< < <
Date Index
> > >
Islamic State
by B. Y.
08 March 2002 12:43 UTC
< < <
Thread Index
> > >

I remember a past debate about the anti-systematic character of the islamic movement.
Maybe islamic state criterions can be discussed in this manner:
How can we define main characteristics of islamic movement if we consider the wide variety of
this movement?
Range of this movement changes from liberal parties to the guerilla types.
I think it is not easy to define such a description points about its characteristics.
But, the type which nowadays under pressure is clearly guerilla ones.
These are directly connected with an other struggle like racism as in USA.
These are not for national sovereignty movements today.
They are offering a state mechanism or any other kind of liberal component.
I think the most important one: they are anti-modernists in terms of their culture/ideology not only politics
and this makes them really anti-systematic as Wallerstein says.
So most of them are talking about a new system, not a new state.
On the other hand, real question at this point exists as they are progressive or not?
Our first answer would be definitely not. But in terms of what? Rights of people, institutions of liberalism?
Of course there is an other debate about the "rights of people", French Revolution etc...
But I think, saying that current picture of the islamic movement is not progressive is not justified.
Taliban or the picture drawn by USA does not fully represent islamic movement.
A complete analysis is required for such a decision and any other opinion becomes in the hand of orientalism

Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com

< < <
Date Index
> > >
World Systems Network List Archives
at CSF
Subscribe to World Systems Network < < <
Thread Index
> > >