Islamic Societies Review WEEKLY

Sunday, April 29, 2012

Africa’s next big war?

Sunday, April 29, 2012 No comments

BADLY drawn imperialist borders that cut across tribes or lumped too many diverse people unhappily together once fuelled much violence in Africa. Half a century after independence full-blown wars are much rarer, even if some borders still irritate. One of the last open wounds appeared to close on July 9th 2011, when the mainly Christian and animist south of Sudan seceded from the predominantly Muslim north. After decades of fighting that killed some 2m people, partition seemed to mark a success for both African and Western mediators.

Yet now that success is overshadowed by the threat of war. Over the past nine months the two Sudanese successor states were supposed to find a way to divide up such things as oil revenues, border posts and the rights of people living on one side of the border who wish to be citizens on the other. Both sides made outsized demands and engaged in extreme brinkmanship. New sparks flew when the south announced plans to build a pipeline to the Indian Ocean, through Kenya to the south-east, which would cut the north out of most of the oil trade. Militias, often proxies of the old rump state or the new southern one, attacked each other. International mediators, vital as brokers of the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement that paved the way for partition, stood aside, though Ethiopia and Egypt organised some talks and the UN proffered advice. Barack Obama last week made a stirring appeal for calm.

Friday, April 27, 2012

Human Rights in the UAE

Friday, April 27, 2012 No comments

by Rori Donaghy

Rights of foreign workers in UAE in focus

The UAE. A place famous for tax-free shopping, stunning feats of construction and beautiful beaches. So much so that one million Britons visit each year. Scratch beneath the aesthetics of opulent Dubai however, and a much darker story begins to emerge.

In the past, the rulers have distributed wealth amongst their citizens in exchange for political acquiescence. Following the advent of the Arab Spring, this has begun to unravel as the lack of democratic institutions has become clear. Of course, when the indigenous population makes up less than 10% of the population it is a little easier to ignore or suppress any whispers for democratic reform.

Last year, the case of the UAE 5 gained some traction in the West as five individuals were prosecuted for undermining state security after calling for increased democratic accountability in their country. After the international community's gaze fleetingly turned towards the UAE, the five were granted pardons and the focus swiftly moved onto other matters.

Thursday, April 26, 2012

Lawrence Krauss: another physicist with an anti-philosophy complex

Thursday, April 26, 2012 No comments

by Massimo Pigliucci

I don’t know what’s the matter with physicists these days. It used to be that they were an intellectually sophisticated bunch, with the likes of Einstein and Bohr doing not only brilliant scientific research, but also interested, respectful of, and conversant in other branches of knowledge, particularly philosophy. These days it is much more likely to encounter physicists like Steven Weinberg or Stephen Hawking, who merrily go about dismissing philosophy for the wrong reasons, and quite obviously out of a combination of profound ignorance and hubris (the two often go together, as I’m sure Plato would happily point out). The latest such bore is Lawrence Krauss, of Arizona State University.

I have been ignoring Krauss’ nonsense about philosophy for a while, even though it had occasionally appeared on my Twitter or G+ radars. But the other day my friend Michael De Dora pointed me to this interview Krauss just did with The Atlantic, and now I feel obliged to comment, for the little good that it may do. And before I continue, kudos to Ross Andersen, who conducted the interview, for pressing Krauss on several of his non sequiturs. Let’s take a look, shall we?

Krauss is proud (if a bit coy) of the fact that Richard Dawkins referred to his latest book, entitled “A Universe from Nothing: Why There is Something Rather Than Nothing,” as comparable to Darwin’s “Origin of Species,” on the grounds that it upends the “last trump card of the theologian.” Well, leave it to Dawkins to engage in that sort of silly hyperbolic rhetoric. (Dawkins still appears to be convinced that religion will be defeated by rationality alone. Were that the case, David Hume would have sufficed.) The fact is, Krauss’s book is aimed at a general audience, popularizing other people’s (as well as his own) work, and is not the kind of revelation of novel scientific findings that Darwin put out in his opus, and that makes all the difference.

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

Tom Friedman’s War on Humanity

Tuesday, April 24, 2012 No comments

by BELÉN FERNÁNDEZ

Thomas Friedman, three-time Pulitzer Prize-winning foreign affairs columnist for the New York Times, once offered the following insight into his modus operandi: “I often begin writing columns by interviewing myself.”

Some might see this as an unsurprising revelation in light of Edward Said’s appraisal: “It’s as if … what scholars, poets, historians, fighters, and statesmen have done is not as important or as central as what Friedman himself thinks.”

According to Friedman, the purpose of the auto-interviews is merely to analyze his feelings on certain issues. Given that his feelings tend to undergo drastic inter- and sometimes intra-columnar modifications, one potentially convenient byproduct of such an approach to journalism is the impression that Friedman interviews many more people than he actually does.

Wrong Formula: Bahrain races ahead with Formula One, but reverses on reform

Tuesday, April 24, 2012 No comments

THE Bahrain Grand Prix is back. Across the tiny island kingdom, posters trumpet joy at the return of the Formula One race: “UniF1ed: One Nation in Celebration”. But although cars, crews and cameras have indeed arrived for the event from April 20th to 22nd, the slogan rings hollow. A year on from an uprising against Bahrain’s ruling family that prompted a brutally efficient military crackdown, more than 50 deaths and the cancellation of last year’s race, the atmosphere in Bahrain remains poisonous.

Activists have gleefully torched posters for the race, and vow to disrupt it however they can. Government troops, tanks and armoured cars are enforcing a forbidding cordon around the desert circuit. Night after night, riot vans sweep into villages on the outskirts of the capital, Manama. Activist ringleaders are dragged from their homes, beaten in front of their families and carted off.

France's presidential election: It's Hollande's to lose

Tuesday, April 24, 2012 No comments

THERE were scenes of jubilation outside the Socialist Party headquarters in Paris last night, after François Hollande topped the first round of the presidential election with 28.6% of the vote. As the night went on, his lead over Nicolas Sarkozy narrowed slightly. Official results now put the incumbent president on 27.1%. These two candidates will go on to face each other in the run-off on May 6th.

Some analysts are now suggesting that Mr Hollande’s slender lead leaves the race wide open. It is certainly true that it would be a mistake to underestimate the campaigning skills of the energetic Mr Sarkozy. But I just don’t see how at this late stage he can pull it off.

The argument in his favour is based on the disappointing score achieved yesterday by the Communist-backed contender, Jean-Luc Mélenchon. He ended up with 11.1% when some polls had credited him with 15%, and suggested that he might even come in third place.

By contrast, on the far right, and as previously predicted, the National Front’s Marine Le Pen did better than polls had suggested, scooping up 18% of the vote. This figure, while not quite as much as some early exit polls suggested last night, is still more than her father, Jean-Marie, managed when he made it into the second round in 2002; indeed, it is the Front’s best-ever score in a presidential election.

Add up the score of the "right" (including a minor nationalist candidate), goes the argument, and you get 46.9%; more than the combined score of the left, at 44%. Ergo, all that Mr Sarkozy needs to secure a majority is half the centrist voters who backed François Bayrou, who got 9.1% Sunday.

Sunday, April 22, 2012

What a Hollande Victory Would Mean for Merkel

Sunday, April 22, 2012 No comments

By Veit Medick and Severin Weiland

German Chancellor Merkel has made it clear that she would like to see French President Nicolas Sarkozy win a second term. Indeed, if his challenger François Hollande emerges victorious in the country's upcoming election, she could face isolation in Europe. But a Sarkozy re-election might be problematic, too.

As Europe continues to integrate both economically and politically, the outcomes of national elections have grown in importance to reach beyond their own borders. German Chancellor Angela Merkel knows that, and it's why she will travel on Sunday to Paris, where voters will be heading to the polls in the first round of the French presidential elections.

Conservative French President Nicolas Sarkozy is fighting for a second term, but he has a strong opponent. The Socialist candidate, François Hollande, has a good chance of moving into the Élysée Palace. The latest polls show Hollande leading in the first round of voting, as well as in the possible run-off vote on May 6.

For Merkel, this is an election like no other, and one that is even more important to her than many German state elections. Whoever wins in France will help drive European policy by her side. If the victor proves to be Hollande, who differs with Merkel's closely allied partner Sarkozy on many issues, not the least of which involve rescuing of the euro, things could become uncomfortable for her, both in Brussels and at home in Berlin.

Thursday, April 19, 2012

Did Humans Invent Music?

Thursday, April 19, 2012 No comments

by GARY MARCUS & GEOFFREY MILLER

Did Neanderthals sing? Is there a "music gene"? Two scientists debate whether our capacity to make and enjoy songs comes from biological evolution or from the advent of civilization.

Music is everywhere, but it remains an evolutionary enigma. In recent years, archaeologists have dug up prehistoric instruments, neuroscientists have uncovered brain areas that are involved in improvisation, and geneticists have identified genes that might help in the learning of music. Yet basic questions persist: Is music a deep biological adaptation in its own right, or is it a cultural invention based mostly on our other capacities for language, learning, and emotion? And if music is an adaptation, did it really evolve to promote mating success as Darwin thought, or other for benefits such as group cooperation or mother-infant bonding?

Here, scientists Gary Marcus and Geoffrey Miller debate these issues. Marcus, a professor of psychology at New York University and the author of Guitar Zero: The New Musician and The Science of Learning and Kluge: The Haphazard Evolution of The Human Mind, argues that music is best seen as a cultural invention. Miller, a professor of psychology at the University of New Mexico and the author of The Mating Mind: How Sexual Choice Shaped the Evolution of Human Nature and Spent: Sex, Evolution, and Consumer Behavior, makes the case that music is the product of sexual selection and an adaptation that's been with humans for millennia.

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

A Tribute to Islam, Earthen but Transcendent

Wednesday, April 18, 2012 No comments

By HOLLAND COTTER

DJENNÉ, Mali — As in so much of the Islamic world, “insha’Allah” — “if God wills it” — is how people punctuate conversations in this predominantly Muslim West African country. If you speak of starting a project, or taking a trip, or trying to pay a debt, the outcome is always understood to be conditional.

Recently Malians have had to trust heaven more than usual. The year’s millet crop arrived too early and much too thin. In late fall and winter there were attacks on Europeans by a Qaeda affiliate. The military overthrow of the government in Bamako, the nation’s capital, left one of Africa’s poorest nations shut off from the world. Meanwhile Tuareg rebels and Islamist forces have seized the northern half of the country, including Timbuktu.

Tourism, so vital to the economy, has been reduced to a trickle, though West Africa has never attracted the kind of monument-hungry crowds that flood into Egypt. Most travelers who come here are in search of “black” Africa — the Africa of so-called tribal art — and many are only dimly aware of the extraordinary vitality of Islamic culture, old and new, below the Sahara.

Saturday, April 14, 2012

Idiosyncrasy as a Tool of Knowledge: Social Criticism in the Age of the Normalized Intellectual

Saturday, April 14, 2012 No comments

Axel Honneth, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main and Columbia University

Contrary to repeated claims of the disappearance of the intellectuals, their participation in public discussion has never been livelier than in today’s advanced democracies, Axel Honneth argues. Instead, he traces an epochal transformation that has brought about two fairly distinct types of reflexive positions: the constantly growing number of normalized intellectuals as the cultural byproduct and manifestation of the successful establishment of a democratic public sphere on one hand, and the marginal position of the social critic on the other. The public learning processes initiated by the latter are of much greater persistence and durability than any day-to-day intervention of normalized intellectuals could bring about, Honneth argues. His essay for our Academia & the Public Sphere Essay Series comes from the concluding chapter of his most recent translated essay collection.–ed.

In an article with the suggestive title “Courage, Sympathy, and a Good Eye,” Michael Walzer energetically sets the debate about social criticism on the track of virtue ethics.[1] The argument with which he grounds this reorientation initially sounds as plausible as it is timely. Since social theory can provide neither necessary nor sufficient grounds for successful social criticism, its quality cannot be measured primarily by the merits of its theoretical content but, rather, more urgently by the qualities of the critic. According to Walzer, he or she must have developed a capacity for sympathy and finally a sense of proportion when applying it.

What sounds plausible in this conclusion is the fact that the forcefulness and practical effect of social criticism seldom results from the measure of the theory in which it is invested but, rather, from the perspicuity of its central concern. And today this results in a turn to the virtues of the critic, since it feeds the devaluation of sociological knowledge and meets up with the tendency to personalize intellectual contexts. All the same, the self-evidence with which Walzer still regards even the intellectuals of our day as born governors of social criticism is surprising. He does not speak of bold Enlighteners—we might think of figures on the model of Émile Zola—but of the ubiquitous sort of author who participates with generalizing arguments in the debates of a democratic public sphere. Is this normalized intellectual, a spiritual agent in the fora of public opinion formation, really the natural representative today of what was once called “social criticism”? Here I first trace an epochal transformation in the form of the intellectual before outlining a completely different physiognomy of the social critic than that found in Walzer’s work.