12-14,000 years - that's how long Native American tribes are believed to have been here and well-established feuding and fighting with each other.
You’re right to say – “there are a fair number of people who have failed to learn the lessons of civil disobedience.” Every one of you who supported America’s wars against the Vietnamese, the Iraqis, the Nicaraguans, the Guatemalans, the Panamanians, Bay of Pigs, the so-called “drug lords” in Columbia, and many, many, more have failed to learn the lesson.
Sounds a little hypocritical, doesn’t it?
Dear Editor:
Where to begin.
Anytime you'd like to challenge me to a test on geography I'm ready.
Anytime you'd like to challenge me to a test on history I'm ready.
Congratulations on knowing a word that starts with the letter "x". Please refer to my prior posts where I've noted time and again that we are a nation of immigrants and that is what makes us stronger.
I'm sure Marco Polo was very happy to see all of those 7-11's on the way to China.
Not only do I know when Israel was created, but when Iraq was created too!
No - I don't know any Muslims, but I do have liberal friends, which is the same thing. Dealing with people who are much different then you and treating them with the same respect and courtesy that you'd like to be treated with.
Your generalization as to how much Christians, Jews and Muslims know about each other is entirely specious. It varies by person, not by religious group wouldn't you say?
On the other hand, when I make a general statement about the lack of peace for over two thousnad years in the Middle East, I'm taken to task for historical inaccuracy.
I could go on, but the rest of your post is the usual hate-America-hate-the-white-man handwringing that you liberals love to do and do so well.
Yeah, yeah, we made mistakes, humans have a propensity for that. But as far as I'm concerned, there's no better country on the earth and no where else I'd rather live.
I will give you credit due for one thing though, you have helped me to create a new word:
Irascihole
A combination of Irascible and a word we're all familiar with. It is a one word summation for the attitude you apparently got out of bed with this morning. I suppose I could have used "contrarian" and combined it with the other word for "contrahole", but then he'd just go off on Ollie North and Ronald Reagan, so I'm sticking with irascihole.
Muslim trade networks?? They were formed from their aggression on the continent. This isn't a religion of peace, it is a religion of the sword, where the reformers are too afraid to speak out for fear of a fatwa.
Islam was founded after judaism and christianity and based on their tenets. Then prophet mo added his own twists and perversions. How the hell could the jews and christians recognize a religion that started hundreds of years after the bible was complete??
AE, have you ever read the Koran??
It is full of violence, misogyny and contempt for the kaffir, or infidel. The womens rights under islam are an abomination. As witnesses, under inheritances and in marriage they are inferior to men. And the convoluted reasoning for same is pitiful.
Europe is full of people like you who are blinded by what a caliphate is and what islam has in mind for us. Get your cranium out of your rectum, clean the excrement out of your eyes and wake up.
BTW, ADK editor, I do know, have lived amongst and worked with muslims. A coworker had given me a copy of "Towards Understanding Islam" as dawah (look it up), at the time I had no preconceived notions on Islam, except that I admired their devotion, abstension from alcohol, and strict fasting as required.
I read the book the same as i had "the Watchtower" and the book of Mormon; as an expansion of my understanding. After reading the book, i was troubled by islams view of other religions and the concept of ummah. This was in the Mid 1990's. On sept. 11,2001 I reread the book, i am very worried to this day. I am far from a Xenophobe and believe in equal rights, gay unions and a host of other liberal undertakings as i am a libertarian. If you look in a thesaurus, islam should be an antonym for liberty.
I don't see how anyone can be troubled about the way muslims see other religions. They want everyone to be a muslim just like Christians want everyone to be a Christian. As for the concept of ummah, I'm not sure why that should bother anyone either. Surely, the Christians in the USA are working for the same thing. They would like everyone to be a Christian and have to answer to a "Christian" government. Just ask Mike Huckabee. Remember, these are conservative people asking for these things in the USA, not liberals. I really don't see how conservative Christians differ so much from Muslims. What really gets me is that most Christians are the "Sunday" type of Christian. Where Islam is a way of living your life. They live their religion. Right or wrong you have to give them some respect for that.
Oh yeah, and civil disobedience by Arabs against their government. How about some Arab civil disobedience against the Saudi government. You remember the Saudi's...the guys that attacked us on 9/11? Oh but I guess civil disobedience is somewhat difficult to think about when the USA is providing the Saudi princes with billions of dollars in weapons sales.
Remember what happened at the end of the first Gulf war when the USA called for civil disobedience? That worked out well for the Kurds didn't it?
And you're "big gay al" and probably want everyone to be gay. Difference between you and muslims are that in islam you either convert, die, or pay a dhimmi tax.
In predominantly islamic countries it is illegal to proselytize, sometimes punishable by death. This is not about christians (i'm an atheist)v. islam. This is about non-muslims v. islam.
Don't try to compare the greatest place on planet earth to some sh*thole religion where they cut off hands, stone adulterers and allow sexual pleasure to be derived from infants as long as their is no penetration.(the last granted by the great ayatollah khomeini). We have freedom in this country, you can be "big gay al" try that in Iran, you'll be hanging from a crane. Try bringing a bible to Saudi Arabia, try suspending an icon of mohammed in a test tube of urine. It is an intolerant misogynistic homophobic savage religion w/ very devoted followers.
Lol, so much for "I am far from a Xenophobe and believe in equal rights, gay unions and a host of other liberal undertakings as i am a libertarian." After visiting your blog I knew it would be pretty easy to get you to show your true Christian colors.
Al, my big cuddly bear. My blog illustrates one thing and one thing only. I do not like the islamic faith. I do not trust its' adherents. i have no fear of things foreign. I support amnesty for immigrants who have families and have worked in this country to better themselves. I believe that homosexual unions are none of my business and should be allowed. I believe in legalization of marijuana. You leave me alone and I'll leave you alone, as long as we don't hurt each other. I am a libertarian. There is nothing inherently libertarian in an islamic society. The only reference to christianity on my site is the word "christmas". I refer once to god and that out of respect to the notion that there are no atheists in foxholes. Every thought on my blog has been brought forth by a great deal of research into the Islamic faith and the cultures tht surround it.
Concepts like the ummah, taqqiya, dhimmitude, martyrdom and the indoctricnation of very young children to the cycle of hate should scare the hell out of any american. Could you imagine in our country a place where there would be a sign that says "muslims prohibited"? Each year millions of muslims travel to Mecca and Medina, Al, I hate to tell you this but, you are not allowed (unless of course your a muslim)
Wait, you mean after all the weapon we've sold to Saudi Arabia, the fact that G.W. Bush is almost considered a relative to the Fahds, the fact that we let them get away with attacking two of our cities....the fact that we allow them to suppress their own people....and we still can't even visit Mecca? I guess that's gratitude for you. I hope Ron Paul works out for you.
I couldn't give a sh*t if we obliterated Saudi Arabia tomorrow. We allow them to supress their people? Are you suggesting we invade there, like Iraq? Iraq was a blunder,as far as I can see. And wtf is Ron Paul?;->
You don't get it, its the religion, stupid.
The division between church and state is one of the cornerstones of this country. If I had to guess a number, I'd have to say that at least 95% of the people in this country hold fast to that concept, but that's just a guess.
John Kennedy had to face your kind of racism in the 60's Al. Demeaning and damning people because of their faith is just as racist as doing the same to them because of the color of their skin.
Now before you go ballistic, I don't think you're a racist, religious or otherwise. I don't know that for a fact, that's just a guess. We are all capable of saying things in the heat of the laptop that we normally wouldn't say.
I think you're capable of better insight than to suggest that any branch of government could ever get away with making any religion the official religion of the state.
I might also add that ecumenism is an ongoing effort not only between Christian denominations, but also between Christians, Jews and Muslims as well. Its not happening everywhere in the world, but it is happening here - of all places.
As I'm sure some cynical historians would tell you, after the white man got done conquering and proselytizing most of the world by the late 19th Century, there weren't that many "uninformed" natives to bring into the fold. Since the Reformation didn't work out all that well for anyone, especially the Jews, we eventually got around to that incredibly difficult concept: "To each his own!"
Even a casual observation of the three major religions will easily find the lunatics that occupy the fringes of all the religions - just to be fair, the atheists have their nut cases too.
If Ghandi had sponsored terrorism like Arafat, would India have achieved independence sooner?
If Arafat had acted like Ghandi, would the world, or more specifically the United States, have been more supportive of a Palestinian homeland?
Questions to ponder with no answers.
I know you find it hard to believe, but like most conservatives I know, violence is something to be avoided, never initiated, but responded to after time for careful consideration in most cases. The declaration of war after Pearl Harbor was the exception to the rule.
Hey, guys, how about some fudgies all around. They're almost as effective as Xanax and more habit forming. Geez...lighten up!
I knew there was a reason I always liked you Sir Charles.
Post a Comment