"Nathan Newman" <nathan.newman at yale.edu>
>And while anti-Islamic prejudice is an evil, Islamic ideology itself >(like
>a lot of religious ideology) does in many cases divert people >from more
>radical critiques of the global economic and political >system.
This is my first post here, but this comment does seem to capture a lot of the attitude of secular left activists towards radical religious activists. I appreciate the caveat "in many cases" but as a radical Catholic activist, there is often the attitude that religious faith stunts peoples political maturity.
Religious critiques of the world are as far-ranging as political critiques (as if there is a clear division between them). It is as reasonable to say that political critiques divert people from moral radical critiques of the immorality of the global system, since politics is often the art of theoretical justification of the unjustifiable.
To me what is often missing in secular political analysis and activism is a focus on the change made in the people transforming and being transformed through radical change. There are often weak theories of "empowerment" (shudder at the phrase) with little focus on the soul being empowered. It is from the radicalism in the change of that soul that truly radical changes in life and society are made.
Now, I'll be the first one to argue that many religious authorities use religion for conservative purposes, but the same can be said for political critiques, including radical political critiques often used to justify authoritarianism in many forms.
But in its essence (okay, always an arguable phrase, but a real one to me), a religious focus on the radical change of the individual keeps those involved in radical change of society honest in their politics. It keeps the focus on the lives and aspirations of the very people in whose name revolution is invoked.
Of course, even secular activists often have a spirituality at the core of their political critiques, but it is often ruthlessly suppressed for its immaturity in favor of elaborate theoretical constructions that amount to the same thing but are spiritually less satisfying to most folks actually involved in social change. While not a fan of the New Age style of activism, since it often combines weak-tea spirituality with weak-tea politics, it is evidence of the spiritual hunger of a lot of political activists.
While the Catholic hierarchy is the patriarchal mess its critics note, I still find more moral sustenance and outrage seeking social justice battling within (and with) that theological tradition than many I know swimming in the loose moral space of secular morality.
And while I don't know Islamic doctrine very well -- although this discussion has peaked my interest -- I can respect the reasons social activists in those countries have found a moral basis for action more appealing for sustaining change. It is not religion itself that diverts radical action, but the pervasive authoritarian conservative traditions that always fight change in any form that divert that action.
So I hope left folks like Nathan would treat religious activists with a bit more respect, not reducing their faith to a mere diversion from "real" social critique.
Peace and Love,
sp
http://members.tripod.com/sp_home/ ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com