I do not agree with the author's assertion that there is something inherently violent in Islam itself. All religions, including Islam, attempt to regulate human behavior. The teachings of Islam in itself, are not violent. Any scholar with a cursory study of history and teachings of Islam can attest to this fact.
I want to remind the author that violence is part of human psyche and not a gene ingrained in the Muslim population. How can the author explain the killing of millions by Nazi Germany, the colonization of America, Asia, Australia and Africa by the enlightened Europe, the gigantic tragedy of human slave trafficking of blacks from Africa to America. You see, to conquer, vanquish and impose one owns ideology is a human problem not a Islamic or Muslim problem.
RE:Opposing View
by Nayagan on Oct 02, 2004 09:49 PM
Mr. Azhar, in all the instances you quoted above Greed and Wealth were the primary motivating factor whereas in the case of islamic terrorists it is religion. In the case of former you'll want to live in order to enjoy the material pleasures whereas terrorists not only kill others but are willing to kill themselves. It is more of a psychological problem and that my friend is why the whole world wants to put an end to this menace.
In case of India, first Hindus have to unite. A new caste called "HUMAN" should be adopted by every concerned Hindu. Muslims who oppose Shariat and want to be in the mainstream should also be given an option to start a sect called "HUMAN". And the most-progressive and enlightened people should be given an option to even go beyond "organized religion" and choose their religion as "HUMAN". Because, people have not chosen their religion. Religion should be restricted to human character, human values, human mind, human spirit and human creativity. It should be inclusive of theists and atheists. It should focus on inner values: truth, love, freedom, bliss, awareness. It should be about the development of the BODY, MIND, EMOTIONS, INTELLECT, CREATIVITY & CONSCIOUSNESS and a 'sense of concern' for a fellow human-being and for every other living being as rationally as possible. It should break free of the virtual world, the spiritual fictions, the stupid images, the superstitions, the useless prayers, the pilgrimages, the rituals, the branding of people as sinners, the imposition of the concept of God and all kinds of stupid claims of being the last word of God and political corruption.
RE:A Case for ''positive'' secularism
by Ryan on Oct 02, 2004 11:57 PM
I like your line of thought Mr. Gangully. In fact what you just mentioned, viz. the religion called "HUMAN" is already inherent in Hinduism. The answer is pure, unadulterated philosophy devoid of perversions...the philosophy of Shankara and Madhava, of the teachings of Swami Vivekananda, the spirit of Karma Yoga, elimination of inhuman practices in the garb of religion. Rites and Rituals were relevant once upon a time, to entice illiterate masses into practicing religion and also make it palatable, but now completely outdated. The need of the hour is religion which can make us think rationally and not blind-faith. Religion practiced out of fear is slavery. Its time for introspection. Its time to be free. Its time to realise the truth. Swami Vivekananda once said, "...And may I be born again and again, and suffer thousands of miseries so that I may worship the only God that exists, the only God I believe in, the sum total of all souls-and above all, my God the wicked, my God the miserable. My God the poor of all races, of all species, is the special object of worship."
The action to combat terrorism should be through governments and through due process of law, using the full force of the law and implementing it without fear or favour. This mantle cannot be passed on to vigilante groups under any situation. Vigilante groups can only fuel further reprisals and if there is Government patronage to vigilantes it can only mess up the situation further. Further the source of money laundering should be effectively tackled and RS should also have dealt with this issue (more so with movement of monies in a globalized market place and global banking so much easier)
Most importantly fighting the dialectics of terror with ideological challenges and governing systems that are assimilative ,giving all sections a participation and opportunities within the social systems .
Where governance is not participative and not reaching out to all sections through fearless dialogue there is every possibility of terror blooming.
There should be no fear to negotiate or to take tough action aginst terrorists who are unwilling to forsake violent means.
Rajeev Srinivasan (RS) has done an interesting and fairly dispasionate analysis. Though one cannot agree with the entire article there are some very relevant points.
Kid gloves or obsequiousness on the one hand or indifference on the other hand to the issue of terrorism would be self-defeating. For that matter so would private (and therefore localized) groups and endeavours, be ill advised and ill- equipped to deal with this menace.
There is a fountainhead of finance and training and purveyors of warped ideology that (is today truly globalized) and should be tracked down and tackled internationally. UN and NATO and money laundering laws have proved ineffective to deal with this.
Further selectiveness of approach when it hurts and damages only a particular interest (rather than a consistent global stance) has not aided joint combat operations.
Where strict,tough and fair implementation and upholding of the rule of law has not been carried out by Governments, this has aided the growth of terrorist organisations. One can hope that indifference is energised through public pressure for action against all terrrorist action and all law breakers.
