Cross-cultural Dialogue Instead of a Universalistic Monologue
8/9/2002 - Political - Article Ref: IV0206-1670
By: Siraj Islam Mufti
Iviews*
A recurring call echoed in the West since September 11 was that of reform in
the Muslim societies. To this end, the United States is asking them to
reform their religious education. It is assumed by several scholars,
journalists and politicians that fanaticism that motivated the highjackers,
is rooted in religious precepts - that they teach narrow views to be imposed
on the rest of humanity through violence.
This call is made without any objective analysis: it does not take into
account the causes that underlie Muslim frustrations with the current
situation, and is an exaggeration that considers only a fringe element of
Muslim society. Despite this, it requires examining the 'why' of this
reality: why the West is at odds with the non-Western, especially Islamic
concepts.
Clearly, this problem arises because the West insists that its cultural
norms should become universally accepted as standards. And it is this
universalistic monologue that the U.S. is forcefully engaged in now, instead
of relying on a cross-cultural dialogue that would aim at finding a middle
ground for common human existence.
In fact, ever since the emergence of Islamic movements, the Western
decision-makers and their cohorts in the Muslim societies have suspiciously
viewed the advocacy of religion in the public domain as regressive, and a
return to medieval way of life. Their contention is that the Western society
has progressed intellectually, politically, socially and economically by
pushing religion aside into private life; and therefore, other societies
must follow a similar course for modernity and progress.
This secular assumption has been vigorously advanced as a strategy for
modernization through the model of Westernization. Its advocates range from
Leonard Binder to Samuel Huntington. Although Binder realized that Islam is
central to modernization in the Middle East in his seminal work, Islamic
Liberalism, but unfortunately, that marked the end of his career among
modernization theorists. Conversely, Huntington advanced from advocating
modernization to forecasting the doomful "Clash of Civilizations."
It must be realized that the call for reformation within Muslim societies is
nothing new: For example, consider the middle nineteenth century reputed
reformers Jamaluddin Afghani and Muhammad Abdu. These reformers realized
that profound societal and cultural changes in the Muslim societies were
needed; but they always based them within the Islamic vision - although
their endeavors were frequently undercut by the ruling elite who used the
facade of Western modernity to disguise their despotic intentions. Isn't it
ironical that Western reformation within Muslim societies is voiced by the
very powers that resist Islamic reform? And isn't it even more ironical,
that the advocates of freedom and democracy in the West, in gross violation
of these principles, have aligned themselves with such autocrats to achieve
their specific selfish ends? There goes the truth and honesty!
A meaningful reform of Muslim societies cannot be undertaken by ignoring the
Islamic foundations of Muslim cultures. Nor, can it be unwillingly forced
upon the Muslim masses. Islam is ingrained in the very psyche of Muslims and
any reform effort must be firmly based on it; nothing that is in conflict
with this basic understanding will ever succeed - as clearly evidenced from
various post-colonial experimentation in Muslim lands. Furthermore, all
reform efforts must proceed through free and open debate in the public
square and a consensus achieved before it could be enacted. This is also
what Islam demands in all dealings from home to the state affairs.
A cultural reform has been underway since colonization of Muslim lands, and
includes, in addition to the above, a long list of reformers; for example,
Khairuddin al Tunusi, Abdulrahman al Kawakibi, Rashid Rida, Muhammad Iqbal,
Said al-Nursi, Malik Bennabi, Ali Shariati and Ismail al Faruqi, to name a
few others. Their appeal is to the values and ethos embodied in the Islamic
sources in order to restore the moral autonomy of the individual, and to
develop an open and egalitarian political culture.
Indeed, all major reform movements that brought about profound cultural
changes have been religious. Even the modern secularist West owes it to the
Religious Reformation, as reminded by Weber in his Protestant Ethic.
Likewise, the Muslim East should carry out its own reformation that is
rooted in its Islamic ethos.
Islam requires both individual and societal reformation. It emphasizes
individual responsibility, and as a result, has encouraged various
individual expressions within its very broad boundaries. It inspired
individual creativity in eminent works such as that of al-Farabi, Averroes,
Avicenna and Ibn Khaldun that contributed to the Western scholarship. And
along with it, this individualism has historically maintained, rather
celebrated - pluralism, much more than the modern West. And this pluralism,
lasting until the fall of the Ottoman Empire, reached far beyond the
religious and political into the social, cultural and even legal spheres.
Indeed, the current totalitarian orientation is the result of decline in
rational thought, and the rise of authoritarian regimes encouraged and
assisted by the West.
The universalistic monologue of the U.S. is predicated on its strategic and
hegemonistic designs and is coercive in its nature whereby its proponents
feel justified dictating to others their particulate dictums based on these
considerations. In order that a meaningful dialogue could take place, it
requires instead a change in understanding and attitude - from one that
relies on power and self-righteousness to one that depends on rational
interaction, and respects the autonomy of various cultural communities. Only
thus through an open and free dialogue could universally shared standards be
objectively established.
Therefore, in a world distinguished by its cultural pluralism, the emphasis
must shift from an inter-subjectively derived universal norm of a certain
cultural community (the West, in the current situation), to cross-cultural
inter-subjectivity, wherein communities with their different normative
references must freely acknowledge a universal norm. While explicit
agreement of people within a similar cultural set-up is essential, it is all
the more so, for a cross-cultural dialogue that aims at peace and justice
for the world.
Siraj I. Mufti, Ph.D. retired as a research professor from the University of
Arizona and a chaplain from the U.S. Department of Justice. He currently
writes as a free-lancer.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Visitez http://www.mAliLink.net pour vous deconnecter
Service offert par http://www.afribone.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (c) mAliLink