Sunday, July 9, 2017
BANGLADESH IN
CRISIS (FOR PUBLICATION ON SUNDAY THE 23RD OCTOBER 2005)
By Kazi Anwarul
Masud( former Secretary and ambassador)
Perhaps both the
great Arab historian Ibn Khaldun and Scottish philosopher David Hume (who
greatly influenced Skepticism and Empiricism school of thought) shared
oscillation theory in their observation of religion. While Ibn Khaldun believed
that popular religion in Muslim societies tended to oscillate between periods
of strict religious observance and of devotional laxity; David Hume believed
that men changed from polytheism to monotheism, not in a continuous unilineal
change, and back again because “men have
a natural tendency to rise from idolatry to theism and sent again from theism
to idolatry”. This oscillation, argues Hume, is not caused by thoughtful and
considered reasoning but by politics of fear, uncertainty and a “kind of
competitive sycophancy”. Hume is, therefore, not surprised that Hercules,
Thesus, Hector and Romulus are replaced by Dominic, Francis, Anthony and Benedict.
Hume was a protestant and a skeptic at that. His distance from Catholic
philosophy, however interesting, does not form the core of our discussion. What
is important is the relevance of the commonality in the perception of Hume and
Ibn Khaldun of oscillating devotion of human beings between monotheism and
polytheism and also differences in the character of devotees in both creeds
which have plunged the world today into a black hole of holocaust because a minuscule part of the
adherents f one creed would repeatedly inflict upon the world their weapons of
hatred. It has been surmised that Christianity’s urging of its followers to
give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s is because it initially flourished among the
politically disinherited, among those who were persecuted for their belief in a
monotheistic religion when “competitive sycophancy” obliged most people to
practice idolatry because Caesar had
both gold and sword which an unseen God in His wisdom did not chose to use to
save His followers from the jaws of death. It took the Christians thousand
years till Emperor Constantine converted himself to Christianity and Emperor
Charlemagne converted Europe to Christendom. Before that time a faith born
without political power could hardly be expected to preach otherwise. By
contrast the initial success of Islam was so rapid that it did not have to give
anything unto Caesar and it spread its wings often at point of sword and grew
into a rich civilization dominating a large part of Europe. By the eighth
century the Muslims had conquered North Africa, the eastern shores of the
Mediterranean, most of Spain, established bases in Italy, substantially reduced
the size of the Eastern Roman Empire and besieged its capital Constantinople.
The Ottoman Empire’s assault on the gates of Vienna could perhaps provide a
background to the stringent Austrian opposition, though mellowed down
temporarily, to start European Union’s talks fro Turkey’s entry into the EU. If
historian Bernard Lewis’ clash of civilization denoting those between Muslims
and Christians and post-Christians,
rigid theocratic hierarchy vs. permissive secular modernism is to be given
credence then one could imagine that the seat of non-Catholic Christianity has
now taken residence in the White House combining both temporal and spiritual
powers( how can one forget President Bush’s communion with God ordering him to
attack Afghanistan and Iraq and to establish the State of Palestine). Whether
the Americans have reelected an evangelist and fundamentalist as President
could have been ignored by the world had not that person also at the same time
been the most powerful man in the world presiding over a country described by
some as one which has so much economic, cultural and military power not accrued
by any nation since the days of the Roman Empire. One hopes that despite the
horrific terrorist transgression into America—both physical and
psychological—President Bush would not be totally converted to Bernard Lewis’
perception of the Muslim world’s “downward spiral of hate and spite, rage and
self-pity, poverty and oppression” having been caused by the defeat of the
Muslims at hands of the Judeo-Christian civilization but would retain his
belief in the conviction expressed by John F. Kennedy in his posthumously
published book A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS that Jefferson and Madison’s America
would see immigrants as ethnically-hyphenated (e.g. Arab-American) or as
ethnicity of origin(e.g. a Bangladeshi). In reality, however, the Muslim
Diaspora in the West is seen through tinted glass by their predominantly white
neighbors (a recent survey shows that a majority of both whites and
African-Americans favor a decrease in the current level of immigration)
reminiscent of the internment of the Japanese-Americans during the Second World
War. In self-defense the Muslims have adopted, as Professor Kay Deaux points
out, many taxi drivers in New York city (immediately after 9/11) who by
appearance could be labeled as Arabs or Muslims pasted American flags on the
windscreen of their cars. Another tendency displayed by the Diaspora is to turn
inward, a tendency to “circle the wagon” in the face of unfriendly stares which
a western liberal values imbibed modern person would have been loathe to do
under ordinary circumstances. Yet the stigmata generally stamped on the Muslim
community despite the realization that terrorism is not and had never been a
proprietorial element of Muslim faith
and had been and continues to be practiced by others in abandon. Undoubtedly
the current discontent prevalent in the Middle East has been a scapegoat as a
primary cause of global turbulence. A deeper analysis would reveal that the
present discontent of the Muslim youth
is primarily due to the failure of Pan Arab nationalism not only to deliver
basic political goods but also to hide their failure the leaders strangulated
the voice of dissent. Added to this was the acquiescence or blatant support
extended by the West due to the demands of the then Cold War situation which
fuelled Muslim anger. And of course a constant source of Muslim frustration has
been occasioned by the unqualified support given to the Israeli genocidal and
expansionist policies in the Middle East. While the expression of this anger
and frustration through terrorism can never be justified because terrorism even
in its most expansive definition can only be abhorred, one has to address the
root causes of this malignancy not in terms of “defeat” of one civilization by
another but to secure a coherent globalized society where prosperity and
poverty are not totally segmented. It is natural for the West as it for the
victims of terrorism in some developing countries to attack the terrorist where
ever they may be as Plato had advised centuries back that the price of
civilization is the need to defend its own material preconditions by force of
arms if necessary. Equally it is necessary to recognize that the Muslims of the
world differ substantially not only in their religious views but also in their
politico-cultural orientation. Islam is trans-ethnic, trans-social and
trans-national yet it far from being homogenous as the simplistic would tend
one to believe. Indeed as Professor Ernest Gellner points out Islam provides “a
scriptural faith; a completed one is available and there is no room for further
accretion or for new prophets; also, there is no warrant for clergy, and hence
for differentiation, and there is no need to differentiate between the church
and the state, between what is God’s and what is Ceaser’s”. But there are
cleavages between the Sunnis and the Shiias(the current situation in Iraq
provides the most glaring example); between the Arab and non-Arab Muslims;
between those who believe in hereditary and hierarchical system as Bernard
Lewis put it “The Imam is central to the Ismaila system of doctrine…the Imams
were divinely inspired and infallible” and those who believe that no
intermediary is necessary between God and His devotees. These differences have
arisen with the passage of time and have caused both social and political
conflicts. The merchants of death today are exploiting these differences not
only to promote sectarian violence within the Islamic world but also to deny
the fruits of technological advancement to the Muslim subalterns of the
yesteryears. Our misfortune is that these ideologues of hatred, semi-literate
themselves, are convincing the illiterates( of secular education) madrasha
students of their inerrant moral and intellectual “superiority” over others to the extent that these “others”
being moral degenerates need to be physically eliminated to purify the earth of
apostates. This kind of Hitlerian menace( who believe in superiority of faith
in place of racial superiority) has now assaulted our shores. As it is according to Human Development Index, Growth
Competive Index, Failed States Index and Transparency International’s
Corruption Perception Index Bangladesh has fared miserably. Unless our
authorities can free themselves from the vortex of being a politician who can
see only up to the next elections and graduate to that of a statesman who
thinks of the next generation Bangladeshis may have to account for their
failure to the elders of the global village.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment