Re: dialogue of civilizations?

Greetings,

The term 'civilizatinality' is not my own invention. A. J. Toynbee, in one of his most perceptive observations argues that:

'' The misleading feature is the fact that, in modern times, our own Western civilization has cast the net of its economic system all around the world, and this economic unification has been followed by a political unification on the same basis which has gone almost as far ... that all the states of the contemporary world form part of a single political system of Western origin ... while the economic and political maps have now been westernized, the cultural map remains susbtantially what it was before our Western society started on its career of economic and political conquest'' (1947, Cited in Tahir Amin, 1991. 14)

Before going any further, Boris should give some definition about 'Islamists' and what is 'Islamicity'? The second point is related to Islamicity and Democracy. Boris argues that Chinese and Islamists are against 'Democracy'. Who are they? Name please? As far as Islamicits are concerned if 'Demo' (people) is to be considered as equal to the territorial collection of individuals within the system of 'state' then Islamicits are against Democracy. Becasue the scope of 'Demo' in Islam is not decided by 'imposed modernity' of Russian (Tzarsim, Bolshevikism), British Colonialism, French Imperialism, or American Imperialism. A look at the invention of African, Asian, Central Asian, and Latin American states would reveal that what is called 'Demo' is an invention of Colonial power than other things. For instance, what is Iraq? What is the difference between an Iraqi and a Jordanian or for that matter an Egptiyan?

Last but not least; I think all Thrid-Worldist intellectuals should try 'not' to make another Europe or America in Asia or Africa. What's the use?

Kind

Seyed