Uzique wrote:
the islamic world celebrated because of the history and the attitude that we have bred... the things i have been speaking about. this does not mean that the RELIGION itself is a religion of VIOLENCE - the reasons for their celebration and joy at a middle-eastern 'victory' over the western world are POLITICAL-ECONOMICAL-SOCIAL, not THEOLOGICAL. that's as simple as i can make it. the citizens of the region's sympathies may lie with their own martyrs, but it does not mean that each and every one of them would take up arms, or even scorn a christian/westerner. they are just trying to earn their own complete independence- economically/fiscally, politically, and (most importantly i feel) culturally.
you honestly cannot tell me that because we are busy utilizing our capitalism to corporate-pillage the region of its resources that they are in any way being enriched or pacified. the citizens hate the injection of western cash- it amounts to gross materialism, capitalistic greed and the spread of western consumerist culture. the world's measure and criterion of happiness doesn't all amount to a 4 bedroom house in suburbia, a mercedes and a 50" television. these people don't want our money and our dubai-like edifices of greed; our monuments and megaliths of iniquity. this is just in fact a symptom of neocolonialism; this is a term i have used many times to you and, in light of your responses, i really do not think you understand it. look it up, please. throwing money at them and signing oil-deals is just a further perpetuation of the fiscal power-relationship between west and middle-east; we are further propagating our (indirect) control and influence over the region. much like japan and imperial china, cultures and countries opposed to the occidental world often prefer to be isolationist and economically self-sustaining. we are pretty much making that an industrial and diplomatic impossibility for them. they don't like it. nor should they-- they've been under our thumb or somehow indebted into our pockets since we carved up their maps after the fall of the ottoman empire.
please do a research
Yet... at the same time, the very existence of the Ottoman Empire was evidence of the conquering nature that much of Islamic society possesses that was similar to the Catholics before them.
While it might be true that much of the Islamic World isn't Western and has different priorities than we do, they share much of the same nature. Both the West and the Islamic World are conquerors by nature. The only difference is that the Islamic World finished most of their conquering before the later colonial period.
So, while our own "corporate pillaging" can be somewhat to blame for the conflicts between us and the Islamic World, it's not like these areas were without their own versions of it -- although historically, they've preferred the more traditional war version.
Another thing to consider is that the Soviets spread quite a lot of anti-Western propaganda amongst the Middle East during the Cold War. Unfortunately, a lot of the people bought into it and still do.
On a side note, however, many of these people do actually want some of the material comforts we have. There's a good reason why much of Western media is heavily consumed by some of their markets.
So, while it would be incorrect to assume all of them want Western advances, it is also incorrect to assume all of them reject them.
Most of the conflicts are actually coming from the most radically conservative parts of their culture. These are the traditionalists that want to control everyone. In the long run, it would be best to eradicate the ultraconservatives, so that these cultures more functionally assimilate into a more modern global culture.
Last edited by Turquoise (2010-04-27 21:41:49)