Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
That's because his followers don't live in an impoverished, war torn region. If you remove war and poverty from the Middle East, you remove the bite of radical fundamentalism. That's my point.
|
The region isn't impoverished because of war. The poverty was there before the war.
Poverty is rampant in the ME because of the oil. The ruling elite don't have to tap their citizens to create wealth all they need do is tap the earth for oil. The nations that have run out or never had oil to begin with are the ones in the middle east that are the most liberal, have democracies (even if they are just starting out like Bahrain) and encourage diversity.
A nation that has to rely on its people for wealth and prosperity, rather than natural resources, cannot afford to ignore 50% of its populace. So they tend to be more liberal with women's rights.
Those same nations, if they are to tap the resources of their people, must invest in education (upgrades in the software of their people if you will).
They must also rely, increasingly, on trade and interaction with other nations. This inevitably results in a more cosmopolitan outlook.
However, when the opposite is true and all the elite need do to create wealth is drill into the ground and sell their natural resources, they do not have pay attention to their populations other than to keep an eye on them to ensure that they do not rise up to overthrow them.