« pork barrel as a political attack weapon | Main | Treasury comes clean »
February 25, 2005
Iraq: a religious modernity?
A useful insight into Iraqi democracy as designed by the Washington neocons:
You could call it federalism. We do need to remember that the Washington was initially opposed to these elections and wanted them defered until after the constitution had been written. It was Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani who pushed for the elections.
Those who think critically like this obviously support terrorists and hate family values. So say the conservatives. Read Evan Jones' incisive comments over at Alert and Alarmed on the lapdogs.
Iraq democracy may very well become an Islamic State. As Waleed Aly points out in The Sydney Morning Herald:
True, the religious parties, having captured about 48 per cent of the vote, will not have absolute authority in Iraq, and it is probably too early to say how the political tensions among the elected will play out. But one thing from the emerging picture is clear: this will not be an Iraq in which secular forces predominate.
This is not suprising. As Waleed says:
Civilisation in the Middle East reached its zenith under religious government. This was a time of intellectual growth and social justice that, while far from perfect, was enlightened for its age, particularly compared with Europe. By contrast, oppression in the region is principally a modern, post-colonial phenomenon that, with some exceptions, has been experienced at the hands of secular rulers, many of whom were hostile to public religiosity.
So bringing democracy to the Muslem world through occupation produces an Islamic state.
That is not what the US-led coalition of the Willing had in mind when they talked about using their military power to bring freedom and democracy in the Middle East.
Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at February 25, 2005 09:20 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.sauer-thompson.com/mt2/mt-tb.cgi/2699