Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Rastinny

Sociology Students

Recommended Posts

Peace and Blessings to all

 

I am a sociology student and writing a research project on the so called 'clash of civilizations'. My hypothesis is that what is called a clash of civilizations is actually an expression of dissatisfaction with a range of societal mishappenings existing in Islamic and non Islamic cultures.

I would like to ask the community if you agree with this thesis

if you can help me identify those mishappenings.

 

I thank every one for their contribution.

 

God Bless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds
Peace and Blessings to all

 

I am a sociology student and writing a research project on the so called 'clash of civilizations'.

Salam,

 

Welcome to the forum Rastinny.

 

I agree with you. If I am not mistaken, in his theory, Huntington believes that the clash between nations and states is based on religious and idological reasons rather than political or economic?

 

Islam encouraged people to fight against the oppressor, and it might appear as clash of civilization based on religious reason in the eyes of Huntington and many Westerners who are not quite aware of the Islamic teachings.

 

Therefore, he is wrong. Judaism, Islam, and Christianity share many ideas and beliefs in fact and the followers of these faiths have lived side by side for centuries. Religion has come into play because some people use it as a tool to recruit members, whether or not they are really fighting for their beliefs ... or patriotism. Some of them maybe don't really understand the teaching of the religion and misused it for their benefit. The other important reasons are that the ever decreasing supply of natural resources, interfering by the West, and etc ... there are many reasons for clash of civilization ... Western vs Middle East or Western vs East and etc.

 

And it's time for Dialogue of Civilizations.

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you

 

As I understand it the need to express dissatisfaction about societal affairs by dedicating or submitting oneself to a Divine order is not new. Am I right to suggest that the Salafi school (more than 100 years old) was born out of a simmilar expression of disatisfaction with colonialism?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Am I right to suggest that the Salafi school (more than 100 years old) was born out of a simmilar expression of disatisfaction with colonialism?

I am not sure if it was born out of expression of dissastisfaction with colonialism since salafism is not a political movement.

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True

 

but reading about the founding intellectuals seems like they all advocated Pan-Islamism to resist European colonialism???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i would say its a global war between:

 

 

" two opposites, between two eras. It is a clash between a mentality that belongs to the Middle Ages and another mentality that belongs to the 21st century. It is a clash between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality. It is a clash between freedom and oppression, between democracy and dictatorship. It is a clash between human rights, on the one hand, and the violation of these rights, on other hand. It is a clash between those who treat women like beasts, and those who treat them like human beings."

 

 

this war is also being fought here in the west - it is not a geographical war, it is a social war:

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetbuzzflash(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/farrell/04/03/far04007.html"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetbuzzflash(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/farrell/04/03/far04007.html[/url]

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetcommondreams(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/views05/0909-36.htm"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetcommondreams(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/views05/0909-36.htm[/url]

 

 

huntingdon made the mistake of regarding societies as 'unified conglomerates of ideas', which went to war with other conglomerates, in some Nationalist Social-Darwinism fantasy. Instead societies are composed of various ideas, and many of them contradict each other and conflict. This in itself utterly trashes his thesis, and the only reason his book became so famous is that it is easily manipulated to justify the war-mongering and triumpalism of certain sociopathic individuals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
True

but reading about the founding intellectuals seems like they all advocated Pan-Islamism to resist European colonialism???

Who are these founding fathers? There are actually two views on the history of salafism:

1. Some believe the history of salafism started with the Prophet himself.

2. Some believe that it started in Egypt in the mid 19th century among the intellectuals at al-Azhar University, the preeminent center of Islamic learning in Cairo.

 

Once again, I am not quite sure if the motivation of establishing Salafism is to advocate Pan-Islamism to resist European colonialism. Can you give me an example of the founding intellectuals' views that support this opinion?

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was thinking about the second option of the intellectuals from the University in Cairo

 

• Muhammad Abduh (1849-1905): advocated Pan-Islamism to resist European colonialism.

• Jamāl al-Dīn al-Afghānī (1838-1897): political activist and Islamic nationalist preached ideas of political reform called for a return to the original principles and ideals of Islam, and for greater unity among Islamic peoples. This, al-Afghani argued, would allow the Islamic community to regain its former strength against European powers.

• Muhammad Rashid Rida (1865-1935, Egypt): Also focused on the relative weakness of Muslim societies against Western colonialism, blaming Sufi excesses and the blind imitation of the past (taqlid), for the stagnation of the umma, and the resulting failure to achieve progress in science and technology.

 

From Wikipadia...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i would say its a global war between:

this war is also being fought here in the west - it is not a geographical war, it is a social war:

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"http://############buzzflash######/farrell/04/03/far04007.html"]############buzzflash######/farrell/04/03/far04007.html[/url]

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"http://############commondreams######/views05/0909-36.htm"]############commondreams######/views05/0909-36.htm[/url]

huntingdon made the mistake of regarding societies as 'unified conglomerates of ideas', which went to war with other conglomerates, in some Nationalist Social-Darwinism fantasy. Instead societies are composed of various ideas, and many of them contradict each other and conflict. This in itself utterly trashes his thesis, and the only reason his book became so famous is that it is easily manipulated to justify the war-mongering and triumpalism of certain sociopathic individuals.

 

 

Thats Indeed what i want to argue

However as the clash is not between cultures what is it? is it between rich and poor? religiouse or secular?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the resistance against the West (or Pan-Islamism) is just one of the many consequences of wanting to have an ideal uncorrupted, pure religious community.

 

With that being said, I believe that salafism was not born out of expression of dissatisfaction of the colonialism, but mainly due to the desire to have an ideal uncorrupted, pure religious community which is free from any foreign innovations, where particular emphasis is given to monotheism (tauhid) and etc etc, and jihad is one of those things being encouraged in salafism. I am referring to those two types of jihad.

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Edited by Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colonialism is just one of them

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, absolutely

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think this is a fair conclusion?

 

Many individuals of both ‘western’ and Islamic fundamentalist cultures are becoming increasingly faced with failures of rational bureaucracy and therefore thrown back to their own resources to find answers to life’s challenges (Beck, ). As modern risk societies place people at the centre of choice and danger, and as public trust in the rational and institutionalised bureaucracies is declining, people continue to express a need for spirituality and use varying degrees of spirituality to deal with the societal challenges like alienation, purposelessness and disenchantment (Macionis and Plummer, 2002). The real nature of the conflict is thus not ‘cultural plurality’ but a critical attitude to some effects of social change. This attitude is shared, not only by Islamic fundamentalists but also by many non-Muslims in the ‘west’.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One can argue that throughout the ages certain individuals have explained societal-, natural, even political problems in terms of failures to reach a religious ideal and therefore prescribed an amount of dedication to religious life conflicting with what was commonplace at the time. However, the refusal to explain societal or political problems like colonialism and exploitation in a secular way does not justify their practice. The critique directed at colonialism is also not exclusive to Islamic fundamentalism or even religion. The way a coherent critique of society is constructed can be different between religions, cultural and political movements in both religious and secular societies. But using the way this critique is constructed (in one culture) to devaluate the validity of the critique itself is misleading. Some have argued that such an attitude caused policies such as the ‘war on terror’ to become a ‘carte blanche’ for the oppression of opposition members by authoritarian regimes. Regimes that were coming under pressure from democracy groups and Islamic fundamentalist political opposition, have used the ‘Terrorist’ and ‘Religious Fanatic’ tag on opposition groups, often in a manner that made the populace despise the regime and the ‘west’, for what they feel is removing their control over their own destiny. (######en.wikipedia######/wiki/Islamist)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you think this is a fair conclusion?

Well, I guess so

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×