Kamis, 19 April 2012

No Excuse for Tied Hands on Oil Speculation

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Anyone who drives or owns a business has noticed the recent surge in oil and gasoline prices recently. We have also heard that the price is dependent upon nothing more than good old Econ. 101 supply and demand. This is simply not the case, and there is absolutely no reason that the Obama administration has not initiated investigations at the Department of Justice and the Commodities Futures Trading Commission.

Oil futures speculation has contributed at least 40% to the recent run up in oil prices. Moreover, Wall Street firms trading in oil futures with no intent to ever take delivery of one drop of oil works to distort the market. Wall Street is not a family farmer attempting to lock in a price for his or her soybeans, or a pig farmer seeking to hedge against a drop in pork belly prices. Wall Street's involvement in any commodities futures market does nothing to serve the people who produce commodities nor the public at large. As of today, Wall Street controls more than thirty times the amount of oil being produced and 80% of the oil futures market. In other words, a group of investors who do not use or produce oil are driving the global price. Supply of oil worldwide is at near record levels, and demand is falling. There can be no other explanation but oil speculation for the recent price spike.

The public does not bear the responsibility to force the administration's hand to enforce the law. Even in the case that the administration fears taking action due to tepid interest by the public in such an investigation, numerous groups have petitioned the government seeking action on this front. Trade groups across the spectrum have begged Obama to take action, from large trucking conglomerates, to food retailers, to major airlines, to large-scale shippers, to mom and pops. One is left with no other explanation but that Wall Street has more power than not only the public, but also major corporations. The list is long and varied. Essentially, Wall Street can do as it damn well pleases.

It is certainly not our position that fossil fuels represent the future of energy, in fact we believe the opposite. This is about a fair market, whether it be for oil or for something more obscure. Price manipulation and price fixing hurts every consumer, and if the administration can prosecute a company for raising the price of milk in three small states, oil should be somewhere on its list of priorities.

It is time for this administration to act, and act boldly. Can Wall Street really be so powerful as to prevent a sitting president from taking action that will quite obviously help his reelection chances? That is a frightening proposition indeed.

Ben Stormer: http://www.thirdpartytime.com/.

We at thirdpartytime.com are dedicated to fostering a government responsive to the people -- a government which acts based upon sound science and sound economics. While we consider ourselves to be progressives, we do not necessarily conform to each and every position consistent with the larger progressive movement, nor do we hold any political party affiliation. We will however applaud members of the two major political parties when they act ethically and responsibly on the peoples' behalf.


View the original article here

The Necessity For Insights Into Politics

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

'Politics' is a term that is scary for many and at the same time the most favorite of many others. While there are those who either hate or look down upon the concept and any activity related to it, there are others who actively plan their life so as to make a career in the field. However, its importance just cannot be denied. The various political ideologies play a vital role in the social and political life of every individual. They have a major impact on our lives. Hence, one should not avoid the topic just because on is not an active politician.

Today, there are multiple online websites that allow you to express your ideology while providing you an opportunity to know about what others wish to say. There could be clash of principles, but the knowledge that you receive would make you a better social being. Anyone who likes to think outside the box needs to be abreast with the existing trends across the globe. Today, the economy is in bad shape, and hence, everybody should be knowledgeable about the politics related to the economy of their nation. The intertwined and complex structures of political power make it impossible for the average person to understand what is going around him. The informational resources online would deal with anything and everything that is guided by the political forces across the globe. You could be under the impression that the group fighting to end the atrocities against an individual's monopoly in Uganda might not have any impact on you. Even if there is no direct correlation, you might soon discover that the poor and the needy at the other end of the world are facing similar political issues like you.

Your constitution has entitled you rights, which are often misinterpreted and misused by the minority, which has an upper hand. By receiving an insight into politics, individuals associated with almost any field would be able to attain their goal in life. Whether you are in ecommerce distribution, social media networking, real estate business, private investing, stock trading, foreign exchange, company acquisition or any such field, you must have some knowledge about the ongoing current political developments. There are ample of blogs extensively dealing with the topics of news value which would help you to be informed. Anyone who has an ambition to gain something in life can make use of these platforms.

There are many independent thinkers who might be able to provide you with the information that you seek. Subscribing to their blogs and referring to the information are excellent practices. The discussions, debates, articles and more would help you learn about the current situations. Your ideas in politics might sound crazy, but you sure have the freedom to express them. The online platforms allow you to express your opinion on various subject matters. Commenting on the blog posts as a guest blogger is an excellent practice to be amidst the exciting topics which are being discussed in your country or region.

Ryan Ridgway is the author of this article on Wealth.
Find more information on Politics here


View the original article here

Iran and Hizbolah

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Check mate

The final hour of this historical moment is approaching in this international tournament of chess game between the ancient masters of chess and the new prince in the hood.

Iran is the ancient master of this game where as the new prince is none else than the United States.

Will the United States of America be able to execute the last move and check mate on Iran chess board once and for all in this day and age of tribulation!

Will the ancient master succeed to out maneuver the new prince once more, this is yet to be seen, but what is historically recognized as a fact is that Briton was a better opponent in this game especially with Persia...

The last move I am referring to in here obviously is Hezbollah and certainly not Syria. As a matter of fact, Iran has no trust in the Syrian regime due to several known facts; first is Syria was and still is a broker interested in competitively playing a pivotal role in the Middle East game for a higher payoff, Syria managed to fool itself and others that it is small country with super power foreign ministry due to its previous occupation of Lebanon and stretched out manipulation of the Palestinian frictions between its warring and disputing factions. Then there is the other fact which is just as common that is Hezbollah, Hezbollah is an inseparable entity of the Shiite republic of Iran sharing in common creed and belief and divine vision and that makes it the most advanced out post for Iran in its conflict and probable future confrontation with any western power and Israel...

Syria will lose this game because the Syrians are simply playing poker on a chess board, in chess there is no room for a miscalculated gambling, that would only lead to check mate and that is what will eventually happen with Syria.

Iran on the other hand is very successful in playing this chess game and will continue to do so, since a check mate move is not possible in this current standoff situation which left Israel, United States and its allies in a very unenviable confusion.

Iran is as patient in weaving Persian rugs as playing off a last game of chess...

In fact, there has never been any such confusion in taking a decision to strike any of Israel's enemies since the day of its formation, and this is rather unprecedented in modern history.

The same applies for Hezbollah which just as successfully proven to be there to stay (on Israel northern border), and removing it might translate to removing a great chunk of present Israel.

Hezbollah is playing his cards as wittingly as Iran, promising flexibility while showing no retreats and no dodging whatsoever...

We need to consider one solid and uncompromising truth concerning Hezbollah political principal and military stance. Hezbollah cannot compromise, will not compromise not now and not as long as it exists, and for any regional, local or international diplomatic body hoping this would or might ever be achieved in future through negotiation is an utter ignorance of Hezbollah Islamic foundational background which would become illegitimate if Hezbollah either accepts to share power with any none follower of their sect and philosophy or any other governing system not based upon Islamic shariaat law.

It would be easier for Hezbollah to split Lebanon into two separate states instead, or simply do what it is doing now, which is keeping a Maronite Christian ally (Mishal Awn) up front to avoid having to deal directly with any unwanted competitor or adversary which is a genius politics by Hezbollah leadership with a lot of complexity indeed...

As for dealing with Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, well, that would be a very big mistake since they have a divine cause and a very disciplined and systematic vision for a future of eternity in paradise according to their belief...

This year will be very interesting to monitor since coming events promises to be more thrilling than any Hollywood action movie, the coming events are going to be solid reality with vivid and accelerated action fit to re shape the whole of the Middle East and set a new logic of super power concept.

As for the foreseen downfall of the current Syrian regime and leadership, and on the contrary to common belief in that region, such downfall will drastically strengthen Hezbollah and free it from many undesired obligations towards this regime.

Conclusion; if there is any change to take place for the near future it would only be achieved through a bone breaking confrontation between Iran and allies and its sworn enemy Israel and its allies... this is a genuine finger biting situation, I wonder who is going to scream first...

I am afraid all I see for that already tiny country of Lebanon in the near future is a division into some sort of a confederacy to preserve stability and sustain internal peace, otherwise, its another armed conflict for Lebanon as well...

Keep your watch

Adam El masri

Adam El Masri

Author & Researcher

http://www.paradetect.com/


View the original article here

Socialism Is Great, It's Working Well in the Nordic Countries - He Claimed

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Often socialists will cite the incredible success of socialism in Nordic Countries, however much of their claims are simply nonsense. Indeed, on much closer review things are no so perfect in these nations and so-called socialist utopias. Not long ago, an acquaintance attempted to promote socialism by evoking the examples of Sweden and Denmark as total success, and perfect examples of how socialism is the future, and the path that even the US ought to take. I completely disagree in the strongest terms. Okay so, let's talk shall we?

Interestingly enough, I live in an international tourist town and meet people often from all over the world. I also travel quite a bit and purposefully ask folks I meet where they are from. You see, I have talked with many people in Nordic countries, even those nations my acquaintance had mentioned. Perhaps, what I'd like to do here is give a decent counter argument, not necessarily why socialism is wrong for the US, most of us realize that, but rather to put an end to this rumor that all is warm and fuzzy in these Nordic Countries.

Now then, don't you remember the shootings of all the socialist leadership kids on that island retreat in Norway? Why did that happen? It's simple, as there is a lot of animosity being swept under the socialist carpet of political correctness. I'd say "destroying the individual's life experience" sums it up pretty nicely - direct and to the point, thus, that is my argument as I stated to my acquaintance, so I thought you should know. I'd say it stands and it's valid.

Specifically, as I said before my acquaintance brought up Denmark and Sweden. Do you remember how the cartoonist in Denmark was targeted by outraged Muslims over his depiction of Mohammed as a terrorist? There were many bombings around that country from that incident. Does that sound like a happy society where everyone is living in utopia? The locals are angry, the Muslim immigrants are angry and the government cannot afford to continue what it is doing in the way of socialist promises to the people.

Sweden is having issues things have deteriorated, many indigenous Swedes feel crowded-out and that their country is being overrun, they are angry at their government and there is severe tension between Muslim-Swedes and those who have generations there. Denmark is also having similar challenges, and the political correctness is causing friction, not yet at the point of what happened in Norway, but it's a problem.

Socialism may have worked for a while in these nations when the population was quite homogenous, but not with the increased costs of all the Muslim immigrants. Further, I'd say you should read a piece in the WSJ on March 27, 2012 titled; "Obama's Europa Complex" by Mark Helprin, which makes a lot of similar points to what I am saying here. In fact, one quote in that article pretty much sums it up; "why emulate countries with high budget deficits, high unemployment, low birthrates, and weak defense?"

What I am saying is this, socialism isn't working in those nations, nor has it been all that great in Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and we all know the challenges with the EU's economy right now, it's not a pretty picture. Should we blame socialism for this? Absolutely, and to deny that would be wrong. Beware of those preaching socialism for the US. Not only has it not worked there, but it wouldn't work here even if it did in Europe. Nothing is similar, we'd be fools to follow Europe off that cliff. Please consider all this and think on it.

Lance Winslow has launched a new provocative eBook on 2012 Q1 Politics. Lance Winslow is a retired Founder of a Nationwide Franchise Chain, and now runs the Online Think Tank; http://www.worldthinktank.net/


View the original article here

Governments Worldwide Embrace Voluntary Carbon Market

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

The global carbon market has evolved in recent years on the back of negotiation and application of the Kyoto Protocol. Although primarily compliance-driven, the worldwide carbon market includes an active voluntary retail arm. Still very small in comparison with the compliance segment, the voluntary carbon market nevertheless has large growth potential in the prospect of extension to countries not embraced by existing compliance regimes. Additionally, a report by Ecosystem Marketplace has found that more and more national and regional governments are resorting to voluntary carbon offsetting markets to meet emissions reduction targets. Some 21 government programmes are currently under way with nine of these having emerged in the last four years. The report profiles 13 such initiatives, of which five were set up by regional regulators - three in the United States and one each in Italy and Canada - and eight by national governments in Europe, Asia and Latin America.

Despite doubts held by a portion of consumers, companies and policymakers as to whether carbon credits are an appropriate means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, governments worldwide have incorporated voluntary climate-change solutions into their formal strategies and development tools for a low-carbon economy. Ecosystem Marketplace found that governments have moved beyond their traditional role of providing oversight for voluntary offsetting programmes to now performing services ranging from the certification of projects and development of emission-reduction methodologies to registering carbon credits and educating buyers.

Research-based data shows that there has been a great shift from scepticism about to acceptance of the voluntary carbon market as a valid complement to regulation. Three years ago, the Carbon Markets & Investors Association (CMIA) and the International Carbon Reduction and Offset Alliance (ICROA) convened a dialog between national governments and carbon market representatives to identify attitudes towards the voluntary carbon market. The picture to emerge was of the perception amongst most governments of a lack of market transparency, weak governance of existing standards and registries, and a poorly communicated product.

It's a fact that the voluntary carbon market has too much been characterised by an absence of publicly available market information and lack of transparency, together with concerns about the lack of credibility, all of which could hinder future investment and growth. Alongside the absence of a universal registry, an identifiable causal factor has been the range of different procedures applied to projects. Some standards and processes have been backed by credible organisations but many were not available to public scrutiny and could be substantially less rigorous. Now however there is widespread recognition that rigorous standards are critical to ensuring market credibility and providing assurance that carbon offsets put onto the market are genuine, high quality and are not double counted. This created an apparent warming in attitudes towards the voluntary carbon market.

The United States has famously failed to develop a strategy for slowing the process of or adapting to climate change, but that hasn't stopped the US states of Oklahoma, California, and Oregon from creating their own frameworks to support greenhouse gas emissions trading. These sub-national governments use offsetting tools that were developed originally as non-mandatory measures by which companies could reduce their carbon footprints. And now South Korea, South Africa and Costa Rica are not far behind these North American regional governments in looking to use non-compliance offset standards, the research company said. South Africa has indicated it could consider allowing offsets of voluntary origin for use under its proposed carbon tax, the report added.

This rapid governmental shift in attitude towards the private sector and NGO-driven market for voluntary carbon offsetting, notable in the U.S, Asia and Latin America, stands in stark contrast to Europe. EU policymakers have been long wary of some types of carbon credits, particularly those from forestry, which are banned for compliance use in the EU's Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS). There is also an uneasy relationship between individual EU member states and their regional emissions trading scheme. Indeed, the governments of Italy, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands are increasingly turning to voluntary carbon market mechanisms, both as a source of market innovation to pick up the slack in demand from regulated markets and to exceed formal emission reduction targets.

Emissions reduction volumes in the voluntary market used to be insignificant when compared to the compliance market and the total emissions reductions needed worldwide. However, with the current growth rates of carbon credits traded on the voluntary market, a substantially greater contribution could be realised with subsequent positive outcomes in terms of awareness and regulation.


View the original article here

Reflections on the Ummah-Nation-State Divide

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Hopefully, this essay will provide some food for thought as we begin the arduous process of rethinking many of the fundamental ideas and institutions that developed during an age that is rapidly drawing to a close. As that age expires, many of the ideas accompanying it must be allowed to expire with it. If we attempt to cling dogmatically to outmoded ideas and institutions, we are only delaying their inevitable demise and handicapping the ability of coming generations to build a world that is a more realistic reflection of their resources, potential and limitations.

One of the most profound developments in the modern history of Islam has been the emergence of the Nation-state in Europe and its subsequent imposition on the Muslim world. Its profundity is illustrated by the fact that it has come to capture the imagination of all politically active Muslims. In the process, it became one of the principal means for consolidating the destruction of a viable Islamic civilization by introducing into the Muslim world an institutional and conceptual framework that helped to hasten the disappearance of the institutions and organizations that gave Muslim societies their unique character and identity.

To briefly illustrate both the pervasiveness and the destructiveness of the nation-state in the Muslim world, we can mention the statement of Dr. Sayyid Hussein Nasr that the Muslim nations are united in their destruction of their respective environmental richness. Hence, Qaddafi's Libya, Saddam's Iraq, The Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, etc. all share a reckless disregard for environmental protection and a total disregard of classical Islamic teachings relating to environmental stewardship and conservation. His point is that these Muslim nation-states, despite their varying ideological orientations, have all waged an undeclared war against their fragile ecosystems.

One of the reasons for this is the imperative that the Muslim nation-states "catch-up" with its western counterparts in terms of economic and industrial development. In the context of a linear view of national development, the argument goes, Muslim nation-states cannot afford the luxury of considering the ecological consequences of their so-called development programs. Environmental protection can only come at the cost of slowing development and the strategic implications of lagging to far behind are too grave for ecological concerns to even be considered.

Before proceeding, let us mention that the nation-state as a modern political arrangement was unknown until 1648, at the earliest, in the aftermath of the signing of the Peace of Westphalia, which resulted in the break-up of the Holy Roman Empire. This is seen as the event that demarcates the birth of the modern nation-state. As far as Muslims are concerned, the idea of a sovereign nation-state is a 20th Century phenomenon. Most contemporary Muslim states did not achieve independence until after the Second World War through the expiration of various colonial mandates and decolonization struggles. There are a few exceptions to this chronology, such as the secular Turkish Republic, which achieved its independence in the aftermath of the First World War.

Prior to the 20th Century, hence, for most of the history of the Muslim Ummah, Muslims organized themselves, politically, according arrangements that primarily reflected tribal or geographical lines of demarcation. A sultan's (political leader) authority was demarcated by the limit of his tax-collecting and rebellion-suppression ability, not according to his claim to hold sway over a territory demarcated by fictitious lines drawn on a map. Similarly, although people may have accepted the authority of a particular sultan, their ultimate allegiance was, practically, to their tribe or clan.

Despite such practical ties, most Muslims held a sentimental attachment to the Ummah, in its conceptualization as the global Muslim community. There were instances when that sentimental attachment translated into tangible political action, such as the Turks soliciting volunteers from lands as far flung as India and Morocco to assist in the expulsion of the European occupiers from the remnants of the Ottoman Empire in the aftermath of the First World War.

In endeavoring to look at the question of what it means to be a member of the global Muslim Ummah in the context of the modern nation-state, we must look at the different ways we can examine the idea of the Ummah. We can examine it politically, socially, culturally and religiously. In many instances confusion arises when discussing issues related to this topic, we fail to make these distinctions.

Let us begin by looking at the idea of a distinct Ummah, religiously. Most of the verses in the Qur'an dealing with the idea of a single, unified Ummah are religious statements. They demarcate a unique religious community, and in most instances they enjoin upon it specific religious duties.

"Our Lord! Make the two of us submissive unto you, and from our progeny a community submissive unto you. Teach us our rituals, and accept our repentance. Surely, you are most accepting of repentance, the all merciful".

"Thus have we made you a moderate community in order that that you be a witness against humanity and the Messenger will be a witness against you".

"Let there arise from you a group calling to all good, enjoining right and forbidding wrong. They are those who will be successful".

"You are the best community brought forth [to serve] humanity. You command good, forbid wrong and you believe in Allah".

"They are not the same! Among the People of the Scripture is an upright group that recites the Signs of Allah, throughout the night, all the while in humble prostration".

"How [will it be] when We bring forth from every community a witness, and We will bring you forth as a witness against these".

'Verily, this community of yours is a unified community, and I am your Lord. Worship Me!"

In these verses Allah describes a religious community that has been commissioned with religious responsibilities: submission to God; undertaking certain rituals; witnessing for or against humanity; recipients of and preservers of a scripture; followers of the Prophetic tradition; calling to the path of God; enjoining the right; forbidding the wrong; believing in God; a community that will be testified against by the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessing of Allah upon him, a community established to worship Allah.

These functions are religious duties or obligations that can be performed within or outside of the context of a nation-state. There is no excuse for Muslims not to be performing them in whatever time or place we find ourselves in. This is the most basic level of our defining our membership in the Ummah of Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah upon him. This is a level that defenders of most modern nation-states would view as noncontroversial.

Another level we can consider the Ummah is directly associated with the first. As a religious community of shared rituals, a shared liturgical language, shared dietary conditions, a common general dress code and unique approaches to art and music, Muslims share a common culture. This shared reality creates an Ummah at the cultural level. This cultural Ummah, cuts across the various nations, tribes and geographical regions that comprise the religious Ummah. At its height, it allowed Ibn Battuta to travel over 70,000 miles, from Tangiers in Morocco to Indonesia, and to remain, for the most part in a single, integrated cultural zone. Hence, he was able to become a judge in the Maldives. He was at home wherever he went in the vast Muslim world. His situation stands in stark contrast to Marco Polo, who traveled to many of the same areas a quarter century before Ibn Battuta. The latter was an outside observer in virtually all of the lands he traversed.

This cultural unity has indeed decayed, but it is still an extant reality, even in its diminished form. Muslims pray the same way the world over. We fast the same month of Ramadan in the same way the world over. If a Muslim from Canada and or the United States were to go to Indonesia or Mali he or she would find Muslims praying and fasting exactly as he or she is praying or fasting, and if they were educated, Islamically, they could communicate with their hosts in the Arabic language. Standards governing what constitutes acceptable or Halal food are universal among Muslims.

These cultural distinctions of the Ummah should be actively encouraged regardless of the political imposition of the nation-state over the Muslim people, as they are distinctions that are apolitical in nature. Those cultural traditions that are disappearing, such as calligraphy, spiritual musical, etc. should be revived. Furthermore, these standards have always accommodated local influences. Thus, by way of example, even though traditional Malay food or dress would be viewed as Islamic, it differs markedly from the traditional Fulani, West African Muslim food or dress owing to the unique Malay of Fulani contributions to the Islamic ideal.

It should be also be understood that the cultural reality of Islam has preceded, coexisted with and will likely outlive the nation-state. This latter statement does not assume an inherent superiority of the "Islamic." It assumes that humans will find superior ways to organize their societies than the already anachronistic (to some extent) nation-state. Again, these are levels of endeavor that most advocates and defenders of the nation-state will not find controversial.

The most controversial level of analysis in terms of assessing the relationship between the Muslim Ummah and the nation-state is at the level of politics. Here the degree of controversy does not arise from Islam, if that were the case, the nation-state would have never become the dominant form of political organization among the Muslim people.

The ongoing "Arab Spring" illustrates the pervasiveness of the degree to which Muslims have accepted the nation-state. The various movements in different Muslim countries are focused on who will control the nation-state. They are not movements that challenge the validity of the state itself. The movements' principal slogan illustrates this:

"The people want the downfall of the regime".

The activists, both Muslim and secular, are calling for the eradication of the oppressive ruling regimes, not the eradication of the state itself.

What controversy between Muslims and the nation-state that does exist arises from the nation-state itself, not from Islam and Muslims, with the exception of fringe groups that have little political relevance in their respective societies. The critical question here is what does the nation-state demand of the Ummah. If the nation-state demands the acceptance of a common set of political obligations and the assumption of a common set of political responsibilities, which advance the common good of all of its members, and I am speaking of Muslims in the context of a pluralistic, representative state, then the degree of controversy can be managed.

Among the most fundamental obligations and responsibilities for Muslims living in the western, secular, pluralistic nation-states are the following:

1) Respecting the sanctity of the life, property and honor of one fellow citizens;

2) Respecting the sanctity of the public space;

3) Respecting the plurality of ideas, beliefs and the personal freedoms that underlie them; and expecting that the belief, ideas and personal freedoms of Muslims will be protected.

These are obligations that virtually all Muslims will find acceptable and consistent with Islamic beliefs and values.

However, if the nation-state demands blind, unconditional allegiance that crosses into the realm of worship, which some fascist definitions of the nation-state imply, then the state is elevated to the level of an idol and idolatry is forbidden in Islam. Consider the following view of the fascist state by one of its most influential theorists and architects, the Italian dictator, Benito Mussolini:

Against individualism, the Fascist conception is for the State; and it is for the individual in so far as he coincides with the State, which is the conscience and universal will of man in his historical existence. It is opposed to classical Liberalism, which arose from the necessity of reacting against absolutism, and which brought its historical purpose to an end when the State was transformed into the conscience and will of the people. Liberalism denied the State in the interests of the particular individual; Fascism reaffirms the State as the true reality of the individual. And if liberty is to be the attribute of the real man, and not of that abstract puppet envisaged by individualistic Liberalism, Fascism is for liberty. And for the only liberty which can be a real thing, the liberty of the State and of the individual within the State. Therefore, for the Fascist, everything is in the State, and nothing human or spiritual exists, much less has value, outside the State. In this sense Fascism is totalitarian, and the Fascist State, the synthesis and unity of all values, interprets, develops and gives strength to the whole life of the people.

This conceptualizing of the state is not only forbidden in Islam, it runs counter to the western, pluralistic democratic state as we know it and as it was envisioned by its founders. It is therefore a patriotic duty for Muslims and all other concerned citizens to oppose any fascist views that involve the deification of the state. Critically, and this is an issue I have addressed at length elsewhere, it is a duty of Muslims to oppose efforts deifying an authoritarian, totalitarian state in the name of Islam, or the "Islamic" state.

One of the greatest steps we can take to undermine the emergence of fascist views of the nation-state is to "de-reify" it. In other words, the modern state is not an anthropomorphized, monolithic, living, "spiritual" entity. It is an pseudo-abstraction comprised of individuals, groups, institutions and organizations, which have in most instances varying interests. Each of these is connected to a particular nation-state in different ways. Take the example of the United States.

It is comprised of groups that have been labeled Native American, African Americans, White Americans, Latino Americans, Asian Americans, Jewish Americans, home-owing Americans, corporate Americans, oil industry-controlling Americans, defense-contracting Americans, etc. Each of these groups is connected in different and differing ways to the American project. Some groups are able to control and manipulate the institutions of government in ways that advance their interests, while other have little or no influence over those institutions.

Usually, but not always, groups are connected to the American project in ways that reflect their being the victims or beneficiaries of that project. For example, many Native Americans feel no connection at all to America. As a result they are seeking independence from the United States and endeavoring to establish sovereign nations. Some African Americans, whose ancestors were brought to America in chains, lack the same sense of patriotism that resides in the breasts of many who came to America freely and found prosperity for themselves and their progeny. Their feeling is expressed well in the following words of Fredrick Douglas. In his moving speech, What is the Fourth of July to the Negro, Douglas stated:

"The rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity and independence, bequeathed by your fathers, is shared by you, not by me. The sunlight that brought light and healing to you, has brought stripes and death to me. This Fourth of July is yours, not mine. You may rejoice, I must mourn. To drag a man in fetters into the grand illuminated temple of liberty, and call upon him to join you in joyous anthems, were inhuman mockery and sacrilegious irony. Do you mean, citizens, to mock me, by asking me to speak today?"

Yet, even among African Americans, there is a a wide range of feelings towards America. While many would share the bitterness expressed by Douglass, others display a more ambivalent attitude towards the country. Consider the words of Langston Hughes when he writes, critically, but hopefully, in his poem, "Let America be American Again":

"O, yes, I say it plain,

America never was America to me, And yet I swear this oath- America will be!

Out of the rack and ruin of our gangster death,

The rape and rot of graft, and stealth, and lies,

We, the people, must redeem

The land, the mines, the plants, the rivers.

The mountains and the endless plain-

All, all the stretch of these great green states-

And make America again!"

Yet other Americans of African descent find no problem in an unqualified embrace of the American project and unabashed praise for the country. This group is represented by the likes of Reverend Archibald Carey, Jr., an African American minister whose words informed Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s I Have a Dream Speech. He proudly proclaimed in an address to the 1952 Republican Convention:

"We, Negro Americans, sing with all loyal Americans: My country 'tis of thee, Sweet land of liberty, Of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, Land of the Pilgrims' pride From every mountainside Let freedom ring!"

The point I am making here is that if African Americans are this complex and diverse in terms of a connection to the American project then what about the entire country and all of its ethnic, racial and religious elements. That diversity is what makes America unique, and it argues against a fascist vision of the state that would seek to disguise that diversity beneath an imaginary uniformity generated by an authoritarian state.

In conclusion, America, and most other modern western nation-states are composed of many elements. Muslims, in varying numbers at various times have always been one of those elements. As such, the struggle of American Muslims, both to live peacefully in this land as Muslims, and the struggle to define the nature and terms of our engagement with the state, while belonging to a global Muslim community, are uniquely American struggles. As such, we have an obligation to our ancestors who preceded us in this land to continue that struggle, and we have an obligation to our fellow citizens to work along with them to preserve the integrity of the sociopolitical arrangement that made that struggle possible.

By Zaid Shakir

Imam Zaid Shakir is a co-founder and faculty member of Zaytuna College in Berkeley, CA. As a gifted author and lecturer, he was ranked as one of the world's most influential Scholars by "The 500 Most Influential Muslims", edited by John Esposito and Ibrahim Kalin, (2009).

He has also authored numerous articles. His groundbreaking books are "Heirs of the Prophets" in 2002, "Scattered Pictures: Reflections of An American Muslim" in 2005, an award-winning text "Treatise for the Seekers of Guidance" in 2008, and Where I'm Coming From: The Year In Review, in 2010.

For more articles, please visit New Islamic Directions website or subscribe to the blog.

Website: http://www.newislamicdirections.com/

Blog: http://www.newislamicdirections.com/nid/notes/ C2011, Imam Zaid Shakir


View the original article here

The Great Age of African Coup D'etat Seen Through the Calamitous Adventures of One African General

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

View the original article here