We Are Suffering a Surplus of Enlightenment!
Hazem Saghieh Al-Hayat - 14/11/06//
Some Arab writers and commentators have become professionals in attacking liberalism, enlightenment, progress and modernity. Their frequent attacks give the impression that concepts have the upper hand in the Arab world.
Sometimes these critics put the aforementioned terminology between parentheses, or describe them as 'alleged' or 'false'. This suggests that they are not completely opposed to them, but that they have other perceptions concerning them. These critics also infer political options other than those adopted by liberals and advocates of false enlightenment.
First, we must note the existence of alleged and false liberals who enthusiastically support all the actions of the US according to the Arab saying 'Defend your brother, right or wrong'. They even support the politics of the Bush administration represented by Donald Rumsfeld in Iraq, Palestine and elsewhere. In fact, this attitude is only the happy marital home of the stupid follies, extreme class selfishness and cruelty hiding under the cloak of Christian religiousness and charity.
But these are not the target of the sharp criticism, rather those who oppose the policies adopted by Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas, Chavez's Venezuela and Kim Jong Il's Korea. No matter how we extend the definitions of liberalism, modernity, enlightenment and progress, Iran, Syria and the rest remain as distant from them as the North and South poles.
Such criticism might have seemed acceptable if these circles had ever showed some interest in the conditions of law, the individual, liberties or religious reform. They could have left even a narrow margin to these concerns, besides focusing on the 'nation's' rights and liberties. But ignoring such bases for progress and enlightenment turns the critics' claims into pure allegations, and makes their critical role a mere polemical gesture.
One is tempted to interpret the continuous campaigns on scattered, helpless individuals, as a deeper crisis arising from the isolation of the instigators from the main stream cultural life.
The 'nation', which was capable, during the Nasserite era or even the time of Arafat, of mustering culture under its banner, has lost this ability during the time of Nejad. As for populism, the creed of campaigners, it requires a degree of anti intellectualism and communal fanaticism in order to be effective. The truth is that the excessive and abundant availability of these factors is what makes populists actually successful at all levels. Any sociologist with the least integrity can analyze the composition of the current 'masses'. He will only discover that a local form of anti-cultural fanatic fascism is being promoted and reinforced by those critics.
Hence, those who criticize progress and enlightenment without hiding behind parentheses are the most faithful, or at least uninhibited. They are fully supportive to 'Nejadism' and they know that when they serve its interests, they are serving their own. When 'Nejadism' is completely triumphant, these critics will be in charge of publicly whipping their current colleagues who have 'different' views in enlightenment and progress.
|
