Dealing with diversity…

Mankind like never before is grappling with its inability to deal with diversity.

Some deal with it through division. We can see today how the coalition with its initial vision to bring democracy to Iraq is quivering on the methods to do it within a country that has strong ethnic diversity. The coalition seems to find solutions in dividing the country along sectarian lines to deal with the diversity.

Half a century ago the world saw, when the great imperial British India was brought down to its feet by its peasants, that the peasants were grappling on how to deal with religious diversity and they found the solution in superficially dividing the country into two countries for each major religious group.

We have seen our in old South Africa, diversity in color was dealt with using apartheid rule. In United States of America too till a few decades ago had the diversity in color been dealt with through division of space, opportunities, endowments etc along lines of color.

We can name many more examples of 20^th century and today where solutions to deal with diversity was found in divisions. The question is whether the outcomes were as desirable as predicted. Indeed the answer is a clear no and it is evident through our human experiences especially in the last hundred years that you can never divide and find harmony in a diverse environment.

In the same period of time, we have seen how some tried to deal with diversity by trying to remove diversity and to make things identical. We have seen how in some countries or regions, e.g. Thailand, Philippines etc where the ethnic minorities were forced by their state to be combined with their ethnic majorities hereby not allowing them to have their own self-determined system that is modeled by them and which is built on their indigenously ethnic considerations. In other regions or countries we have seen how the state have attempted aggressively to deal with diversity of religion within their public space and political space by opting to desacralize the space in the name of secularism.

Again we can name many more examples in 20^th century and today where solutions are forced upon systems to deal with diversity through delineating diverse factors by makings things identical. The question again is have the outcomes turned out as predicted. Again the answer is a clear no. Unless we humans and our systems are truly identical, we cannot achieve identity across space, systems, processes or environments.

Then what can be the solution to address diversity? God clearly states that diversity is a blessing.

"Do you not see that Allah sends down from the clouds water, then brings forth with it fruits of different kinds (or colours). And in the mountains there are streaks, white and red, of different colours, and some intensely black. And of people and animals and cattle there are different colours likewise. Only those of His servants fear Allah who possess knowledge." (Holy Quran 35:27-28)

And from His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth and your different languages and colors. Surely in that are signs to all the worlds[Quran 30:22:]

O people! surely We have created you of a male and a female, and made you tribes and families that you may know each other; surely the most honorable of you with Allah is the one among you most careful (of his duty); surely Allah is Knowing, Aware.[Quran 49:13]

In other words it implies diversity is not a curse or evil or bad thing. At the most it may be only a challenge. Therefore the question is how to deal with this challenge and not try to seek solutions in divisions or in making things uniform (undoing God’s predestined sense of diversity in His creations).

God also clearly states He despises disunity and divisions. Therefore the solutions to diversity clearly lies in seeking unity through integration without undoing the diversity. Therefore the calls by European leaders for immigrant populations to give up their native identity and adopt “European” identity is ludicrous. Instead the solutions lies in seeking a moderate and middle way to the diversity and where its virtually impossible to reconcile differences then effort must be made to allow the diverse factors to co-exist. There must be a will to see that the end is a reconciliation of diversity and differences and not dominance.

Likewise the solution for the problems in countries such as Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Burma , China, Israel, etc which arise due to diverse ethnic/religious/language differences, lies in reconciling the differences through finding ways to allow the different systems to coexist. That precisely has been the technique employed to achieve peace in Acheh, Indonesia which conflict dates back for more than two decades at the cost of economic backwardness and human lives.

The question of veils and headscarfs also begs the same solution. Indeed within every religious or ethnic group there is a diversity of attire donned by individuals. It is foolish to assert that the diversity of such attire, if permitted in schools and public space, will affect integration. When two individuals of diverse backgrounds, clothe themselves differently, they only are establishing their identity in a much stronger sense and there will be a clear and conscious understanding that each other will not behave, react the same as oneself and that the other will not require the same opportunities, definitions of space, treatment etc as oneself. Establishing a strong sense of identity allows the other to know who you are and hereby allows the other to treat you, respond to you, react to you and interact with you accordingly.

When there is no strong sense of identity of the diversity, then there is a false sense of uniformity. This is the dangerous phenomenon because then two diverse individuals will then develop a false sense of uniformity and expect each other to behave like the other and when differences arise due to their diversity, tensions and disappointments start to arise and one will try to impose on the other. I have gone through this experience first hand in a number of systems and countries in which I have lived in and made the conclusions after looking at how in traditional systems such as my grandparents, they were able to establish strong sense of identity and yet be able to reconcile their differences and live in harmony and peace that we desire today for our world and space.

This is a hate free zone

Students Respond to Islamophobia in Canadian Universities

September 27, 2006
Students Respond to Islamophobia in Canadian Universities

The Canadian Federation of Students (CFS), of which TCSA is a local body, announced the launch of a taskforce on the needs of Muslim students on Monday last week. The taskforce is comprised of ten members who will serve as panelists traveling to various campuses in the province to receive statements from students, staff and faculty. These statements will be compiled into a report to be published on March 21, 2007, which is the International Day to End Racism.

The taskforce is in keeping with CFS’s “No Islamophobia, Antisemitism, Racism” campaign and is pertinently being launched the week before the beginning of Ramadan. Ramadan is the ninth month in the Islamic lunar calendar, where orthodox Muslims refrain from eating, drinking, sexual relations and any sin from dawn to dusk.

Haitham Al-Barwani, a Trent international student from Oman, is greatly encouraged by the formation of the taskforce. “I have had to deal with a number of racist and anti-Muslim sentiments, especially at the local clubs, so I am delighted that the CFS is taking this stance,” he says. Sakib Ahmed, a second-year student from Bangladesh, agrees, saying, “The panels should be open to the city as the issues span out of the university and into the community.”

Trent Muslim Student Association

The Trent Muslim Student Association (TMSA) has been very active on campus in the last few years, ensuring the provision of Halal food at OC Cafeteria as well as petitioning for prayer space on campus, an issue that is still yet to be resolved.

Michael Allcott, the Trent International Program Director, complimented TMSA’s efforts in creating awareness of Islamic issues at Trent and in the community, stating that “the TMSA leadership has played a remarkable role in educating and building understanding in our community. Their courage and reasoned engagement has been a great expression of Trent ideals.”

When informed by Arthur of the upcoming TCSA-led hearing, the Muslim Student Association’s Admin/Finance Officer, Mohamedabbas M. Fazal, refused to comment until the group’s next executive meeting.

Islamophobia

Pope Benedict XVI came under criticism recently for his address at the University of Regensburg on Tuesday where he quoted 14th-century Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus saying ‘Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.’

Such comments are part of the narrative of anti-Islamic rhetoric that fuels the global ‘War on Terror’ as well as the various attacks on Muslims across the globe. Though the Vatican insists that the Pope’s comments were taken out of context – the address uses Emperor Manuel’s words to showcase the lack of reason or logos within the Islamic conceptualization of God – they are hardly the most politically sensitive of statements considering the latest rise in anti-Islamic rhetoric. President Bush’s recent comments on creating peace through war in the Middle East are yet another example of public remarks that are increasingly being perceived as Islamophobia within the Muslim world.

Muslim Response

Muslim students across the country have taken on a number of initiatives to combat Islamophobia. The TMSA’s annual Islam Awareness Week goes a long way toward creating understanding at Trent and Peterborough. The Muslim Student Association of Canada and USA also organizes over a dozen conferences annually.

A recent launch of T-shirts through the online social networking site Facebook has also gained popularity. The HijabMan line consists of T-shirts reading “Don’t hate me because I’m Muslim (and beautiful),” “Good things come in small Pakis,” “This is what a radical Muslim feminist looks like,” “Go ahead. PROFILE ME,” and the ever-popular, “My name causes national security alerts. What does yours do?” These T-shirts are becoming part of culture jamming as well as identifying various members of the Muslim community who want to engage in conversations on issues of culture clash.

The TCSA is working towards a hearing at Trent for the visiting taskforce later in the school year. For further information or if you would like to volunteer, please write to Stephen Lanni at: vpuniversity@trentcsa.ca

SK Hussan

Economics : The Crucification of Adam Smith

nowadays only in rare occasions do you get well-paid, well-fed journalists in well-resourced, mainstream newspapers writing intelligent articles. instead one has to increasingly turn to independent newspapers like Arthur. below is a very nice article.


October 04, 2006

The Crucifixion of Adam Smith

Karl Marx once said, “I am not a Marxist.” Similarly, if Jesus Christ were alive today (assuming he’s not), he would likely say, “I am not a Christian.” I mention these two men because, like Adam Smith, their messages have been significantly bastardized to stand for the opposite ideas the men originally intended. While Christians have the New Testament and Communists have the Manifesto, Capitalists prefer to legitimize greed by citing Smith’s seminal work Wealth of Nations; indeed, it is the capitalist bible.

These three works are interrelated in that The Communist Manifesto is used to counter capitalist doctrines while Christianity and capitalism required each other for colonialism (not to say that communists haven’t participated in colonialism). Though Smith’s Wealth of Nations is often used to justify contemporary capitalism, one only has to read the book to realize that the state of modern capitalism would horrify Smith; many of the things he warns about in the book exist today.Because Wealth of Nations begins with Smith’s theory on the “division of labour” those who have read specific parts of the book uphold the division of labour as a perfect hypothesis.

What these readers have missed is Smith’s condemnation of the division of labour later on in the book where he predicts it “will turn working people into objects as stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a human creature to be,” and therefore the government is responsible for preventing this in civilized society. In defiance of Smith’s warnings, we see the division of labour creating mindless factory jobs within our society, while it is taken to its logical extreme in the form of Free Trade Zones around the world. In some countries, workers who must repeat the same minute action thousands of times a day have become physically (and mentally) crippled.

Another famous line lifted from Smith is the oft-quoted phrase “the invisible hand.” Though the phrase only appears once in the entire book, Wealth of Nations does praise the idea of “free” markets: “no regulation of commerce can increase the quantity of industry in any society beyond what its capital can maintain. It can only divert a part of it into a direction into which it might not otherwise have gone: and it is by no means certain that this artificial direction is likely to be more advantageous to the society than into which it would have gone of its own accord.”

While the idea of “free markets” may be feasible, we will never know for it only exists in the speeches of politicians. The 200 years of trade protectionism and government intervention waged by the Western governments would be excusable today if indeed they had evolved into the free market system. The American government’s massive subsidies towards high-tech production masked by pentagon defence spending exemplifies the fact that the “Global North” is nowhere near a real free trade system; especially when it comes to preventing the “Global South” from enjoying a reasonable piece of the world economy

In fact, the only countries that have come close to trying free market values are those poor, indebted countries where the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) were implemented. In those countries the effects of SAPs, for the most part, have been devastating.Another repressive factor in contemporary capitalism is the corporation. Though Smith only criticizes corporations briefly in Wealth of Nations, for harsh criticisms, one must only read founding father and American president Thomas Jefferson’s observations.

However, Smith does write about an issue entwined in the corporate situation of today: local capital. In his analytical introduction to Wealth of Nations, Andrew Skinner notes that Smith believed “the home trade of consumption was to be preferred since it only served to replace domestic capitals. The foreign trade of consumption was ranked second…” This utterly defies the current globalized system where trans-national corporations, free trade agreements and draconian measures imposed by the World Bank and IMF insure that capital flight is a prevalent problem in the rural North and the Global South. Susan George estimates that the $400 billion transferred from South to North between 1982 and 1990 is “the equivalent in today’s dollars of some six Marshall Plans provided by the South to the North.”


The final insult to Smithian ideas is the contemporary divorce between economics and morality. Andrew Skinner points out, “more serious still was the fact that the classical orthodoxy made it possible to think of economics as quite separate from ethics and history, thus obscuring Smith’s true purpose.” Though Smith had an undeniable talent in political economy he was predominantly a philosopher of ethics as seen in his 1759 book The Theory of Moral Sentiments. The philosopher Terrence Hutchinson describes Smith as having been led by an “invisible hand” to promote ends in which he would never have agreed with.

It is exasperating that equality advocates within the market economy are called “idealists,” when it is really the doctrine of Neo-Classical Economists that proves entirely theoretical. Trickle-down theories that propose a high concentration of wealth to a few individuals with the belief that resources will find their way to the beleaguered majority are more utopian than our belief that the only way to equality and justice is through equality and justice. Indeed, equality and justice have existed in certain circumstances whereas successful implementation of trickle-down theories never has.

That record levels of poverty exist, while there have never been more billionaires, proves this point. The bastardized messages of Adam Smith, Karl Marx, and Christ, made by the Capitalists, Soviets/Maoists, and Christians respectively, led me to an easy truth: even straight-forward ideas are susceptible to exploitation when placed in the hands of centralized power. I ask only that capitalists justify their beliefs for what they are: greed or ignorance; and not the ideas of Adam Smith. Indeed, if Adam Smith were alive today he would surely say, “I am not a Capitalist.”

If you would like to explore this issue further, I suggest reading Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, Patricia Werhane’s Adam Smith and His Legacy From Capitalism, and Noam Chomsky’s Profit Over People.


Paul C. Gray

What is the highest point of selfishness?

What has transformed each one of us living in today's generation to be so much more selfish than our previous generations yesterday?

A couple of factors and phenomenon typical to the global system that we live in and the worldview that we all behold today have inherently contributed to our ever growing sense of selfishness.

The global commercial and capitalist culture undeniably has only taught us to treat ourselves as commodities. It has made us to look at ourselves as objects instead of subjects and have created within us the craving for other commodities that can aggrandize us .

Global economic culture works with the assumption that we all have unlimited needs and insatiable demand and the global economic system is built to ensure we maximize our utility and satisfy ourself by trying to satisfy our insatiable demand.

Secularsim has taught us to desacralize nature, hence reducing the relationship of God-Mankind-Nature to purely Mankind-Nature. Therefore in our decision making processes it is no longer He-I-it but instead I-it. Naturally we start acting according to our whims and fancies selfishly since I is greater. Hence we have grown to exploit nature recklessly and irresponsibly according to our will to satisfy our wishes.

The following is adapted from Mercy Oceans: The teachings of Maulana Abdullah Al-Faizi ad-Daghestani by Shaykh Nazim Qibrisi which clearly explains what happens when this sense of selfishness reaches its highest points.

"What is the highest point of selfishness?" asks our Grandsheikh.

"It is egotism, and it is the worst character in a man. It means that such a man cannot carry anything contrary to his will. He must always do as he likes or he will be angry. There is no speaking against his opinion. He has no respect for the ideas of anyone else and he wont admit that his wrong"

Ego is the attribute of Pharoah. It demands always to be chief, to dominate. It is the character of Satan, the worse character of the nafs (baser self), and the last to leave a man.

The love of being chief! If there were only two people on earth, you would see it!

It is so difficult to rid a person of egotism. To conquer it is like trying to kill a snake, when the head is cut off the tail still wiggles!

Political: Anwar Ibrahim Press Statement on Lee Kuan Yew's remarks

unexpected and interesting reaction from anwar ibrahim in response to lee kuan yew's remarks. anwar cites cambridge professor and nobel laureate Amartya Sen who has concluded in his brilliant paper that Lee's definition and understanding of "Asian values" to be inconsistent and obsolete. i had uploaded that paper in this blog a long time ago which is lengthy and wordy but worth reading every word of it.

http://www.malaysia-today.net/Blog_surat1/2006/10/anwar-ibrahim-press-statement.html

Monday, October 02, 2006
Anwar Ibrahim Press Statement

LEE KUAN YEW SHOULD LOOK AT RACIAL AND DEVELOPMENT ISSUES FROM THE BASIS OF JUSTICE FOR ALL RACES

Former Singaporean Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew recently criticised Malaysia and Indonesia for marginalising the Chinese. This clearly presumes that the Chinese communities in the two countries are not treated fairly. We should respond with a fresh dialogue since it touches on the basic issues of a constitutional democracy, economic management, racial unity and social justice.

Under current practices, a free dialogue take place only in Indonesia. I doubt the possibility that such a dialogue can be allowed either in Singapore or Malaysia where laws restricting freedom and the media continue to operate. Lee Kuan Yew is now a respected statesman due to his record of initiating continuous economic growth and managing the city-state.

Nevertheless, his record is tarnished from clamping down on free speech, as well as oppressing and imprisoning his political enemies. Furthermore, the involvement of the state’s companies in a few neighbouring countries is criticised for lack of accountability. Amartya Sen has now rendered obsolete his once-dominant ideal of “Asian Values”.

Clearly Lee Kuan Yew is still trapped by his outdated thinking. His argument exposes the element of racism which has been suppressed for so long. Therefore he recognises the problems of Chinese overseas but not the anxiety of the neglected Singaporean Malays. Furthermore, what is regretted is the fact that he does not show any concern to the plight of other marginalised races in Malaysia or Indonesia, whether the bumiputra or Indians.

In fact in Indonesia, the latest statistics reveal nearly 40 million people trapped by poverty. Lee Kuan Yew should look at racial and development issues from the basis of justice for all races. Clearly he should understand the fact that when the New Economic Policy was initiated in 1970, the stake of the Malays and bumiputra in the economy was a mere 1.8 percent.

The success of the NEP in education, producing a critical mass of professionals and providing business opportunitie should be acknowledged. However the policy has been hijacked, leading to corruption and cronyism, enriching the few and marginalising the majority of the bumiputra. The fruits of the NEP are also shared by a few Chinese and Indian corporations selected to receive contracts for mega projects, independent power production and the gaming sector.

I have put forward a New Economic Agenda to replace the out of date NEP. The country should be more competitive and prepared to face globalisation. We must take care of the poor and marginalised, eradicate corruption and provide opportunity for all races to propel a more robust and vigorous economy.

Lee Kuan Yew has been comfortable all this while with neigbouring autocrats that share a similar racial perspective. He must now accept that more and more people of the region now demand freedom and justice for all as the new paradigm for the 21st century.

ANWAR IBRAHIM
Advisor of People’s Justice Party

Economic :Singapore desperately needs the growth of regional ASEAN economies

Singapore for the last two decades had managed to serve as a hub for ASEAN. The region itself was roaring with high growth Tiger economies then and Singapore supported regional businesses and governments through its positioning of its services in finance, trading, services etc. Foreign investors too were rushing to the region then and were requiring these services which were not yet well established in the neighboring countries, hence naturally turned to Singapore for such services.

In current times both these two factors contributing to the demand for Singapore's services have waned. In regional countries like Indonesia, where growth is not as significant as in the past, there is a general observable decrease in demand for Singapore's services by Indonesian businesses and/or central/local governments. Foreign investments are also not rushing in into Indonesia as in the roaring 90s and hence foreign investors' demand for Singapore's services is also waning.

In regional countries like Malaysia and Thailand, there are many services such as port, airport etc which they have developed over time and today they decreasingly require such Singapore's services. In all the reliance of ASEAN economies on Singapore is no longer as significant as in the past.

Though Singapore initiated a few projects such as the Growth Triangle, it always maintained its direct role in the growth of regional economies to be a passive one. Part of this attitude is due to its sense of kiasuism and part of this attitude has been due to Singapore concentrating on itself only.

In recent years, investors are more keenly heading towards East Asia region. The reliance for services is shifting from Singapore to economies such as Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan etc whose services are supporting the growth of economies such as China and Korea.

In light of this, there is an undeniable need for ASEAN growth to pick up and roar again for the regional demand of Singapore services to grow. It will be difficult to expect foreign investors to return to ASEAN with the same energy in any time soon. Hence the growth of ASEAN need to be inspired its local and regional businesses and governments. Singapore is kind of recognizing it and is making some efforts. However there needs to be a radical change in outlook towards Singapore's relations with ASEAN countries. Trust needs to be re-established.

Singapore also needs to aggressively enter the regional economies to development that can in turn promote economic growth. It needs to share its expertise in housing, health, education, transportation, energies and resources policies. It will be recommended to pursue an era of harmonization of living standards across ASEAN. This will require Singapore to be committed to ASEAN through direct investment, support for institutional infrastructure development and transfer of large amounts of knowledge and technology. Singapore will need to break free from its traditional sense of siege mentality that it is surrounded by Muslim neighbors, build better understanding and most importantly build up a strong sense of benevolence and discard its sense of kiasuism. This is the critical paradigm shift required and anything less than that will only yield cosmetic results.

We have embraced dialogue.... How about You,Sir?

Dear Orientalists, Seculacrats, Kemalists, Politicians, Neo-Liberals, Journalists, Media, White Supremists, Seperatists, Neo-Cons, Islamophobics....

Since Sept 11th 2001, you have had the convience of a greater wealth of arsenal to employ in your rhetoric and exercise to demonize Islam and isloate Muslims. More than ever before you implicitly chose to use the actions and words of an isolated bunch of Muslims to represent Islam and Muslims though explicitly you denied this.

In the 80's some of you embarked on a campaign to get rid of USSR through Afghanistan by recruiting Muslims worldwide in large numbers to this cause using wahabi ideology of jihad. You armed them, trained them, created seperate militant curriculum in the madrasahs there for them using the research activities of one of your top universities. Then you refused to engage the mainstream Muslim world and decided to keep them at the peripheries and used peripheral entities to answer the political question in central asia. Two decades later, they have come to haunt you.

Today you still refuse engage the mainstream Muslim world. You embark on a superficial and idiosyncratic project to create Moderate Muslims, which implicitly you are trying to create the "Muslim" other of you. You call for dialogue but the only dialogue you conventionally engage in with the Muslim world is through the peripheral, isolated entities, such as Irshad Manji, Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Nyamko Sabuni etc , amongst whom almost everyone is totally disconnected with the rest of the Muslim ummah. In your project to create Moderate Muslims, you have turned towards seculacrats and kemalists who in their very nature are radicals therefore making their brand name Moderate paradoxical.

Since Sept 11th 2001, the mainstream Muslim world had engaged you through dialogue always. In North America alone every mainstream Muslim scholar, speaker and leader were reaching out through dialogue in their own avenues. However you turned them away and only chose to engage with those who only agreed with you views and echoed them. Your lack of tolerance to diversity of opinions shut you out from any dialogue. Till then to today, your calls for dialogue had not been demonstrated through actions. Your invitations for mainstream Muslims to speak up against violence had failed to recognize the efforts by mainstream Muslims to speak up against violence as you had been selective of who you want to engage.

All this while mainstream Muslim world had been trying to engage you, though in futile, individually. In an unprescedented way, 38 leaders scholars and leaders who have the mandate of the majority of the Muslim world, have in a significant way reached out to you in dialogue and intellectual discourse through their letter to the Pope.

Controversies, peripheral and isolated Muslims, confrontations, cliches, rhetoric, biases, prejudice, slogans, pre-emptive military confrontations are the ways you have been increasing engaging the Muslim world since 2001. The question now is we are two steps ahead of you in dialogue, when are you going to stop your superficial claims for dialogue and sincerely engage the mainstream Muslim world positively through dialogue and exchange?

the Letter... finally published by Straits Times

the letter penned and signed by thirty eight leading Muslim scholars and leaders of the Muslim world in response to the Pope's remarks made by His Holiness on 12 September 2006 has finally been published by straits times. its a positive sign, yet i will stick by my criticism that it will have published it immediately had only osama written that letter in his own idiosyncratic way.

Maaf zahir dan batin

i once explained to my best friend, an american white chap, while residing under the same roof during university days, that the significance of ramadan is to seek forgiveness from God and therehence seek His love and that the signficance of Eid-ul-Fitr is to seek forgiveness from everyone else and therehence seek their love. he got so excited and on the day of eid he will wake up earlier than he normally will and he will block me from leaving the house till i apologize to him for every thing i did. in the subsequent eid he overslept and so he waited for me to return from mosque and demanded me to seek forgiveness from him. he was so thrilled by this exercise cos he explained that if he had to ever do the same, that will be the last thing for him to do... to seek forgiveness from another person, one naturally has to lower themselves, swallow their pride, bruise their ego which is rather a painful and bitter process which interestingly only produces the nectar of healthier relations. we can see this especially amongst politicians. even when they are at the core of fault, the most incorrigible ones will refuse to apologize and when they do, bitter enemies only unite. its human to err. but its not only divine who should forgive.

unfortunately sometimes opportunities are denied to us even when we are willing to seek forgiveness. once someone asked if i will go to this person, who has wronged me so cruelly, and seek forgiveness from him if she can arrange and i said i will without hesitation simply because that is the one of the chief objectives of Eid-ul Fitr. unfortunately that someone cherishes enmity more than reconciliation and refused that opportunity. i remember since as a kid seeing the mosque on the day of eid being a place for reconciliation. fathers and sons or brothers or relatives who had severed ties, seperated, fallen out with each other and stopped talking will reconcile with a hug and handshake.

amongst the variuos muslim communities i have seen, the malays are the most steadfast in observing the tradition of seeking forgiveness and love during eid. they will make a huge effort to go and visit every single relative and friend. they also use a very powerful and meaningful phrase "maaf zahir dan batin" which means forgive me from within and outside.

in my blog, i may or may not have written something that might have hurt your sensitivities. if i did, i must say it was never my intention and i sincerely apologize. Maaf zahir dan batin.

What if Osama had sent this letter

Thirty eight leading Muslim scholars and leaders have signed a joint open letter to the Pope in the spirit of goodwill to respond to the remarks made by His Holiness on 12 September 2006.All the eight schools of thought and jurisprudence in Islam are represented by the signatories. (refer to earlier post)

A few weeks have passed and the mainstream media have hardly given any significance to this. Had only Osama "CEO of Destruction" or his deputy, issued a letter or an audio recording or a video recording, every mainstream media in every country in the form of print media or tv or radio will covered it without fail.

I had a debate with a senior straits times journalist two weeks ago who blamed Al-Jazeera to be an important source of misinterpretations of Islam through its choice to broadcast letters, videos, audios from extremist groups. He said Al-Jazeera has to stop it and also play a role in promoting good understanding of Islam. Well Al-Jazeera also covered this letter. If Al-Jazeera's coverage of extremist opinions propagates misunderstandings then Al-Jazeera's coverage of moderate opinions must propagate understanding. However that is not the case....

Every home in every country with a tv do not have cable or satelite subscription to Al-Jazeera. It is the delibrate selective coverage of extremists' opinions and rhetoric, by mainstream media in every country, that have been originally shown by Al-Jazeera which really serves as an important avenue to promote misunderstandings of Islam. Mainstream media conveniently however point the finger at Al-Jazeera accusing it of constructing misconceptions of Islam and Muslims, propagating hate and promoting terrorism. It is more than apparent that mainstream media works with its ulterior motives or hidden agenda or prejudices and it benignly, staunchly and implicitly holds Islam and Muslims in the worst light and propagating a cultural understanding of Islam and Muslims, it selectively chooses the information that is consistent with its biases/agenda/motives. Al-Jazeera just serves as a data source.

This letter by the most eminent scholars and authorities of the Islamic world highlights a milestone effort by the Islamic world to try to engage the West in an intellectual way and through dialogue. Clearly the West has not been inspired by it, not has the West keenly welcomed it nor has it used it.

The conventional way the west engages the Muslim world through its politicians, media and academics is undeniably through controversies, confrontation, peripheries and isolated individuals which naturally can only isolate relations. Clearly by ignoring and giving little importance to this landmark diplomacy, effort and positive healthy engagement by the Muslim world, the West only has lost for itself a valuable opportunity to integrate relations with the Muslim world and set a precedence and standard for engagement through dialogue and intellectual discourse.

The mainstream Muslim world is however not going to loose hope. How long is the west going to engage us in their idiosyncratic ways? How long can western media and politicians and academics thrive on their rhetoric and controversies? How long can the western people live in anxiety, suspicion and apprehension? There will come a time perhaps in one or two generations, they will grow fed up and then choose to engage the Muslim world through real dialogue and intellectual discourse. Till then this letter will just be the first and not the last.....

KPIs dont mean much for non-commercial organizations

In Singapore public and social culture, there is an inherent lack of employment of critical mass of professionals trained in those areas such as social scientists( e.g. economists, sociologists, psychologists), public affairs experts (e.g. public finance experts, international relations etc) . Instead the positions of organizations that deal with public or social issues there is a prevalent tendency to fill them with technocrats such as those trained in business studies, engineering, accountants, lawyers, doctors etc.

Due to the fact that Singapore is no longer developing but newly industrialized, we now no longer have the straightforward problems within our public and social space. Therefore these same kind of technocrats who in the past were able to address the prevailing issues are unable to do it now simply because the issues are more complex now, interlinked with so many other issues etc. Just understanding what the issue is a hurculean task that hence requires the one addressing it to be adequately trained in that area in order to conceptualize it. Only through such conceptualization can one fully or adequately understand such an issue.

Or if you want to explain in another way you can say any social or public issue requires conceputualization in order to understand it. However for a developing country that process of conceptualization is a lot simple and direct whereas that for a industrialized or developing country is a lot more complex. Hence in our yester years since our educational system emphasized on creation of technocrats and since our labour force favoured technocrats, there was a strong tendency to hire technocrats to address all public and social issues. it worked then cos since the problems were a lot more direct and simple hence allowing simple and direct solutions to the implemented.

in today's industrialized singapore, public and social issues are a lot more complex and no longer direct nor simple, therefore conceptualization is very complex. since technocrats are not trained in advanced or necessary methods of conceptualization, they naturally use their primitive methods which tend to be simple and direct.

one of such methods is the prevalent use of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to monitor, measure and evaluation performance of public and social agencies/organizations. they borrow this concept of KPIs from business studies and corporate and commercial world. in the corporate and commercial world KPIs still work simply because their processes and systems and universes are still relatively more simpler and relationships are more direct.

within the social and public sphere, KPIs may tell you the facts through statistics and data. but the question is how much meaning does they hold? indeed because KPIs are unable to explain the truth and reality in social and public organizations, KPIs are incomplete in these areas.

outcomes of social and public organizations need to be measured using other indicators. the problem is technocrats have no training to understand what these other indicators are and therefore they not only are unable to recognize them, they can't devise them. these practical technocrats who unfortunately can only be practical will foolishly dismiss the process of devising these indicators or the very indicators as theoretical. practical approach has its limits. in social and public issues, one will always go into unknown areas. its part of the learning curve if one tries to develop organizations or evolve. this is the real process of thinking out of the box. the box is the domain of one's practical experience. the social or public science expert will not only be able to devise these "other indicators" they will be able to implement them. i am not talking of a hypothetical situation but the real and current situation of public and social sector management in the developed world.

somehow in singapore the public and social sectors dominated by technocrats remain cynical of these methodologies. we can always say boldly that we in singapore do things Our Way. this Our Way can yield results that we can display and boast. But the question is how meaningful, true and real are these results.

38 leading Muslim Scholars' & Leaders' Open Letter to Pope Benedict XVI

Thirty eight leading Muslim scholars and leaders have signed a joint open letter to the Pope in the spirit of goodwill to respond to the remarks made by His Holiness on 12 September 2006.All the eight schools of thought and jurisprudence in Islam are represented by the signatories, including a woman scholar. The letter is unique in the history of interfaith relations and reflects the positive response from Muslim world for Vatican's call for dialogue.

here is the letter

Political: Sword can only spread fear, not faith

the rhetoric that Islam was spread by sword always intrigued me. can a faith be really spread by sword? if humans have no capacity to rebel at a moment of the sword or later, perhaps then it can be spread by the sword. even if a human succumb to fear at that instance, subsequently over time be it days or months or years or decades later, the human or his offsprings will indeed rebel. humans are one species that you can never hold them down forever against their will.

it is interesting to read the wills that two of the greatest sultans and conquerors in Islamic history had written for their successor sons. both these two sultans founded two of the longest lasting dynasties and empires. in their wills you find advice that they give to their successors being basically of justice, good governance, ethics, piety, development and human rights. indeed sword can only spread fear not faith and humans may succumb to fear temporally but never forever.



(Sultan Osman Ghazi, founder of the Ottoman Empire, addressing his sonand successor Sultan Orhan Ghazi in his last will:)

Son! Be careful about the religious issues before all other duties.The religious precepts build a strong State. Do not give the religiousduties to careless, faithless and sinful men or to dissipated,indifferent or inexperienced people. And also do not leave the stateadministrations to such people because the one without fear of Allahthe Creator is in fear of the created. The one committing a great sinand continuing to sin can not be loyal. A person would be loyal if hefits to the Prophet's (sws) true traditions and does not go out fromSheriat.

Avoid cruelty and superstition. Remove the persons whoencourage cruelty and superstition from your State. The underlyingreason for it is that such persons make you decline. Always widen theState by jihad. Because if the campaign is not held for a long time adeficiency and clumsiness appear on the braveness of the soldiers andon the knowledge, information and measure of the commanders. Personswho know better about campaigns die and inexperienced persons come intheir place. So many mistakes emerge and the State is damaged muchfrom this.

Save the Beytul Mal (treasury). Try to make much the State stock.Within the borders of Sheriat be contented with what you have. Do notdestroy in an unuseful manner but fulfill your needs and necessitiesand do not squander. Do not be proud with your soldiers and goods.Because they are the intermediaries in the way of Allah for carryingthe public services as a whole and for widening justice and virtue inthe world. Protect the statesmen working for Allah's sake. After theirdeath care about their families and answer their needs.

Do not seizepublic goods by violence. Give your kind hand to the deserved peopleand save such persons' relations from troubles. Protect capablemilitary officials. Scholars, virtuous men, artists and literary menare the power of the State structure. Treat with kindness and showhonor to these men. Make close relationship when you hear about avirtuous man and give wealth and grant to him. Thus, in your State thenumber of learned men, virtuous men and knowledgeable men becomeshigh.

Put in order the political and religious duties.Take lesson from me. I came to these places as a weak leader and thehelp of Allah reached me, although I did not deserve it. Follow my wayand protect Din-i Muhammad (the religion of Muhammad sws) and thebelievers and your followers. Respect the rights of Allah and Hisservants. Do not hesitate to advise your successors in this way.Depend on Allah's help regarding justice and fairness and attempt toremove cruelty in every duty. Protect your public from the enemy'sinvasion and from their cruelty. Do not behave with any person in anunsuitable manner or with unfairness. Gratify the public and save allof their affairs.
[Source: ttp://www.osmanli700.gen.tr/english/sultans/01index.html]

(According to the document available in the State Library of Bhopal,India, Babur Shah left the following will to his son Humayun Shah:)"My son, take note of the following: Do not harbor religious prejudicein your heart. You should dispense justice while taking note of thepeople's religious sensitivities, and rites. Avoid slaughtering cowsopenly in order that you could gain a place in the heart of thenatives. This will take you nearer to the people.Do not demolish or damage places of worship of any faith and dispensefull justice to all to ensure peace in the country. Islam can betterbe preached by love and affection, rather than tyranny andpersecution. Avoid the differences between the shias and sunnis. Lookat the various characteristics of your people just as thecharacteristics of various seasons."

[Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mughal#Babur.27s_will_to_Humayun]