IDEAS
به زبان فارسی
PICTORY
LATEST MUSIC
SEARCH
Muslim Enlightenment?
10-Jun-2011
Every once in a while a new study surfaces in the United States or some other western country, indicating that the attitude towards Muslims is not only negative but is trending worse over time. A tiny minority in some of these countries even believe that Muslim civil liberties should be curtailed. The response of established Muslim organizations as well as some individual Muslims, generally, is outrage sprinkled with accusations of Islamophobia.
A prime example is the protest in London and elsewhere against the Danish Cartoonists or the murder of Theo Van Gogh the creator of the 10 minute movie “Submission.” In Pakistan, several people died during demonstrations against the cartoonists, and in London one could hear crowds of protestors chanting slogans such as “Behead those who insult Islam" and "Europe is the cancer, Islam is the Answer.” Such behavior not only lends support and credibility to the critics of Islam but, rightly so, brings into question the peaceful nature of Muslims--and as a result Islam.
This further gives rise to frequently asked questions such as: Why are such violent reactions as described above rare among Jews and Christians? How many people in this century died because somebody drew a cartoon of Jesus or burned a Bible as a political statement? How many Christians or Jewish coverts to Islam have had their lives threatened by their former congregants? Why do many Muslim countries not allow churches to be built? Why are Jews and Christians not allowed in Mecca whereas Muslims have no problem visiting almost all the holy places belonging to Jews and Christians? Why are many subjects such as archeological research related to the Quran and Islamic history viewed as “off limits” or if not proscribed, why does one rarely see scholarly works critical of the Quran by Muslims unless the author has been branded “mahareb” or the one who turned away from Islam?
Many Muslims in an attempt to answer these questions resort to apologetic tactics combined with poor excuses in the hope that the problem will go away quickly. All this brings us to the question of this commentary--at what point in time will the Muslims be enlightened enough to accept responsibility for their behavior and condemn these actions en masse? In addition, what factors are needed to bring about this enlightenment and how will we recognize that Muslims have embarked on this journey when it begins?
There are several examples throughout history to look at for clues. The best way, perhaps, is to consider the period of Christian enlightenment. By some accounts the age of reason or enlightenment in the West is pegged around the 18th century although some believe it started earlier in the 15th century and sprang up as a consequence of Luther’s Protestant movement. However, many believe the greatest contributing factor to what made Christian enlightenment possible was the attack on religion. Paul Hazard the 19th century French Scholar states that the aim of the Enlightenment was to ‘put Christianity on trial’. Similarly, Peter Gay Professor of History at Yale (The Enlightenment: An Interpretation (1969), described the Enlightenment as a ‘war on Christianity, and liberation of man from the tyranny of myth.’
When analyzing the Christian example these questions come to mind. Are the right factors in place for an Islamic enlightenment? Considering recent events, particularly after September 11, it is difficult to argue Islam and by association Muslims are not on trial. Muslims have been involved in many high profile indiscriminate attacks in the west not mentioning thousands of Muslims killed and tortured in Muslim countries at the hands of Muslims. It was Muslim terrorists, who bombed a train in Madrid Spain; who held a school hostage in Russia, killing scores of children or attacked a subway in London resulting in 55 people dead.
For Karl Popper, enlightenment is “the effort of men to free themselves to break out of the cage of the closed society, and to form an open society.” It would be short sided and mistaken to assume that the majority of Muslims have an aversion to western globalization and structural changes required for modernity and an open society. However, Muslims have to face the fact that in the twentieth century some of the most oppressive and inhumane societies happen to a be in Muslim countries; the Taliban being a good example. Today, there are still Muslim societies that consider the West the greatest threat to their existence and root their survival in opposing an open society. The philosopher, Henri Bergson who coined the term “closed society” in his writing in 1932, suggested that the reason societies are unable to evolve into “open”, is because religion acts as a mental habit binding human intellect. Some societies are just simply incapable of freeing themselves from the chains of their “cultural constraints.” One can see examples of these mini societies in some Muslim enclaves in Europe and elsewhere where repression of women and forced marriages are the norm.
Karl Popper goes further in ‘The Open Society and its Enemies.’ He states that ‘closed’ societies are profoundly inimical to the idea of human freedom. A fact demonstrated over and over again in recent years in Muslim countries, which are not only slow to adopt new technologies but even try to ban the use of the technological tools of an open society such as Internet, Twitter, and Facebook . When leaders of a closed society feel threatened, technologies such as the Internet and cell phone services are often the first to be shut down, even before the expulsion of reporters. This reinforces the fact that these countries view the open society as a menace, as it encourage an informed population supporting what Kant defines enlightenment to be, “the emancipation of the human consciousness from an immature state of ignorance and error--a mental liberation and human self-knowledge no less.” Open societies morph bigotry into tolerance and then to acceptance, marginalize the self righteous and are less susceptible to be tainted with self destructive dogma.
But what completes enlightenment and prevents its corruption according to the seminal 7 page essay by Kant (What is Enlightenment) in 1784 is Critical thinking, a “declaration of independence” for the open mind. Critical thinking interrupts conversation with cultural norms and moves towards independence in pursuit of intellectual freedom and enlightenment. Without a critical mind according to Kant we become “placid" and "dumb cattle" who cannot think for ourselves. Man becomes incapable of using “his understanding without direction from another”, gravitates towards accepting other’s ideas as his falling into the trap of religious emulation and blind following. "I need not think" Kant writes, "if I can only pay." Enlightened man is not subject to any authority without the use of critical faculty and reason, will not surrender to ignorance and misguided. This brings us to the sad state of critical thinking in Muslim countries. Any critical analysis of the Quran or Islam is generally frowned upon by the Muslim establishments. Up until a few years ago the few critical publications by Muslims had to be published under pseudonyms because of the real threat of physical harm by fellow Muslims that accompanied such writings. There is not a single skeptic organization similar to the internationally known organization “Committee for Skeptical Inquiry” (//www.csicop.org/) in a Muslim country. All archeological work that relates to the Quran or the Islamic theological past is either forbidden, destroyed or conducted undercover. The results are invariably not published widely. Kant correctly reminds us that the enlightened is not afraid of “shadows.” How long would Nietzsche have survived had he been living in a Muslim country today writing “God is dead?”
Considering the factors necessary for the enlightenment to take hold as outlined above namely: attack on religion, open society and critical thinking, Muslims have barely begun the journey. Although some might argue that the attack on Islam is in full swing, there has been little progress in opening Muslim societies or embarking on any form of self criticism; one of the vital ingredients of critical thinking.
However, there is hope. It took 16 centuries before the process of Christian enlightenment started and a few more centuries until as Gay describes in the “Revolution of Reason” gave way to critical thinking and open societies. Muslims are approaching the mid 14th century, according to Islamic calendar and traversing through one of the most spectacular technological era in human history that leaves little room for closed or uninformed populations. Therefore, by all indications Muslim enlightenment is not only inevitable but will come to fruition faster than it did for our Christian brothers.
How will we know that we have reached the shores of enlightenment? The answer is simple; when the large demonstrations by Muslims turn into protests against miscreants like Ben Laden and Anwar Al Awlaki. When talk of enforcing Sharia law is reserved to a few outcasts without the general support of Muslims. When there is no talk of oppression of women in Muslim countries and women are afforded equal opportunity. When burning a Quran is not worthy of news anymore and Muslims can study the book with a critical eye and without the fear of persecution. When the news of rigged elections in Muslim countries is studied in history and not as contemporary events and no Muslim can arise and declare himself representative of God on earth. When Muslims can freely condemn superstitious practices and realize salvation is through self reliance and not through reliance on a hidden Imam at the bottom of a well, as some believe. When Geert Gildner can express his opinion freely while Muslims will engage him in a lively civil discourse. When the right to choose ones path to hell is considered sacred and not interfered with. When synagogues, churches and other non Muslim places of worship can be built in Muslim countries without government opposition. When Muslims can convert to any religion without fear of being murdered. When centuries of traditions (hadith) and Quranic exegesis are openly questioned by Muslims without fear of reprisal and ultimately the final test could be when in a Muslim country a Jew or Christian candidate has equal opportunity to participate in presidential elections or may be better when there could be a gay parade in Saudi Arabia.
Fereydoun Taslimi
NOTE
This paper is an expanded version of a presentation made by the author at International Conference of Critical thinkers for Islamic Reform, Oxford University June-11-13, 2010
RECENT COMMENTS
IRANIANS OF THE DAY
| Person | About | Day |
|---|---|---|
| نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
| Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
| Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
| احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
| گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
| Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
| محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
| Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
iran2050 and good islam,bad islam
by Siavash300 on Thu Jun 16, 2011 09:49 PM PDT"Islam, like any other ideology in the world, can be interpreted negatively or positively" iran2050
Now, bad islam has power. it torture,rape and kill our brothers and sisters and we need to get rid of it. Fight with it. United with your people agains this bad islam.
Siavash300, Your
by Iran 2050 on Wed Jun 15, 2011 07:04 PM PDTSiavash300,
Your problem is that you say “according to IRI” and “according to Zarqawi”. Well, Of course. IRI has one of the strongest propaganda machines EVER, without it, it would have not by any means survived the last 30 years. IRI creates its own definitions for things and spreads it, it bashes people shamelessly, it misrepresents Iran, Arabs, Islam, religion and everything else. They are masters of deception and lie and brutality.
However, they are not that because they are “Muslims”. We had many Khomeini types in our history. They are that because the society that they grew up in, Iran, produces people like that because it has an ultra-tyrannical socio-political structure rarely seen in other parts of the world. The god like head of the state, whether King or Vali Faghih, shows little if any tolerance towards its people. You do not see that brutal dictatorship in many places of the world. And not only that, once they do that to their own people, they go around the neighborhood messing with other nations for more power. Speaking of Iraq, what do you think was the real reason the Iran – Iraq war started? It was because Khomeini initiated an Iranian-type shite revolution in Iraq. Tats no different than attacking a nation with your army. He miscalculated and underestimated Saddam’s madness. The result was the destructions of two great nations.
You’re saying for example that Jordan had stoning but now that they are friends of the West, they stopped it? Come on! Get real!
As I said before, the issue with religion is you cannot just narrow it down to one concept. Islam, like any other ideology in the world, can be interpreted negatively or positively. There are many true Muslims, even in Iran, that pick only the positive teachings of Islam like love thy neighbor and kindness and things like that (even tolerance towards other religions) and become decent people because of that. We ALL met those people. Don’t deny it. That does not underestimate the fact that Islam was founded as means to control the masses. But you have to look at the big picture.
In a free and secular Iran, Islam or any other religion, should NOT be bashed by the state. We can’t say lets get rid of the “Islamic” (In my opinion un-Islamic) Mullahs and things will be OK. All we did we showed a DIFFERENT face of Fascism and intolerance. That’s all. What we need to say is lets get rid of these, as you said it, “criminal gangs” cause that’s in fact who they are. We need to get this “criminal” and “gang” mentality out of our system for good.
And intolerance as I said before is a slippery slope. It WILL come back and bite you in the behind. How many times are we going to keep that happen to us?
ENOUGH.
divaneh has double standard
by Iran 2050 on Wed Jun 15, 2011 06:39 PM PDTDivaneh,
One day you’re calling me “Don Quixote”, the next day “Mulla Nasrudin”, and yet, you accuse ME of “lack the integrity or the minimum intelligence needed for a debate”!!!!!!! All I can say is WOW. Please keep proving my case of pointing out the dictatorship within some Iranians, like you, being the root cause of Iran’s ills.
Cost-Of-Progress,
by Iran 2050 on Wed Jun 15, 2011 06:33 PM PDTCost-Of-Progress,
The problem is not the “number” of Mullahs, it’s the number of intolerant people in our society, whether they are shite, sunni , Christian, Zaroastrian or any other religion. It’s the system that produces people like Khomeini and Reza Shah and Koroush and others. Our system hasn’t changed a bit for 2500 years now, and that’s the problem. The dictatorship in us is still alive. You portray it my friend! You called me un-Iranian because I had a different opinion than you. That’s intolerance buddy.
As far as resourceful, I just used one of many publicly available Persian keyboards on the internet.
And honestly, you think I’m pro IRI? Only thing that means is you haven’t read a word I said! You havent seen me bash IranMilitaryForum on this site every time he supports IRI? I don’t see you facing him!
Are you pro IRI Cost of Progress?
Respond to iran2050 question.
by Siavash300 on Wed Jun 15, 2011 06:09 PM PDT"please explain why isn’t it used in any other Islamic nation, like Kuwait or Jordan or elsewhere? They call themselves “Islamic”, don’t they? If it’s “Arabic”, why none of the above mentioned Arabic-Islamic nations apply it? " iran2050
They don't apply those principals to daily lives. According to criminal gangs who occupied iran, those nations that you mentioned are NOT Islamic states and their goal is to establish such a Islamic empire and appoint Khalifeh in each providence. That is their agenda and their goal. I am surprise that you didn't know that. You may read maniscript of Al- Zarqawi. That monster was killed by U.S troops during Iraq liberation. In his write up, he explicitly said, "the strategie is to establish Islamic empire and appoint khalifeh in each Emarats (states) it has to start from Baghdad which was historically battlefield of sunni muslims. According to them they are true followers of Mohammad and those nations that you mentioned are NOT following Islam. Those nations are followers of western world. Those nations are good allian of west like Iran when shah was on power. Iranians were muslims, but never used those barbaric principals in our daily lives. At this point, we just should get rid of these Islamic bastards, then peace and happiness will follow, as it was during shah days. That is our first priority.
You remind me of Don Quixote
by divaneh on Wed Jun 15, 2011 12:13 PM PDTIran 2050
You remind me of Don Quixote. Aryan supremacy was the stuff of 2nd world war. The world has moved and you are still stuck in the past and busy battling the wind mills. I have repeated a few times that I don't subscribe to the Aryan race agenda and you keep ignoring it which just shows that you lack the integrity or the minimum intelligence needed for a debate. If I had any doubt, you calling a cunning Talabe (whose only skill is to pull his trousers down for the Akhonds and who dreams of the slaughter and rape of people in Qom) a moderate shows that you need a proper brain check. I am not going to waste any more time on you. Go find another wind mill.
۲۰۵۰ جان، عزیزم
Cost-of-ProgressWed Jun 15, 2011 09:14 AM PDT
۲۰۵۰ جان، انتقاد بسیار کار درستی است وقتی که به جا باشد، ولی این کار شما انتقاد نیست.شما درست حرفهای این اسلامی ها را تکرار میکنید. سرکار به نظر میاد یکی دیگر از عاشقان اسلام باشید که همون یک کم هویت که ما ایرانی ها برایمان مانده داره از بین میبره - منظور این رژیمه. راستی، نظر سرکار راجع به این نظام پر برکت چیست؟ هیچوقت که نگفتی چرا از این آخوند ها حمایت میکنی؟____________
IRAN FIRST
____________
Resourceful
by Cost-of-Progress on Wed Jun 15, 2011 09:02 AM PDTSo you think we need more of these blood sucking anti nationalist mullahs? What do you think of the number of thugs they have on payroll? Enough, you think?
More, as in we don't have enough?
What we need is secular (as in non religious) democratric- representative government. In Iran, this will probably happen when hell freezes over....or, when the cows come home, or....
BTW, you're very resourceful. I switched back to English as a courtesy!
____________
IRAN FIRST
____________
Cost Of Progress
by Iran 2050 on Tue Jun 14, 2011 08:32 PM PDTAs far as the San Diego cleric, I praised him because he's a moderate shite. We need more of them.
Cost Of Progress
by Iran 2050 on Tue Jun 14, 2011 08:31 PM PDTاقای کاست اف پروگرس،
اینهم فارسی که جنابعالی طلب فرمودید. حالا دیگه بهانه تان چی میخواد باشه؟
اقای عزیز, یعنی هر کی که از جنبه های بد فرهنک ایرانی انتقاد کرد, ایرانی نیست؟ از کره مریخ اومده؟
...
by Mash Ghasem on Tue Jun 14, 2011 07:01 PM PDTآیت العظما مجنون، این حقیر مایل به تبعید این ۲۰۵۰ به سیبری میباشم. فرصت
راستی ۲۰۵۰ جان،
Cost-of-ProgressTue Jun 14, 2011 06:54 PM PDT
آقای ۲۰۵۰،
Cost-of-ProgressTue Jun 14, 2011 06:48 PM PDT
____________
IRAN FIRST
____________
Divaneh, And your
by Iran 2050 on Tue Jun 14, 2011 06:16 PM PDTDivaneh,
And your logic is similar to Joseph Gobles’s Nazi logic. To you, if you don’t blindly, and without any compelling reasoning, worship “Aryanism”, you are “in favor of the nomadic people” who are created biologically inferior to us great Aryans! Do you have any idea how dumb and chauvinistic that sounds? Just a question.
As far as what I said about research, in case you didn’t notice, there is something called the “Internet”. The “Internet” very easily allows you to pull information in seconds where as it took prior to its inventions days and months to do so. So I’m not asking anyone to “find the center of earth”, a simple Wikipedia search is a good start, unless you think a Wikipedia search is asking people to “find the center of earth”.
Cost-Of-Progress, I
by Iran 2050 on Tue Jun 14, 2011 06:09 PM PDTCost-Of-Progress,
I have to thank you, because you beautifully exemplified the intolerance in us Iranians. The intolerance that I’ve been talking about all along. According to people like you, whoever doesn’t praise Koroush 1000 times a day, and is not racist towards anything non-Farsi, is NOT Iranian. That is exactly what’s wrong with Iran today. This horrific intolerance. Medieval way of thinking.
Yes you’re right, I’m a “south Lebanon shite”!!! lol ..That’s a good one! I never got that one! Oh yeah and I love Nasrollah! lol. By the way, that’s why I bash IRI every chance I get! Nasrollah lover from south Lebanon but passionately anti-IRI! Hmmm…I’m the first of my kind!
No actually I’m from Mars. You got it wrong buddy.
Siavash300, Does
by Iran 2050 on Tue Jun 14, 2011 06:03 PM PDTSiavash300,
Does Islam have barbaric laws? Yes. In that, is it any different than any other religions? No! Try to understand: the problem with Iran today is NOT Islam, it’s the Iranian socio-political system and culture that has been set up for the last 2500 years.
Couple of things about stoning: 1- If stoning is “Islamic”, please explain why isn’t it used in any other Islamic nation, like Kuwait or Jordan or elsewhere? They call themselves “Islamic”, don’t they? If it’s “Arabic”, why none of the above mentioned Arabic-Islamic nations apply it? 2- Wasn’t there murder in Iran prior to the application of stoning? (And it is highly arguable whether stoning was ever even used in Iran!, but let’s say it has, for the sake of discussion). So the problem is the “stoning” method of killing people, not the actual “killing” itself? Didn’t Koroush or Khosrow Parviz or Anoushiravan murder Iranians? They have done that in the most brutal of ways. More brutal than stoning. Don’t you see the problem here Siavash? So if we take out stoning, our problems will resolve? What about the Khemer Rouge? They are as far as it can it get from Islamic people, aren’t they? Do you know their record in murdering their own citizens in the most brutal of fashions? Or how about USSR? Or China?
One should love his/her country, no doubt, all of us do, both sides of this argument love Iran, but there is a huge different between “love” and extreme nationalism/chauvinism/racism. Think about that.
Reza Shah had the Iranian attitude of thugness in him. That’s what his problem was, his son, not as much, Khomeini definitely a lot. All of the above are product of a system gone wrong. The system that has produced people like them and like us, has kept Iran back. Islam didn’t produce it. The problem is elsewhere.
This is Mola Nasredin business
by divaneh on Tue Jun 14, 2011 01:43 PM PDTIran 2050
Your reasoning is very much like Mola Nasredin. One they asked Mola Nasredin where is the centre of earth? He said it is where I have nailed my donkey's rope to the ground. If you disagree go and measure it for yourself.
Now you are making some claims and then ask the readers to go and find proofs for your argument. If that became norm we wouldn't be left with too many factual claims. I still think you are 50% right where you say we are the source of our own problems and it is not just due to the barbarity of Islam. I however think when you question Iran's old civilization and put it behind its nomadic neighbours you are completely wrong. People like me don't live in the past. We know our present shortcomings and status in the world but we should not allow any false claim about our past. Not those who make it greater than what it was and not those who belittle it.
2050
by Cost-of-Progress on Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 AM PDTdude, I don't believe your Iranian spoecially when in the other blog about the San Diego cleric you praised him - even though he is a shia....whoa, a little careless ha? Sharing too much? That's OK, it is obvious that your allegiances lie elsewhere...as in NOT in Iran!By the way, how's your relationship with those in south lebanon? Ya'll get along OK? Any problems with sharing resources?
Just curious....
____________
IRAN FIRST
____________
Wait a minute.. Iran2050
by Siavash300 on Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:46 PM PDT"First off, today’s Iran is in no way similar to Iran 1400 years ago, and it cannot and should not go back to being like 1400 years ago" iran2050
Wrong. These islamic criminal gang who occupied iran for last 32 years using force as it was 1400 years. Forces such as Hejab, lashing people in public, stoning people to death in public. These are all similarity of Iran with whatever it was 1400 years ago in Arabian Peninsula. I am surprised you can't see that my friend. Divaneh gives very good description of what was happened and nice picture of Arabs civilalization. Don't forget, Aryanism is another version of "nationalism". No nation can survive without nationalism. A love for motherland is the key for suvival of the nation. That is Nationalism that appearce as Ayanism. When you talk about Reza shah the great, remember he did a lot for our country. Never took his booth out. God bless his soul. The era of Reza shah was not democratic like what you're experiencing in western world because we are talking about a country that 95% of their people couldn't even read and write their names. The highest level of education was high school diploma by 1935 that Reza shah established Tehran University. Tolerance or democracy comes as a result of education. I tried to explain for you where is the source of conflict between arabs and Iranains. You wrongly blamed it on Reza shah which was not correct. That's all.
Sincerely,
Siavash
Cost – Of- Progress,
by Iran 2050 on Mon Jun 13, 2011 07:34 PM PDTCost – Of- Progress,
The only religion of peace I believe in is universal democracy and co existence. Religion was formed to control humans, however, by religion, I mean ALL religions, not just Islam. Zoroastrianism is worst than Islam and Islam is worse than Zoroastrianism. That’s all. That’s just my opinion though. In a democratic Iran, even a nutjob Shite should be tolerated, or a nutjob Zaroastrian,,and others.
I did not attack pre Islam Iran for the hell of it. I made a point and I stand firm on my point. What I said was the system that was built in pre Islam Iran is the root cause of what we are going through now. 2500 years of tyranny has produced people like Khosrow Parviz, and Shah Abbas, and Reza Shah and Khomeini. Remember this is a system that changed very little since 2500years ago. Many monarchies either do not exist anymore or changed long time ago. The problem is that we are over proud of this system, and for the life of me, I do not understand why some Iranians are like that. How can you not see the very things that you are over proud about , like Aryanism, and Koroush, and and the Persian imperialistic empire, are the root causes of what Iran is going through now? Khomeini is nothing but another Korush and Reza Shah. He’s just more Machiavellian to pick up another title. Shah is now vali faghih. All I’m saying lets not blame Islam for this. Let’s blame us, the people, the people that are result of a bad system.
As I said before, we should be proud of the good things in our history and we should despise the bad things. We shouldn’t be proud that Koroush attack other nations for power, or Nader Shah attacking other nations for power, we shouldn’t be proud that our empire expanded from one sea to another. Invading others is something to be proud of? I understand if we lived 2500 years ago we would be proud, because human brain did not evolve like it is now, but why are we so proud in 2011?
Divaneh, You did
by Iran 2050 on Mon Jun 13, 2011 07:24 PM PDTDivaneh,
You did label me, and you did show intolerance and it is you who is making up things as you go along and I can see that you have become upset after I made such a compelling argument. Thanks though, all you did is proving my point. Also, show me where I “labeled” someone.
I am not religious as well. I despise all religions; however, I think we, as Iranians, are heading in the wrong direction if we show intolerance towards ANY belief, including Islam, when we want to shape the future of our nation. As I said before, going from religious Fascism to national Fascism is going from one hole to another.
As far more detailed things we talked about, I think you need to read some anthropology before attacking people. The people of Lebanon and Iraq (to be more exact Phoenicians and Baylonians/Assyrians/Caldeans) were of Semitic origin. Guess what the origins of Arabs are? SEMITIC! And guess where the people of the kingdom of Sheba, which, yes, existed before Iran was a country, from? SEMITIC! The people of Lebanon and Iraq, just like Arabs, originated from the Arabian Peninsula. They migrated to more northern parts of Arabia. In ancient world, there were little differences between races. Iranians and Afghanis for example were not as far apart as they are now, and neither were Phoenicians/Arabs/Babylonians and others. Even now after centuries, the similarities are there. Just look at the languages.
As far as you asking me about sources, let’s not forget we live in 2011 and the age of internet. No one can get away with falsifying information. Sources are everywhere for you to look.
BTW 2025
by Cost-of-Progress on Mon Jun 13, 2011 01:05 PM PDTReza shah was a patriot no matter what the embracers believe or say. They obviously had (have) a major problem with him since he could read them like a book and tried to limit and cut their power. That is a hell of a lot more that I can say for the those who pretend to "lead" Iran today.
____________
IRAN FIRST
____________
Iran 2050
by Cost-of-Progress on Mon Jun 13, 2011 01:01 PM PDTyou, like every other embracer of the religion of peace, immediately attack Iran's past (and pre-islam Iran).
Can you find one single entry of mine (go abck in my blog history) where I say Aryan this and Aryan that? While I am proud of the past, I am not naive enough to live in it.
I usually do not prolong this type of discussion with folks like you. You made up your mind a long time ago, but know this that approval of foriegn scripts on "YOUR" flag is a clear sign of being very very confused.
Cheers pal....
CoP
____________
IRAN FIRST
____________
That is beyond belief Iran 2050
by divaneh on Mon Jun 13, 2011 11:21 AM PDTDid you read my comments or are you having a debate with yourself? Where did I label you? On the contrary you are the one who label others. Where did I beat the drum of Aryan race or promoted Zoroastrianism? I am in fact against all religions and think all clergies should be defrocke and made to work. I think you have some difficulty with reading and comprehension.
I did not say that Iranians did not attack other nations as we all know that they did. Not only Scythes were plundering others but also other members of the big Iranian tribe including Erics, Turics, Sarms, etc did the same. Also, I am not sure if Khazars are from the same Indo-Iranian tribe.
With Adnanis and Qahtanis, they are known as the ancestors of people of Arabian Peninsula and not Lebanon or Iraq. It would be interesting to see some references to support your claim that Phoenicians, Babylonians and Assyrians were Adnanis.
You claim that Arabs had older civilization than Iranians. A claim that you have repeated in your last comment. Of course making claims based on thin air is a very easy job but will not take your argument too far. What is the basis for this? Queen of Saba? did she exist? Even if she did, it is estimated that she lived about 1000 BC. Zartosht is estimated to have lived around 1500 BC, i.e around 5 centuries before your beautiful queen and King Solomon. And what was the significance or magnitude of a ruler in Yemen-Ethiopia and another local ruler in Israel in comparison to one of the largest empires that the world has ever seen?
I ignore your other questions about why Cyrus attacked Babylon, or Cambyses attacked Egypt or Nader plundered India, as this is long enough already. Try not to jumble too many things together.
At the end, here is a little picture of Arab civilization for you. Please let me know if he is an Adnani or a Qahtani?
//3.bp.blogspot.com/_2lqbky-cSgg/RrUrUMV3gcI/AAAAAAAAAbo/KnHCPTEvUOU/s400/21-african-shower.jpg
Intolerance is a never ending cycle
by Iran 2050 on Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:18 AM PDTSiavash300,
You’re way of thinking is exactly what I’m pointing out to. Unfortunately, that perception is wrong.
First off, today’s Iran is in no way similar to Iran 1400 years ago, and it cannot and should not go back to being like 1400 years ago. Cultures are all about evolvement and the ones that do not evolve get left behind. One of the things that Iranians should be proud of, and unfortunately they are NOT, is that Iran is a multicultural nation, not some romantic fictional “Aryan” nation. As an Iranian, I am proud of the Arab Khuzestani heritage as much as I’m proud of Turkmen heritage in the north, and both Turkemens and Arabs invaded the land that is now known as Iran.
You cannot blame an entire culture, or belittle them, just because at some distant past, they fought with you, even if they invaded you. That’s a medieval mentality, and since many Iranians, unfortunately, think like you, we are a nation with a “medieval” mentality, thus, isolated, backward and troubled.
It’s not the fault of today’s’ Arabs or Turks that there was a fight between their ancestors and our ancestors. Every neighbor on this planet had wars between them and they invaded each other all the time. Let me give you some example: French –German, French – English, Roman – Germans, Roman – French (Italians – French), Romans – Anglo Saxons (Italy – England), China – Japan, Korea – Japan, china – Mongolia , India – Mongolia, Iran – Mongolia, Iran – Egypt (yes we invaded Egypt for no reason), Iran –Turkey, …and here’s one for you U.S – Mexico! So, why are we the only people who are so racist and intolerant about all this?
Second and finally, shouldn’t Arabs be angrier of us for the Achamenians and Sasanids invading Araban land in Noman (what is today’s Iraq) and Babylon and Assyrians centuries ago before they invaded Persia? We are a RACIST nation. Remember what Khosrow Parviz said to Mohammed’s messenger? Are you proud of that? That was before Arab invasion. None of the other kings portrayed such intolerance, racism and ignorance like he did.
The problem is within us my friend.
Reza Shah DID in fact create this fake “Aryanism”. He did that because he wanted to legitimize his illegitimate reign. He is a less violent version of Khomeini. That’s all. When you spread intolerance, it comes back and bite you in the a$$. Because he spread intolerance toward anything “non Aryan!!”, in 1979, a group of disfranchised and alienated Iranians, took revenge and displayed their own version of intolerance that was nothing more than their reaction to the intolerance towards them. We belittled Akhoonds and anything that sounded “Arabic” as state policy and indoctrinate it to our children, so, they took over and did the same thing against Iran’s pre-Islamic heritage. We belittled Balouchs and Kurds and others and now they want independence. And all we can do is to blame their call for justice on “England” and “BBC”!! “Kaar, Kaar-e-englisihast”!
Intolerance is a never ending cycle. So , you should never get into that circle.
Iran2050 and Arab hating.
by Siavash300 on Mon Jun 13, 2011 06:00 AM PDT"So this whole BS about Persians hating Arabs and vice versa is nothing but a false fantasy ideology created by Reza Shah" iran2050
That is wrong. The issue of conflict between Arab and Iranians goes back to ancient time and has nothing to do with Reza shah the great. The battle of Ghadesayeh, Khaled ibn walid, saad ibn vaas, the invasion of arabs that used to call iranian AJAM, means deaf and dumb for almost 300 years till the rise of Yaghob-e-lace. Persians never forgive Umar, nor the invasion of arabs since then.There is a certain day in Iranian calender that they celeberate killing of Umar, in that ceremoney Persians making mannequin of Umar and burn it in effigy. (Eid-e-Umar koshan).
Confusion about Aryanism comes from usage of Aryan in political term versus racial term. Nowadays, Aryan reflects the political agenda rather than referring to biological basis or bloodline.
Behead, Massacre, Annihilate those who insult Islam ...
by Shazde Asdola Mirza on Sun Jun 12, 2011 04:58 PM PDTWell, if this picture does not demonstrate Mulsim Enlightenment ... then what can ever ?!?!
Divaneh , labeling people is WRONG
by Iran 2050 on Sun Jun 12, 2011 04:49 PM PDTDivaneh , you are wrong. I think you also carry some of that irrational Iranian proud within you according to what you said. Cyrus is NOT embodiment of Iranian wisdom.
First off, Romans did invade England. The Anglo Saxons, whether they came in at that time or later on, used Latin writing. And actually so did the Gauls in France and many other nations. Again, we have a choice here. Do we want to destroy Iran’s post “Aryan!!” heritage? You think converting to Zoroastrianism and bringing back Pahlavi writing will help Iran? Some of the world’s worst regimes were non religious (USSR) and “Aryan!!” in ideology (Nazism). So let’s not fool ourselves.
Second off, it appears that you are one lacking knowledge about Iranians and Arabs. If we want to belittle the whole Semitic race because we think Arabs are “uncivilized”, then the same logic can use to belittle the Aryan race because Scythes (Ancestors of today’s Sistanis and Pashtos) are Aryan too. So are the Khazars and others. They had nothing else to do than plunder other nations, including Iran itself! They were no different than Iranians in customs, language and other things.
Arabs are two groups, Adnanis and Qahtanis. The Adnanis are the cousins (and sometimes ancestors) of great civilizations like Phoenicians (who invented writing), Babylonians and Assyrians. Qahtanis are the people in Yemen and Arabian Peninsula. The civilization in Yemen (Saba) predates Iranian civilization by centuries. As I said, they had queens, beautiful monuments, civilization,,etc,,,before Iran ever existed.
I would appreciate if you some research on this. As I said, you cannot generalize like cultures like this. You cannot call people “vahshi” (savage) and call your culture better than theirs because their civilization at that time invaded your civilization. If you do some research you would see that Iranians attacked and invaded northern part of Arabian Peninsula many centuries before the Islamic rise. Iran has attacked many countries itself, and in that, they are no different than others. Didn’t Koroush attack Babylon? What did Babylon ever do to Iran? Or did he have a “freedom” agenda as well! Didn’t Kambojiyah invade Egypt? Did Egypt attack Iran first? Didn’t Nader Shah attack India? What did India ever do to Iran? Examples are everywhere.
Have you heard of the Nomani kingdom? Do a search. That was an Arabic kingdom invaded by the Persians and actually many Nomani Arabs died defending Iran’s borders. So this whole BS about Persians hating Arabs and vice versa is nothing but a false fantasy ideology created by Reza Shah.
And here is
by Raoul1955 on Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:47 AM PDTanother 'allah-o-akbaring act' commited by muslims on June 11, 2011 resulting in 34 deaths and...:
//www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13739949
you are right and wrong Iran 2050
by divaneh on Sun Jun 12, 2011 06:45 AM PDTYou are right in the fact that our problems predates Islam and goes back to the corrupt Zoroastrian priests who later changed clothes and now we know them as Akhonds. I also agree that we do not need another ideological regime being religion or whatever else. We are however looking for a secular Iran that protects the interest of all Iranians and in that sense nationality is of primary importance, just as it is in UK and USA that you admire.
You are wrong about a few things too. To my little knowledge, Anglo-Saxons did not fight the Romans. They invaded the Island that we know as UK after Romans left that protectorate.
When you say Arab civilization predates Iranians, you demonstrate that you don't know much about Arabs nor Iranians. You mix Yemen civilization (that had good relations with Sassanids) with the desert Arabs. As you know many of those Arab speaking countries are not in fact Arabs. With Iranians, the civilization did not start with Cyrus. He was the embodiment of the wisdom of a very old culture.
There is a fine line Iran 2050. Racism is not good, but lack of identity and lack of knowledge of our past is as bad.