Thanks Aftab for forwarding this article. I think the distinctions of moderate/modern, extremist/traditional, radical/postmodern are creations of the same west-pop thinking. But these now have universal applications as well....
While thinking about the points argued in the article, the question that came to my mind: where do we locate Prof.M.N.Karassery? as a a small- time careerist who could very well translate the uniform kind of west-sanctioned discourse into a Malabar Malayalam... to put it more precisely, a careerist Malayalam translator of the west-versal discourse of Islam. Karassery, assuming himself to be authentic voice, actually in the process, suppress, different and distinct voices in Malayalam ..... On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 11:56 PM, Afthab Ellath <[email protected]> wrote: > > http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=233848 > > *The moderate Muslim* Monday, April 12, 2010 > Afiya Shehrbano > > The last decade has been a particularly compelling one for many > self-conscious Muslims with regard to the moderate vs radical Islam debate. > Through the process, in varying degrees and capacities, a body of > self-acclaimed �moderate� scholars, students and vague academics have gained > relevance and even, international fame. There are those with iconic status, > such as Talal Asad and Mahmood Mamdani, who lend legitimacy to western > critical reasoning since they defend Islam against western attacks while > located in the West. Then there are small-time careerists such as Irshad > Manji and a spectrum of rainbow Muslims who have been well-received by > Europe and the US from Muslim countries and are speckled all over > new-founded Islamic departments within Western academia and media. Several > of these experts and scholars are often rejected (if they�re lucky, > persecuted) by their countries of origin - often not by their governments > but by obscure political opportunist forces. This tends to make them > subversive and academically sexy to western academia. > > Often, such scholars have been largely irrelevant and ignored within their > societies of origin. This is because in Muslim-majority countries the > audiences tend to be less interested in academic debates and more interested > in piety, ritual and political delivery of religion. Also, in Muslim > societies there is such tremendous competition between religious discourses > that unless it�s a sensationalist blasphemous case purported by some > opportunist, it is unlikely to deserve monopolistic attention. In other > words, as in all disciplines and with all other persuasions of faith, the > higher academic debates elude the common people while the political ones > gain attention. It is due to the political relevance of Islamic scholars > that conflict erupts in Muslim-majority countries, not their academic > differences. > > On the other hand, the scholarship that Muslim academics produce in the > West often attempts to disown radical Islamists or militant expressions of > Islamic belief and seeks recognition, even romanticisation, of the > subjectivity of the Moderate Muslim. This serves the political purpose of > western governments because the current globalised economy and spurts of > terrorism demand that politics stay more centrist, blunted, accommodative > and �safe� - for capital, not necessarily for people. In this environment, > the rhetoric of moderation and tolerance requires that we must purge > ourselves of every shade of non-moderate Muslim, ie, both the radical and > the secular. This has served as a popular political ploy for leaders, both > in Western countries but also in Muslim-majority ones. > > What is the relevance of such projects? On the one hand, there is no > denying the importance of research, analysis, debate and disagreement on any > topic that lends itself to enhancing knowledge and ideas. However, it is > when academia begins to engage with the political, that the application of > such research comes up for discussion. > > In an effort to buffer radical Islamic sentiment, moderate scholarship > attempts to build an alternative body of Islamic history and social norms > derived through an academic rather than political process. The trouble with > sapping out the politics from history is that it becomes rather dull, > pedantic and does not lend itself to the current (modern) political context. > So moderate scholars are split on this point; some suggest aligning Islamic > history to the current context and projected future, while the revivalists > tend to reject modernity and western universalism and are drawn to a newly > constructed, �culturally appropriate� alternative body of norms and laws for > Muslims. This latter proposal preoccupies western governments and societies, > where war has become unpopular and economically draining. > > It also finds resonance in a new generation of young Muslims who have > witnessed the surge of anti-Muslim sentiment expressed by way of irreverent > cartoons, banning of veils and minarets in Europe. The careerist Muslim > scholars all around the world gained most in this period by using this as > evidence of the racism, Islamophobia and anti-liberal humanism that > preoccupies western politics and inflicts �moral injury� to Muslims > globally. This made it opportune for troubled leaders to construct the idea > of an alternative, soft, Sufi Islam. It didn�t matter that this makes > absolutely no policy sense and is simply a re-packaged way of suggesting the > state remain secular without actually saying so. Politically it has more > serious repercussions. > > The trouble with such theory is that it gives a cover for intervention > under a more subtle guise. Republican-sponsored Islamophobia has given way > in the US to a liberal Democrat sentiment, seemingly prone to giving up on > defeating radical Islam by aggression. Instead, the current administration > seeks to pursue a policy that concedes to appeasing Muslim (male) sentiments > by funding projects that enable Muslims to develop themselves through > �Islamically appropriate� rights. This would mean not confronting, > disrupting or challenging existing patriarchal cultures or social practices > or getting into the troubling debate of whether they are religious or > cultural or both. What was earlier the hypocritical, sudden feminist concern > for Muslim women by the Bush administration has now become an equally > self-serving political approach by the Obama regime that wishes to graft a > presumed (moderate) Muslim identity on people in Muslim-majority countries. > This would suggest that development and relief should be carried out, to use > an example, by Islamic Relief rather than Red Cross; or projects should > assist Muslim women who can stay at home in veils and do home-based work > rather than changing the nature of the market to allow women equal and free > access; or, to form �peace jirgas� to resolve intra-Muslim conflict; or fund > and arm �culturally relevant� lashkar forces to defend real Muslims against > the spurious ones. > > It�s one thing to respect religious sentiment but another to disregard the > multiplicity of internal cultural dynamics and struggles between competing > political identities within Muslim societies. Such a recognition would mean > no intervention, including not funding �culturally appropriate� projects nor > patronizing any religious persuasion (moderate or not). Instead, maybe the > only criteria for foreign assistance should be towards supporting democratic > civilian efforts rather than dictatorial and/or military ones. > > Interestingly, those who admire western-based Muslim scholars who make > careers of promoting moderate Islam, do not accuse such intellectuals of > being influenced by western rationality or modernity. Ironically, however, > feminists and human rights activists who have spent their lives in their > home countries struggling for specific political rights, including equality > for women and secular rights in Muslim majority countries, are often > dismissed as �un-authentic�, �westernised�, misguided agents of secularism, > even liberal fundamentalists. > > In the final analysis, the only purpose moderate Islamists (those who make > a career of promoting moderate Islam) have served is to have created a wider > wedge between the problematic and often, false binaries of the traditional > and modern, appropriate and inappropriate cultural and/or Islamic practices. > They serve the political purpose of a feel-good strategic use of religion > that accommodates some merger of what are considered, western rationality > and eastern conservatism. But ultimately, they are the fence-sitters who > have enabled the strategic use of Islam to further pragmatic political goals > without substantively making any deep, meaningful change. If anything, > moderate Islamists serve as buffers that may seem more acceptable than > radical ones but in the process they maintain the worst kind of patriarchal > and social conservatism because they endorse slow, gradual and limited > progress that does not contest the broader, entrenched and unequal status > quo. > > The writer is an independent researcher based in Karachi. Email: > [email protected] > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Green Youth Movement" group. > To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<greenyouth%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB.
