here & there

May 18th, 2012

Coptic Christians and Egypt’s future

posted by

Yasmine Saleh recently reported on the dilemma many Coptic Christians face in the upcoming Egyptian presidential election. While Copts often felt like second-class citizens under the Mubarak regime, many will likely support candidates  affiliated with this past regime due to fear of increased discrimination under an Islamist presidency. Saleh explains:

Coptic voter Medhat Malak hopes those discriminatory rules will be changed if his choice for president wins – Mubarak’s last prime minister and former military commander Ahmed Shafiq.

He worries that an Islamist head of state would make life more uncomfortable for Copts, who blame ultra-orthodox Salafi Muslims for a surge of attacks on churches since Mubarak’s overthrow in a popular uprising 15 months ago.

“Islamist policies on Christians are vague. It is possible they would restrict our freedoms to gain popularity among strict Muslims at our expense,” said Malak, 33, whose Cairo church has been the centre of a row over whether it has a proper license.

A senior Orthodox Coptic church official said 6 million Copts are among the 50 million eligible voters who go to the polls on May 23 and 24 and again next month in a run-off if no candidate scores more than 50 percent in the first round.

If Christians voted as a bloc – which may not happen – they could help swing an unpredictable race whose main contenders are either Islamists or men who served under Mubarak at some time.

Many voters are undecided, but ask a Copt and most are swift to declare a preference for Shafiq or Amr Moussa, the former Arab League chief and Mubarak’s one-time foreign minister.

Both are Muslims, like all 13 candidates, and both were part of the Mubarak era, when Christians complained of being treated as second-class citizens in the workplace or elsewhere.

Read the full article here.

May 17th, 2012

Marilynne Robinson on religion, secularism, and literature

posted by

Joe Fassler interviews writer Marilynne Robinson after the publication of her latest collection of essays. The interview was published by The Atlantic alongside a review of Robinson’s body of work. The discussion touches on religion, human perception, the importance of fiction, and the draw of sacred texts. Robinson  is especially critical of the framing of a science vs. religion debate and, as a “profoundly religious person,” is also “a great admirer of secularism”:

How has it been for you being a profoundly religious person who’s spent much of your life in the mostly secular university setting?

I’m a great admirer of secularism. At its best, I think it’s one of the best things that we have. I don’t believe in insinuating religion into conversation. I don’t believe in excluding it from conversation. I enjoy the fact that people’s innermost thoughts are their own. I think actually that writers tend unusually to have a religious aspect to their thinking, whether or not they’re formally religious in any way. I never feel isolated in this.

At the same time, it’s an inappropriate use of a classroom to exclude the possibility of religious thought, or to insinuate it. But any human situation is imperfect. People are on one side or the other. I think people who choose a religiously oriented education can get an excellent education of that kind. I like being in a larger environment. I’m already interested in what interests me almost to the point of obsession, and I don’t feel the need to be in a setting that reinforces it.

The idea that there are huge spaces in which everyone feels equally at home, and that everyone can choose within the vast ways of responding to religion or anything else, is excellent. It’s much too precious, should never be ridiculed or minimized.

Read the full interview at The Atlantic.

May 16th, 2012

Sunni-Shia discord on the rise?

posted by

The Economist reported recently on the state of Sunni-Shia relations only a few years after a seemingly pivotal moment:

It seemed historic. Muslim scholars, 170 in number and representing nine schools of legal thought (including four main Sunni ones and two Shia), gathered in Amman and declared that, whatever their differences, they accepted the others’ authority over their respective flocks. Implicitly, at least, they were renouncing the idea that their counterparts were heretics. Some called that meeting in Jordan in 2005 the biggest convergence since 969, when a Shia dynasty took over Egypt.

In spite of continued efforts by those religious leaders that gathered in 2005, the magazine relays that “seen from the outside, feuds between Sunnis, who make up roughly 80% of the world’s Muslims, and the Shia minority (most of the rest), remain savage and are, in some ways, worsening.” Among the reasons cited for this deterioration are a decreased Western presence in Iraq and the ongoing transformations of the Arab Spring:

Paradoxically enough, one reason for the worsening in intra-Muslim relations is the declining role of the West. At the time of the Amman gathering in 2005, Iraq was in the grip both of horrific Sunni-Shia violence and of American occupation. It was possible to convince ordinary Muslims (however unfairly) that America was to blame for stoking this tension; and that, for dignity’s sake, followers of Islam should stand together against the outsiders’ game of divide-and-rule. Now the American occupation of Iraq is over, and hatred between Sunnis and Shias there has a ghastly momentum of its own: the Shia prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, has accused a Sunni vice-president, Tariq al-Hashemi, of complicity in terrorism and forced him to flee. On April 30th he was charged with multiple murders.

But perhaps the biggest change is that Sunnis think they are now winning the global contest. Seven years ago it seemed that Shia Islam, whether in Iran, Iraq and Lebanon, was on the march. Hot-headed Sunnis who yearned to see a government or movement that would confront Israel in the name of Islam had to find role-models across the sectarian divide, in Iran, or in the mullahs’ Lebanese protégés in Hizbullah.

These days zealous Sunnis need no longer look to swashbuckling Shias for inspiration. The real action is unfolding in their own homelands, at least in north Africa or the Levant. Nor need they look abroad for political ideology: the Arab spring has established the Sunni sort of political Islam as a powerful, domestically based force that has emerged from the underground or from exile. Rachid Ghannouchi, for example, Tunisia’s best-known Islamist, has returned from London to become probably the most powerful figure in the land. Vali Nasr, a professor at the Fletcher School of Tufts University in America and a former adviser to the Obama administration, says that—rightly or wrongly—Sunnis believe that Western sanctions are weakening Iran, and that the combined efforts of Sunnis and the West will also topple Iran’s only Arab ally, Syria. From a Sunni perspective, these impending victories outweigh the travails of their co-religionists in majority-Shia Iraq.

Read more here.

May 14th, 2012

Tunisian Jews and the Arab Spring

posted by

In a recent article, Lin Noueihed and Terek Amara discuss the racism and fear of  harassment Tunisian Jews have experienced since the overthrow of Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali. The island of Djerba, home to one of  North Africa’s largest Jewish communities, has historically been a point of pilgrimage, internationally drawing Jews to El Ghriba synagogue to commemorate the anniversary of the death of a second-century Jewish scholar. Over the past two years, Jews have been wary to make this  pilgrimage because of political uncertainty in the country. Noueihed and Amara explain:

Sitting in his jewelry shop in Djerba’s covered souk, David Bitan said life for Tunisia’s Jews was changing, much as it has for all Tunisians since the revolt. Business had yet to recover and the instability that dogs Tunisia affected them too.

“We are not afraid of Salafis who talk too much. We’re afraid of those who say nothing, then do something,” said Bitan.

“Things have changed since the revolution. Before, people were afraid of the police. Now, we are under pressure. The police is weak, so racism is increasing. People are not afraid.”

The pilgrimage to Djerba, which attracted a peak number of 10,000 pilgrims in 2000, was cancelled last year because visitors were reluctant to wade into the charged political environment of the Arab Spring. Less than 100 made the journey.

Ahead of this year’s event around May 9 – the anniversary of the death of a second century Jewish scholar – Tunisia’s new Islamist-led government has been at pains to assure Jews that they are welcome.

But news of occasional unrest, such as a day of clashes between police and protesters on April 9, still spooks visitors thinking of making the pilgrimage, mainly from Germany and France.

Tunisia’s Jewish community once numbered 100,000 people. But fear, poverty and discrimination prompted several waves of emigration after the creation of Israel in 1948. Many left after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. Most went to France or Israel.

Read the full article here.

May 14th, 2012

The graduation wars

posted by

In Il Sussidiario, Michael Sean Winters gives his opinion on the recent controversies surrounding commencement speakers invited to Catholic institutions of higher education:

The graduation wars have begun. As thousands of students at Catholic colleges and universities prepare to celebrate their graduation and take their degrees, their campuses are embroiled in controversy over who should and should not be permitted to speak at graduation and, in some cases, receive an honorary degree.

I am of two minds about these wars. On the one hand, as I suggested last week, Catholic institutions of higher learning must not be pushed into a kind of intellectual ghetto by the Torquemada-like fanatics at the inaptly named Cardinal Newman Society. Catholic colleges and universities should not be afraid to engage the culture and listen to anyone who has something to say on their campus. What are we afraid of? That a single appearance by an errant Catholic or a controversial non-Catholic will rob our students of their commitment to the faith? If so, we are not doing a very good job of inculcating that faith in the first place. More importantly, whenever the Church has built a wall around its institutions to keep the forces of the ambient culture out, the procedure has failed. The CNS folk can build walls as high as they like and still at the end of a graduation ceremony, and indeed at the end of every Mass, we are sent out into that world beyond. The urge to censor begins in a humane instinct, the desire to protect those we love from influences that might harm them, but it cannot always and everywhere trump another humane instinct, the desire to explore and engage, least of all at a college campus. A ghettoized university is no university at all.

On the other hand, I rather like the fact that we have these debates about the Catholic identity of our colleges and universities (and hospitals and social service providers). Harvard’s motto was once “Pro Christo et Ecclesiae” – for Christ and His Church – but having become a hotbed of Unitarianism and than rationalism, the motto was switched to the more anodyne “Veritas” in the latter half of the nineteenth century. Other great colleges and universities in America find, in the center of their campuses, over-large and under-used chapels – think Princeton, Yale, Wake Forest, Wesleyan – as a testimony to their former religious sensibilities and current lack of such sensibilities. James Tunstead Butchaell’s magisterial (in both senses) book The Dying of the Light catalogues how religious universities lost their religious identity over time and it makes for some grim reading. It is important, even vital, that we Catholics not let that happen to our institutions and so the debate about Catholic identity is a welcome one: we heard last Sunday about the need to prune in order to grow. Between the coarse censoriousness of CNS and the blithe indifferentism of the Ivys, we must find our way forward.

Read the full essay here.

May 11th, 2012

The season of revolution

posted by

The online journal Interface: A Journal for and about Social Movements dedicates much of its most recent issue to the “Arab Spring.” In their editorial, the editors problematize this label for the recent struggles in North Africa and the Middle East:

Whatever name we assign to the events in the Arab world, we end up trapping ourselves in one limiting or problematic framework or another. The concept of seasons is embedded in a long history of Orientalizing the region, as if what happened in the history of Arab people before 2011 did not qualify for an acknowledgment of the energies, struggles, and fighting for a better life they have been waging against western colonialism, intrusions, and unjust local governments for over 100 years. From Algeria, Egypt, Yemen and Iraq to Palestine, Arab people have been putting up a hard fight for over a century against a western, colonial and neo-colonial, capitalist and racist modernity. But this hardly registers in a western-centric mindset and discourse, nor among many in the Arab world.

Despite the obsession of the West with the Arab world, and despite its claims of superior knowledge, Arab people continue to be “misunderstood,” and/or maligned, and established academic theories continue to fail to explain and/or predict developments in the region. With every failure, a more arrogant wave of theories are generated by the same failing western-centric expertise, replacing or continuing the old paradigms of “knowledge” as if nothing had happened. Failures are evaded, and expertise, analyses, and prescriptions are repeated with the same arrogance.

This pattern is due to at least three interrelated issues: modernity, Orientalism, and Eurocentrism, which have been at work in combination since the ascendance of western modernity to global hegemony, with its assumption that humans are rational and thus can achieve accurate knowledge and be accurately studied.

In addition to interviews, “action notes,” and a reflection by Samir Amin, the issue contains a number of peer-reviewed articles, which are all available to read under the journal’s open-access policy:

  • Dream history of the global South by Vijay Prashad (PDF)
  • Containing the “Arab Spring” by Jeremy Salt (PDF)
  • The legacy of US intervention and the Tunisian revolution: promises and challenges one year on by Azadeh Shahshahani and Corinna Mullin (PDF)
  • Syria, the Arab uprisings, and the political economy of authoritarian resilience by Bassam Haddad (PDF)
  • Corporate American media coverage of Arab revolutions: the contradictory messages of modernity by Steven Salaita (PDF)
  • A politics of non-recognition? Biopolitics of Arab Gulf worker protests in the year of uprisings by Ahmed Kanna (PDF)
  • The Arab upsurge and the “viral” revolutions of our time by Aditya Nigam (PDF)

Explore the full issue here.

May 11th, 2012

Political and religious groups clash in Bonn

posted by

Last Saturday, a regional political rally in the German city of Bonn turned violent as Salafists, followers of a conservative and literalist approach to Islam, fought with police protecting a political demonstration by the right-wing German group, Pro-North Rhine-Westphalia. At Der SpiegelCharles Hawley characterizes the event as violent retaliation from the Salafists after extended provocation from Pro-NRW, including cartoon caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad. It is important to note that Salafists made up only a fraction of the protestors that showed up to the Pro-NRW rally, which was intended to influence local elections. Hawley writes:

Indeed, the violence of Saturday — coming on the heels of a similar confrontation between Salafists and Pro-NRW last week — would seem exactly what Pro-NRW had been hoping for. The stridently anti-Muslim party has spent years struggling, and failing, to attract the kind of attention comparable right-wing populist parties have achieved in virtually all of Germany’s neighboring countries. Sunday parliamentary elections in the group’s home state have spurned them to once again try to attract votes.

Read the full story at Spiegel Online.

May 9th, 2012

Backlash against Muslims?

posted by

At The Atlantic, Conor Friedersdorf attempts to prove wrong writers, political commentators, and politicians who claim that post-9/11 Islamophobia is a media-conceived, unsubstantiated hoax. Written in response to Jeffrey Tobin’s recent piece for Commentary, in which the author claims that growth of the American Muslim population since 2001 indicates that there must not have been/is not an ongoing post-9/11 backlash against Muslims in the United States, Friedersdorf argues:

I don’t think Muslim Americans should be cowering in their homes or unduly      paranoid. There is, however, more specific evidence that Muslim Americans have faced an observable backlash and discrimination since 9/11.

As noted, law enforcement agencies target Muslims for special surveillance.

In communities including Staten Island; Brooklyn; Temecula, Calif.; Murfreesboro, Tenn.; and Lower Manhattan, there have been street protests organized in opposition to permitting Muslims to build mosques. And multiple Republican presidential candidates spoke out against the so-called Ground Zero mosque. Here is a map the ACLU has put together of anti-mosque incidents.

In hate crimes based on religion, Muslims are the second most-victimized group, and every year since 9/11 they’ve been victimized at rates higher than before the attacks. Is that a coincidence?

President Obama is accused by some of his political enemies of being “a secret Muslim,” as if Islamic faith itself is a slur.

Said Gallup in 2010, “More than 4 in 10 Americans (43%) admit to feeling at least ‘a little’ prejudice toward Muslims — more than twice the number who say the same about Christians (18%), Jews (15%) and Buddhists (14%).”

“A decade after Sept. 11, 2001, the survey, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, shows that a majority of Muslims say the terrorist attacks made it more difficult to be a Muslim in the United States. Many said that they had been singled out by airport security officers and that people had acted suspicious of them or called them offensive names. But half also said Americans had been friendly toward them, and three-quarters expressed faith that with hard work, they could get ahead.” There is bad news and good news in those numbers. I am not sure why Tobin is so insistent on pretending the bad news isn’t there.

Read the full article here.

May 9th, 2012

Contingency, divinity, and revelation

posted by

In The New Inquiry, Adam Kotsko reviews Quentin Meillassoux’s The Number and the Siren, a study of Mallarmé’s last poem:

As Meillassoux summarizes it, [Mallarmé's poem] Un Coup de Dés centers on the aftermath of a shipwreck, which leaves a mysterious “Master” with one seemingly meaningless final choice: whether to throw a pair of dice. It is never revealed whether he actually does so, and he is pulled into a whirlpool. Along the way, we are treated to an enigmatic vision of a siren who destroys the rock that presumably led to the shipwreck, and various reflections on “the unique Number that cannot be // another.” The poem closes with the suggestion that a new stellar constellation may, perhaps, have been set in motion by the Master’s dice-throw. All of this is presented in a unique layout, with lines stretching across two facing pages, varied typography, and virtually no punctuation.

In Meillassoux’s reading, Mallarmé is reflecting on the task of the poet in the wake of the “shipwreck” of traditional poetic form occasioned by the rise of free verse. Where he breaks with most contemporary interpreters, however, is in seeing Un Coup de Dés as part of Mallarmé’s attempt to create an artistic form that could found a modern ritual with all the power and meaning of the Roman Catholic Mass. This project centered on the composition of a liturgical poem called “the Book” that would be part of a numerologically structured ceremony of public reading.

Many critics view this ambition of Mallarmé’s as crazy and embarrassing, something that he surely got out of his system by the time he wrote his final great work. Meillassoux, however, not only claims that Un Coup de Dés is a continuation of the project of the Book, but that—thanks to Meillassoux’s own investigation, which effectively unlocks the meaning of the poem—Mallarmé has in fact actually succeeded in an achievement that could found a new poetic religion that would be secular modernity’s answer to Christianity.

Stéphane Mallarmé is, in short, a modern-day Jesus, and Meillassoux is his St. Paul.

Read the full review here.

May 8th, 2012

West’s witness

posted by

For New York Magazine, Lisa Miller profiles Cornel West, surveying the course of his academic career, personal life, and variety of public spats with figures like Larry Summers and Barack Obama. West tells her, “I want to be like Jesus,” and Miller considers why that might be. West is set to leave Princeton and head to Union Theological Seminary this summer for what he calls “the last stage of his work and witness.”

In November 2007, Cornel West got onstage at the Apollo Theater in Harlem and before a hollering crowd of more than a thousand people, with much arm-­waving and wrist-flapping, along with a certain amount of ass-wagging, introduced his candidate for president of the United States—“my brother, my companion, and my comrade”—Barack Obama. “He’s an eloquent brother,” preached West. “He’s a good brother, he’s a decent brother.” Obama returned the sloppy kiss and pronounced West “an oracle.”

That compliment could not have been more apt, for West regards himself as a prophet more than a professor. He believes that he is called to teach God’s justice to a heedless nation. “There is a price to pay for speaking the truth,” reads the signature on e-mails coming from West’s office. “There is a bigger price for living a lie.” So when his view of the commander-in-chief changed from adoration to disappointment, West was moved to proclaim it out loud. He had already been lobbing rhetorical grenades in the direction of the Oval Office, calling the president “spineless” for his failure to make poor and working people a policy priority and “milquetoast” for kowtowing to corporate interests during the economic crisis. But in an interview with Truthdig, ­published last May, West went nuclear. He called Obama “the black mascot of Wall Street oligarchs.” And then he said he wanted to “slap him,” as the article put it, “on the side of his head.”

In the white world of mainstream media, the interview made a few headlines. But in precincts of the left, and among certain African-American scholars, it unleashed a tide of anguish. West has been an intellectual celebrity for three decades, protected and cherished by his like-minded comrades, but the nasty tone of his Truthdig comments caused many of his closest colleagues to question their devotion, to suspect his motives, and to wonder whether West’s prominence had finally exceeded his merit. Their concerns were in part pragmatic: As the 2012 election approached, some thought West might make his case better if he weren’t quite so mean.

Continue reading here.