responses to the comments so far...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Seaver
I have to disagree with this. Read up on Hourani or Khouri if you are interested in Arab nationalism. They are my two favorite authors on the subject.
|
interesting, i will check up on both of those authors. which of their works would you consider most accessible?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by seaver
Why do I disagree with this? Because it completely ignores the Liberalism/Secularism of the Arab governments for the first half of the Century.
|
that's not true, and even if it were... i don't understand the relevance (the author's comparison is one of the social/geo-political roots, independent of shared chronology). in fact, the article describes the catalyst for the current heated situation as the series of arab defeats begining in 1948 (aligning with your point that such nationalistic forces weren't in their present form in the first half of the 20th century).
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by seaver
Secondly, very few Arab governments come out and decry against Israel anymore. It is the many clerics that on their own cry for Fatwuas and Jihads, in Germany the clergy did nothing, it was the government that did it. In this way Islam has more in common with America than Germany (my whacko clergy, some proclaiming if you follow them a snakebite wont affect you, some saying Islam is devil worship). Drawing parallels works in this way, you can pick the best against the worst to prove your point.
|
i think you're sidestepping the argument. the hypothesis is that islamic rule (with its complement of mullahs, imams, ayatollahs etc.) is the driving force behind the nation-state. it holds the power of the nation state, just like the national socialists did in post WWI Germany. it was the skeleton of Germany and the Weimar republic that the Nazi party brought to life (under its own code) just as it is the skeleton of geo-political boundaries that islam has domineered (since the 1950s) for it's own political ends. you're drawing a parallel between "our preacher guys" and "their preacher guys" without appreciating the dissimilarities in the way they effect themselves within the nation-state.
dragonlich,
i'm sorry, but that's not true. nationalism is (admittedly) an amorphous term, but it's roots are certainly modern european (be they westphalian or from the french revolution.) check out
the nationalism Wiki or any other source, i think you'll find it to be so. the medieval islamic constructs you alluded to were centered around the caliphate, perhaps the antithesis of nationalism.