Devadatta
Well-Known Member
So far it’s turned out that the London bombers were Muslims but born and raised in Britain and Western-educated. The 9/11 hi-jackers were also Western-educated. The primary reason for this of course is that it takes this kind of background to successively operate in the culture. But it also points to the fact that much of Muslim extremism is fuelled by a deadly fusion of Western ideology and traditional absolutist metaphysics. The Muslim Brotherhood, for example, is said to represent that kind of fusion, and has been influential in the formation of groups like Al Qaeda.
This is depressing, of course. While many people on this forum would like to see a fusion of the best in each culture, here you have a fusion of the worst. And what I find particularly sad is that neither side is able to own up to its part. Politics is politics of course and powerfully colours everything, but it would be nice to see some evidence somewhere of the kind of searching self-criticism needed on all sides. Instead, the West wraps itself in the flag of Liberal Democracy and its superior way of life as if it were a simple & unmixed blessing with no back-story. And so much of the Muslim world still presents itself as passive victims of Crusaders and would seem to be lacking any compelling figure or institution to effectively put its own houses in order.
But this diabolic fusion of cultures tells us something very important and very uncomfortable, and perhaps that’s why so few are willing to face it. And that’s the metaphysical absolutism at the base of both civilizations. It’s easy to graft Western fascist and totalitarian notions on to absolutist interpretations of Islam because they share a fundamental identity & mindset, which George W. Bush unfortunately summed up when he said, You’re with us or you’re with the terrorists.*
It’s been said before that the Palestinians and the Muslim world in general needed and need a Gandhi – instead they got Arafat. I would say that the Western world needs a Gandhi as well, and probably more than just one. And what’s a Gandhi? Not a god, or some perfected human being, and not simply a promoter of peace, but someone who radically, imaginatively and courageously addresses the root impulse to violence, absolutism and will to power in all of us.
But this is precisely what we’re lacking. And the four young men who shattered their lives along with many others are among the most pathetic victims of this lack. They’re the tragic ground on which the clash of civilizations is most intimately taking place.
The terrorists are often called “cowardly”, but there’s a far greater cowardice in our inability to seriously grapple with our fundamental impulses and in our repeated recourse to yet another absolute. You are with us or against us, and the cure for bad kings is a relatively better king with more guns.
*(Of course, Bush is close to quoting gospel. I was struck recently by contrasting verses on this topic in the gospels. I can’t site the exact verses at the moment, but one says “those who are not with us are against us”, while the other says “those who are not against us are with us” (this last verse has to do with non-sanctioned persons using Jesus’ name to perform miracles). A whole world of difference turns on which verse we take to heart.)
This is depressing, of course. While many people on this forum would like to see a fusion of the best in each culture, here you have a fusion of the worst. And what I find particularly sad is that neither side is able to own up to its part. Politics is politics of course and powerfully colours everything, but it would be nice to see some evidence somewhere of the kind of searching self-criticism needed on all sides. Instead, the West wraps itself in the flag of Liberal Democracy and its superior way of life as if it were a simple & unmixed blessing with no back-story. And so much of the Muslim world still presents itself as passive victims of Crusaders and would seem to be lacking any compelling figure or institution to effectively put its own houses in order.
But this diabolic fusion of cultures tells us something very important and very uncomfortable, and perhaps that’s why so few are willing to face it. And that’s the metaphysical absolutism at the base of both civilizations. It’s easy to graft Western fascist and totalitarian notions on to absolutist interpretations of Islam because they share a fundamental identity & mindset, which George W. Bush unfortunately summed up when he said, You’re with us or you’re with the terrorists.*
It’s been said before that the Palestinians and the Muslim world in general needed and need a Gandhi – instead they got Arafat. I would say that the Western world needs a Gandhi as well, and probably more than just one. And what’s a Gandhi? Not a god, or some perfected human being, and not simply a promoter of peace, but someone who radically, imaginatively and courageously addresses the root impulse to violence, absolutism and will to power in all of us.
But this is precisely what we’re lacking. And the four young men who shattered their lives along with many others are among the most pathetic victims of this lack. They’re the tragic ground on which the clash of civilizations is most intimately taking place.
The terrorists are often called “cowardly”, but there’s a far greater cowardice in our inability to seriously grapple with our fundamental impulses and in our repeated recourse to yet another absolute. You are with us or against us, and the cure for bad kings is a relatively better king with more guns.
*(Of course, Bush is close to quoting gospel. I was struck recently by contrasting verses on this topic in the gospels. I can’t site the exact verses at the moment, but one says “those who are not with us are against us”, while the other says “those who are not against us are with us” (this last verse has to do with non-sanctioned persons using Jesus’ name to perform miracles). A whole world of difference turns on which verse we take to heart.)
But somehow this sounds quite familiar. Or am I confusing you with someone else? 
