Can Western and Islamic values be reconciled?

[Starlight321]

It's often that young people under 25 are often inmature and lax and when they grow older the become more conveservative like their parents did maybe just a little bit less and this is especially obvious with muslim people in western countries because their internal values start diverting from the mainstream. It's a matter of degree of course and I don't say that all are the same. That's just part of maturing and repeating of pattern.

 

[Raze]

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Christians live in Saudi Arabia and Iran too. That doesn't count for much. It's not like Iran is so genocidal that they don't allow some minority groups to co-exist.

The US government itself admitted its interventions were blocking development and secularization in the Middle East 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfQC5v5-Nx0

[PurpleTree]

16 hours ago, Nabd said:

I usually don't agree with Chomsky but I agree with what he said in the video.

If you go back to almost any coup that happened in the region you would find some major power behind it.

Its not a conspiracy theory but if major powers could gain an advantage by intervening then they sure as hell will intervene. Check Turkey for example. I think its a country where western powers didn't or couldn't (idk) influence as much as other countries and now Turkey is causing the US a lot of headache.

So if the US for example can exert influence on countries like Syria/Iraq/Iran by supporting dictators or playing on sectarian tensions then backing a side or having failed states in order for them to achieve something else then they will do that. It's survival for major powers even though I think the US would benefit from actually supporting stable democracies in the region like they did with Germany and Japan for example but the US seems to not want that.

Yea i think they are afraid that democracies are often less controllable, like in many latin american countries

[PurpleTree]

many muslims in the west have to get out of their „victim mentality“ imo

they live in the west yet kind of hate/dislike the west and always see islam/muslims as a victim

[DawnC]

On 10/13/2023 at 2:40 PM, zazen said:

As in spiral dynamics, stages of development are just that - a development. Not an imposition from others who have developed to that stage. Although, spiral stages are themselves in a hierarchy of their own so its natural to view a stage red society as inferior, but a mistake nonetheless.

Other cultures shouldn't be interfered in by imposing cultural ideas from their own cultural stage. That robs them of their growth process, and what is imposed will try to be disposed of in rebellion.

Lower stage societies view the struggles the West is going through and deduce that they are better than them, which entrenches further to their own stage. Maybe once the West comes out the other side of its current growth process and looks a lot more solid they can then contemplate its merits and be incentivised to develop towards it. 

These two videos show the psychology and perspective of how more traditional conservative societies view themselves as superior - in this case particularly from an Islamic lens.

 

What multiculturalism has done it seems is clashed different perspectives, values and stages of growth towards each other in a pressure cooker. Each questioning the others validity, assumptions and way of life which brings about the current confusion, cognitive dissonance and identity crisis.

Out of this friction evolution could bring us to our supreme identity which integrates them all together, but thats a lengthy and tumultuous process. 

 

Quotes on multiculturalism from Ken Wilber

''Multiculturalism is a noble, logocentric, and rational endeavour that simply misidentifies its own stance and claims to be not rational because some of the things it tolerates are not rational. But its own tolerance is rational through and through, and rightly so. Rationality is the only structure that will tolerate structures other than itself.''

''The "multicultural movement," which claims a universal tolerance of all cultures freed from the "logocentric, rational-centric, Eurocentric" dominance and hegemony, is a step in the right direction, with all good intentions, but ends up being self-contradictory and finally hypocritical. It may claim to be "not rationalcentric," but in fact cultural tolerance is secured only by rationality as universal pluralism, by a capacity to mentally put yourself into the other person's shoes and then decide to honor or at least tolerate that viewpoint even if you don't agree with it. You, operating from a plural rationality might decide to tolerate the ideas of a mythic-believer; the problem is, they will not tolerate you – and, in fact, historically they would burn your tolerant tail at the stake in order to save your soul (whether your saviors be Christian, Marxist, Muslim,or Shinto).''

Multiculturalism can only happen when a society or an individual meets certain crucial elements. Having tolerance toward some cultures is like having dinner with a cannibal. Yes, it's noble to have tolerance for vegetarians, vegans, keto, Halal, Kosher, etc. Such a diverse dinner would be lovely. But I wouldn't add a cannibal to the table. I want to know if I'm on the menu or not.

It is very easy to confuse a respectful approach toward different cultures with non-intervention or appeasing policies. I have respect for lions, but that doesn't mean I'm going to go pet them, avoid putting a bullet in one's head if it tries to eat me, or ignore their spread around the world. When Germany made themselves energetically totally dependent on Russia, or when the West tries to appease Iran, it is not a respect towards their culture. It is a misunderstanding of culture. The Islamic world is diverse, and from a western perspective, different factions of it should be dealt with using varying approaches. Some can actually benefit from direct assistance in their cultural development, some may require a credible militant threat alone and others should be left alone.