Clash of Civilizations

Samuel P. Huntington's book Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order has eerily been taking form ever since he wrote it in the 1990's. The latest cartoon scandal has highlighted this only too well. The heart of the West is liberal democracy (LD). To govern and be governed in such a construct entails more than voting. In fact the latter pales in comparison to the real core of LD: a secular government (i.e. separations of church and state), the individual's liberty and rights, and the rule of law. Islamic civilization (IC) holds closely to its heart, Sharia, Islamic law based on the Quran and the Sunna. In IC, the rights of the individual pale to the well-being of greater society and certainly are subservient to considerations/requirements of any and all paths to God. The government at its core is the church.

Freedom of individual expression is, hence, at the core of LD, and thusly, central to Western civilization. It is clearly NOT at the core of IC's core principles. The latest cartoon scandal illustrates this point extremely well. In the West we may abhor someone's message but we cherish their right to produce it. In IC, someone's message can lead to their death, often sanctified and/or called upon by those in authority (e.g. Imams). The fact that (an) image(s) could lead to the current international response--exemplified by mass protests, gunfire, flag burning, leader-effigy burning, calls for severing of heads, calls for severing of hands, demands for national apologies (more on this later), among other violent expressions--makes it clear that LD is not compatible with IC. One interesting part of the response from within IC has been calls for the government of Denmark to apologize (among more violent demands expressed). But in the West, governments CANNOT control the press (central to LD); in IC, the opposite is not only possible but is the NORM. It is no wonder that demands are directed to the Danish leaders rather than the actual responsible entity: a privately held news organization.

It will be interesting to see how the administration responds to this issue. I predict that it will be a blunted response (as opposed to many European democracies) unless it really boils up (certainly possible). If one connects the dots, it is very clear: the road to a real LD in IC is contradictory on the levels mentioned above (voting sure, individual freedoms unlikely, separation of church and state almost impossible--but there's Turkey you say...we'll see how long that lasts (especially if final.ly refused entry into the EU)...Islamic parties on are the rise there). In short, the reason (the latest reason, which seems to have changed as Bush and the Cronies see fit) for being in Iraq is a joke. You can't have it both ways: LD and IC. There is a way that this could occur: a Luther-type in Islam could arise and lead to major reformation (there are those who indeed call for such a thing). But that will not occur in the McDonald's drive-thru pace that Bush and the mostly unrealistic (and amazingly ignorant) American people expect. The best thing to do is to: get the Hell out of the Middle East, let Israel fend for itself (they do pretty damn well on their own), and develop alternative energy sources PRONTO. Come on, people, the only and I mean ONLY reason we have hung on to the ties to Middle East (including Israel) and risked ALL on the war in Iraq has been OIL. Let Islam find out itself the form of government(s) it needs. We can still trade with them but absolutely must NOT rule them or DEPEND ON THEM.