At the end of this article there is something I struggle with now:
"The Arab Spring is an attempt to return the region to its roots. It’s
not to Westernize the Middle East and make it more democratic; it’s to
Easternize it and make it more Islamic."

I try and I try and I try, and I can't unlock it, which I think is
because it implies something about Israel that is untrue, but still
commonly taken for granted in West.

The first sentence there could just as well be said about Zionism
resulting in the founding of Israel on the land of ancient Israel.
That was to return (a part of) the region to its roots.

And then the key gets stuck for me: "It’s not to Westernize the Middle
East and make it more democratic." Because while Israel of course is a
democracy it's at its core not Western, and it can't be, because
Judaism is Middle-East, it's not Western.

I sometimes wonder whether it short-circuits the perception of Israel
in Western countries that it is a democracy, so that it automatically
also is perceived as Western, even if it's just to look at the
language to see one's mistake. Sure you can write Hebrew in latin
letters, but you are still faced with the fact that Hebrew is not read
or written left to right (and BTW, you also get some problems with
vowels etc. in latin letters). This is not to be dismissed with "oh,
who cares which way." It's precisely here, already at the language
level it is revealed that Israel is not a Western country.

I wonder how much about Western democracies that people would give up
on in their definition of a "Western-style" democracy so as to be able
to have Israel included in this.

Because since I've personally had to know it I know that Israelis
can't get a civil wedding ceremony in Israel, or if they do they will
not be acknowledged as a married couple by authorities. They have to
go to Europe (!) to get their civil wedding ceremony, and I think I
read somewhere that most of them go to Cyprus. This will be
acknowledged by Israeli authorities. They don't have much choice, do
they? They don't want a conflict with the whole Western world about
wedding ceremonies.

Viggo.

At 15:53 05-08-2012 -0400, Arthur Cordell wrote:

>Just to provide some more perspective on the very unstable middle east.  
> 
>
>
>
>Israel, the Arab world’s all-purpose enemy
>
>
>
>
>
><http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/author/gjonasnp/>George Jonas | 
>
>Aug 4, 2012 6:01 AM ET |
>
>Last Updated: Aug 4, 2012 9:48 AM ET
>
>National Post
>
>And how is the Arab Spring? Well, there’s bad news, and good news. The bad 
>news is that since the beginning of the phenomenon that has been discussed 
>more and understood less than any in recent years, hostility to Israel in the 
>region has only increased. The good news is that while the appetite to harm 
>the Jewish state and its inhabitants has grown in the Arab/Muslim world since 
>the fall of Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali in Tunisia launched what was supposed to 
>be the region’s democratic renewal, the capacity to do so has diminished.
>
>An increase in hostility was predictable. Hatred against Israel, kept on a low 
>boil, is the organizing principle of the Middle East. It’s the region’s main 
>fuel of governance; often its only fuel. Some ruling regimes ­ kings, 
>dictators, whatever ­ may have oil wells and sandy beaches, but other than 
>hating Israel (and looking after their families and tribes) they have few if 
>any ideas. If they do, chances are it’s to hate some other group in addition 
>to Israel.
>
>In the Middle East a country’s national purpose often amounts to little more 
>than a list of its enemies. A feeling of being ill-done by dominates the 
>consciousness of groups and individuals. Since it’s a self-fulfilling 
>prophecy, it’s not necessarily baseless: The easiest way to have an enemy is 
>to be one.
>
>The centrality of hatred to the culture is remarkable. The Cartesian idea is 
>“I hate, therefore I am.” Self-righteousness is overwhelming: each desire 
>thwarted becomes an example of justice denied. It’s not a pretty place, but 
>millions call it home.
>
>In many ways, Israel is a godsend to the one-trick ponies who rule the region. 
>Their culture defines “ruling” as inoculating your own sect or tribe against 
>all others, including the ones that form your own country. Many Middle East 
>nations ­ Iraq, Syria, Libya, to name three ­ are just temporarily halted 
>civil wars. They’re truces rather than countries. Canada may be “two 
>solitudes,” but it isn’t an uneasy truce between French and English Canadians. 
>Iraq is, between Shia and Sunni Muslims.
>
>In such an ambiance, nothing is handier than an all-purpose enemy, just out of 
>reach, close enough to seem a realistic threat but too far to be one. Tyrants 
>can govern by whipping up enough popular sentiment against the Jewish state to 
>give their regimes an apparent national purpose and distract people’s 
>attention from domestic woes, then relax and spend some money in the capitals 
>of Europe.
>
>The key is a low boil, though. If the anti-Israeli sentiment boils over, 
>causing riots against the government for being too soft on the Zionists, or 
>foolish attempts to attack Haifa with rockets, which in turn invites 
>retaliation, the people’s hatred of Israel becomes a headache for the very 
>rulers who instigated it.
>
>“Yeah, well, it couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch,” somebody might say, “I’ll 
>lose no sleep over it.” He should, though, because it’s like pulling a thread 
>from a piece of fabric. Things can unravel in an instant.
>
>Tyranny, Egyptian-style, under Hosni Mubarak or Libyan-style, under Muammar 
>Gaddafi, often manifested itself in dictatorial governments balancing on a 
>tightrope, trying to maintain a fragile peace with Israel against their own 
>bellicose people, trying to counteract the effects of the sentiments they 
>themselves instigated. When they couldn’t, the forces they helped conjure up 
>turned against them. If lucky, they died in a hail of bullets on the reviewing 
>stand like Anwar Sadat; if not, bludgeoned like a cornered rat in a culvert, 
>in the manner of Gaddafi. It’s a fate Bashar al-Assad has been trying to 
>avoid, which is hardly surprising.
>
>Assad “has threatened to rain missiles down on Tel Aviv should NATO try to 
>dislodge him,” as 
><http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/how-the-arab-spring-keeps-israel-safe-7268>Michael
> Koplow put it in the National Interest, but in fact Syria’s tyrant has been 
>raining missiles (and if not missiles, then shells and bullets) on his own 
>towns and villages. No wonder, for that’s where his enemies live ­ his actual 
>enemies, as opposed to his mythical ones. It’s his fellow Syrians who want to 
>trap him in a culvert and drown him, preferably along with his entire tribe. 
>Israel has no interest in touching him with a 10-foot pole, especially as long 
>as he’s keeping Syria’s armed forces and rebels thinning each other’s ranks.
>
>We won’t understand much about the Arab Spring as long as we persist in 
>looking at it through Western eyes. We see popular uprisings against 
>dictatorships as moves in the direction of Western-style democracy. If they 
>happened here, they probably would be. Where they’re actually happening 
>they’re taking their societies in the opposite direction.
>
>The Arab Spring is an attempt to return the region to its roots. It’s not to 
>Westernize the Middle East and make it more democratic; it’s to Easternize it 
>and make it more Islamic. If the early 20th century was about the East trying 
>to join what it couldn’t lick, the early 21st may be about the East trying to 
>lick what it hasn’t been able to join.
> 
> 
>_______________________________________________
>Futurework mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework


_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to