Well then I can't be deigned to do research on sociology for someone who comes into an argument with this sort of prejudice.
Have fun with James. I have a 9 hour car trip coming up my schedule.
Is monarchy the best model for the Middle East?
- Thread starter Mouthwash
- Start date
Well then I can't be deigned to do research on sociology for someone who comes into an argument with this sort of prejudice.
Have fun with James. I have a 9 hour car trip coming up my schedule.
I've blocked James, thank you very much. Reasoned debate has its uses, but only with certain people.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
You'll have to give much more of an explanation than that because my only reaction now is that's a bunch of nonsense.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
"Allow me to clarify my generalistion with an even broader generalistion"? Unhelpful.
Look, maybe Goldman's right, but you're missing the point pretty much entirely. I'm asking for mechanics, here, asking for a description of kinship and monarchy in the Arabic world, how they work and how the two relate. I'm asking for the claim that clan and king are mutually-supportive institutions to be explained and justified. I'm not asking for you to tell me that most Arabs are married to their cousin's goat.
James Stuart
King
I think this post is self-referential.
I would make an argument, but tk already made it for me. And it would be wasted on someone who is obviously only interested in a dishonest debate in an effort to prove an unsupported assertion - or several of them - anyway.
Broadly, the theme of Judeo-Christianity is God's covenant with humanity. Judaism views God's revealed law as this covenant, and Christianity takes it further with a single human sacrifice to atone for all humanity. This eventually led to Protestantism and the 'God-given' rights of man.
Paganism, however, holds sacrifice for the sake of the tribe as sacred. It views the deities as being maintainers of the natural order. And that's what Islam is. God does not love every human unconditionally, he loves those who fight for him, who give charity, etc. It views the 'Ummah' as something every Muslim is expected to die for, and indeed martyrdom is the highest honor there is in Islam. God is not bound by any covenant with humanity; he is a distant sovereign who acts according to his whim.
It's difficult to summarize it properly when you aren't asking anything in particular; you are simply hand-waving the whole thing as 'nonsense.'
I can't give you that, but I really don't think it's as important. You could look at how Jordanian or Saudi tribes behave in their respective politics, but I don't know how to do serious research.
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
Good to see that you can just waive 2 millennia of Catholic practice away so easily.
Did I claim that the Rights of Man and of the Citizen descended from Mount Sinai on gleaming stone tablets? No I did not.
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
Not really the point I'm making.
The picture you paint of Islam, as a "pagan" religion that demands sacrifice and the performance of various ceremonies in order to achieve the favor of heaven, and that this makes it wholly distinct from Christianity rather falls to pieces when you consider Catholicism and the role of the Sacraments.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
Also, note the assumption that Protestantism is a somehow more progressive iteration of Christianity. Still surprises me how prevalent that belief is in the Anglo-American world, even among people who should know better.
So what's your basis for believing that clan-systems are, first, as prevalent in the Arabic world as you claim, and second, that they contribute to the authority and stability of monarchical regimes?
James Stuart
King
A Reaganite economist said so.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
Judaism is about God's covenant with Jews, not with humanity. More specifically, with the 12 tribes of Israel. The very structure is about how God proscribed laws to follow. Both Islam and Judaism are rules-based religion more so than Christianity (which even Catholic dogma emphasizes grace, Protestantism emphasizes faith). Many of the laws of Moses are about the good of the community (really, any instructions on when the entire town should stone your family to death falls under this category).
I don't know what Sacraments are, and the Wiki page on them is just incoherent.
It is definitely possible for Judaism and Christianity to absorb pagan elements. I'm just saying that they aren't sociologically disposed towards it.
I'll grant that 'The Protestant Ethic' is a bit outdated, but my understanding of Protestantism is that it became viewed as a personal belief system, in contrast to Catholicism and Judaism and especially Islam.
This is serious?
I don't know. You don't have to have intimate knowledge of your country's politics to understand democratic theory. That's why I phrased the OP as a question, but apparently I'm expected to accept the burden of proof and educate you all.
Yes, Judaism did not start off as a universalist religion. I don't see how that makes it like Islam.
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
The Sacraments (in Catholicism there are seven: baptism, confirmation, eucharist, penance, the anointing of the sick, holy orders, and matrimony) are not just some "pagan element", but rather the very fundamental ideological basis of the Church. Not to mention a key power dynamic that shaped the entire political fabric of Western Europe for the majority of Medieval and Early Modern History. Essentially the Church preached that participation in the sacraments was essential to attaining access to heaven. You don't perform these ceremonies (at the very least the four of baptism, confirmation, eucharist [for most people done once a year, or at best twice], and final confession) you don't move on. The church held unilateral power over the right to perform these sacraments.
You can't say Christianity isn't sociologically disposed towards the "pagan element" of the Sacraments when they are the fundamental ideological basis for the religion. Even the vast majority of "Protestant" faiths acknowledge the sanctity of baptism and the eucharist, even if their opinions on details such as transubstantiation aren't (or weren't) quite so literal as the Catholic Church's take was.
Now if you want to talk about the Cult of the Saints as a "pagan element" that crept into Catholic Dogma, I'd be happy to discuss that. I'll say upfront though that I think the popular (nonacademic) narrative that Priests/The Church morphed existent pagan gods into tolerable saintly figures to ease pagans into the faith is a gross simplification/overstatement.
There also this:
Note: this is one of 6 different version of this speech and they don't really agree on some specific points. I don't think there is disagreement on the absolution through crusade though.
I don't understand how this disputes me or Goldman.
That's not what I mean, really. If you define them as broadly as I do, pagan elements are always going to creep into a society. I would, for instance, take the view that European nationalism was always more pagan than Christian, and that fascism was a totally pagan concept. The idea that Christianity absorbed pagan holidays or figures isn't very relevant to what I have to say.
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
I guess that follows. Since Islam is a tribal religion, I guess that means all those Sicilians and Irish are Muslims?
Then you really, really should not be pontificating on the nature of Christianity.-
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
Yeah, yeesh.
Because of their mutual emphasis on community judgement and the law. Both are religions that focus on how to live ones life. Christianity emphasized important sacraments but otherwise was pretty basic. Judaism is not a universalist religion period. The tenants of Judaism have relaxed in the Christian world, but that's different. I don't think one can take Christian-influenced Judaism (and ignore the Judaism that still existed in the Islamic world) and suggest that all of Judaism is intertwined with Christianity in a way that it isn't with Islam. That's simply a western bias. Although, speaking of universalist religions, both Christianity and Islam are those religions - one more thing they have in common.
Because of their mutual emphasis on community judgement and the law. Both are religions that focus on how to live ones life. Christianity emphasized important sacraments but otherwise was pretty basic. Judaism is not a universalist religion period. The tenants of Judaism have relaxed in the Christian world, but that's different. I don't think one can take Christian-influenced Judaism (and ignore the Judaism that still existed in the Islamic world) and suggest that all of Judaism is intertwined with Christianity in a way that it isn't with Islam. That's simply a western bias. Although, speaking of universalist religions, both Christianity and Islam are those religions - one more thing they have in common.
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
To be fair, Sicilians have fallen under Muslim rule, and certain parts of Southern European kinship structures were influenced by Arab and Moorish conquests.
...now about the Irish, in Crusader Kings, a bug causes Ireland to become 'the Caliphate of Ireland' everytime the game fires a buggy late-game event. Furthermore, Ireland was one of the first Western European EU countries to recognise Palestine. These two things demonstrate the Irish are in fact a highly unique ethnic group that has managed to practice Crypto-Islam since it's conversion from Celtic Paganism. In fact, St. Patrick is also a Muslim Sayyid (descendent of the prophet Muhammad) known in Arabic as Musa ibn Ali and introduced Islam to Ireland secretly while posing to the outward world as a Chalcedonian Christian. He is since widely reviered in Irish Islam.
Calvinism a subset of Islam? You have not been predestined to be saved by Jesus Christ it seems.
James Stuart
King
Just as an economist shouldn't be pontificating on Islam's tribal nature.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
A more individualistic theology doesn't imply a more progressive politics. You referred to the "Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen", for example, a document produced by and for Catholic Frenchmen. So even on the surface, it's not so straightforward as that.
It is, yes. You claim that the clan-system is fundamental to the social structure of the Arab world; I am dubious that it holds the same prominence in Damascus or Cairo as it does in rural Saudia Arabia.
Well, you have to work from at least a rough empirical basis if you're going to make claims about specific countries. If you work from pure theory, then you're stuck in a self-justifying loop with no attachment to the real world. "Kingship works like this because the theory says kingship works like this because the theory says kingship works like this"...
I mean, you're making concrete claim about how Arab ("Arab") societies work, that there are certain mechanisms deeply rooted in Arab kinship-structures that contribute to the emergence and stability of monarchies; of course the burden of proof is on you, where else would it be?
Similar threads
