Re: ANYT THOUGHTS ON AMERICAN PBS SERIES (fwd)

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jeffrey L. Beatty
> To: WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK
> Sent: Thursday, July 01, 1999 3:53 PM
> Subject: Re: ANYT THOUGHTS ON AMERICAN PBS SERIES
>
>
>> At 09:20 AM 7/1/99 PDT, Elson wrote:
>
>> >>I saw it too. My impression was how stupid the comparison
was:
>> >>comparing religious fanatics in the US (who support the US
> >>>oppression of people in the Middle East)

[Beaty]
>> Well, the religious right in the U.S. may have more in common
>> with the Iranian fundamentalists than you think. At least
>> factions of the religious right mistrust globalization of the
>> world economy in much the same way as the Iranian
fundamentalists
>> opposed U.S. "imperialism."

>What they don'have in common is the most important issue: the US
>MM are among the oppressors, the Islamic Fundamentalist movement
>is a reaction by the oppressed against the US. 

i come from the middle east, and i know the dynamics there. the idea that
the islamic fundementalist movement is a reaction to US imperialism is a
myth. islamic fundementalists are capitalists till the end (unlike the
socialists who are really opposed to US imperialism and
capitalism). especially, the leaders and active participants of
the movement come from middle class families, and are trained in middle
class ideology. most of them have PHD degrees in american universities.
the islamic fundementalists in Turkey have established their own bussiness
men association called MUSIAD. they are exploiting poor masses and
indoctrinizing them  with radical religious ideas which are highly
patriarchal, authoritarian and sexist (like the christian fundementalists
here). many islamic fundementalists have opened private colleges in
countries like Egypt  where they train students according to islamic
principles of gender segration.  when the government in 
Egypt postponed privatizations due to opposition coming from labor unions,
it was the islamic fundementalists who _radically_ rejected this option in
favor of privatization. especially after the 1980s', the new islamic
bourgeoisie is emerging reminiscent of the capitalist
principles of free market,anti-unionism and private initiative. 

the bottom line is that the rise of islamic fundementalism should be
understood within the context of world econonmy and international
division of labor. new global economy headed by the ideology of
neo-liberalism is fueling tensions everywhere in the form of religiuos
revivalism and ethnic conflicts, while assimilating different identities
into its logic of profit and accumulation. thus, islamic fundementalism is
a highly middle class, modern and global phenomenon. while its rhetoric is
seemingly anti-US, its aim is to build up a society organized along
capitalist lines just like the one that exists in the US. 

for example, Robert Wuthnow has suggested a framework for the analysis of
fundementalist movements by linking them to world-system dynamics,
relationship between core and periphery and changing positions of elites.
such movements generally occur when the world economy gives elites in
peripheral areas new opportunies to restore the moral order, while
promoting capitalist relations of production at the same time (1). this
results in hybrid identity formation and legitimation of certain cultural
practises (for example, hard-core islamic fundementalists acccuse
feminists, as well as Marxists, for destroying the moral order of islamic
community, presenting them as icons of alien ideas, while they explore the
benefits of global technology (ie.,mobile phones, t.v) to promote
activism .even some islamic fundementalists are gradually recruited into
state cadres for a neo-conservative restructuing of economy). 

in short, neo-imperialism plays a crucial role in the re-construction and
political affirmation of religious identities. within the countries where
economic resources are unevenly distributed, political elites who control
the resources also determine  what is the desirable cultural practices.
since islamic fundemetalists are also part of the political elite
in peripheral areas, they create new rhetorics to maintain their
legitimacy. they turn to cultural questions (religion, morality, women) 
to detract attention from economic problems and social inequalities,
causing resentment as well recruiting support from the disadvantaged and
marginalized groups.


References:

Robert Wuthnow, Meaning and Moral Order: Exploration in Cultural Analysis
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987).


Mine Aysen Doyran
phd candidate
dept of pol scie
SUNY/Albany
Graduate School-Nelson A. Rockefeller College
Albany/NY.