I found a way to end Islamic extremism....

C

Cypress

Well-known member
No, not with more Pentagon spending.

No, not with Bush's bunker-busting tactical nukes.

No, not with waterboarding and sleep deprivation.


The answer is:

Empower arab (and muslim) women.


Based on my cursory review of governments and cultures in a subset of Arab countries, it appears the most stable, most liberal, the most egalitarian, and the most peaceful arab countries are those where women are empowered. Specifically, places like Bahrain, Qatar, UAE. These are relatively liberal constitutional monarchies, with universal sufferage (women included), universal education, near 100% literacy among women, universal health care, and colleges that have more women than men enrolled. Evidently women can serve in Parliament, in the professions, and in high levels of government ministries.


Contrast these liberal arab constitutional monarchies with Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Afganistan (and soon to be Iraq): conservative, theocratic, male-dominated societies.



SHORT VERSION: Give women equal power, and watch these countries become relatively liberal, relatively egalitarian societies, where the extremist mullahs and crazy conservative theocrats are marginalized -- A country with an even division of responsibility and rights between men and women functions best. :cool:
 
Cypress said:
No, not with more Pentagon spending.

No, not with Bush's bunker-busting tactical nukes.

No, not with waterboarding and sleep deprivation.


The answer is:

Empower arab (and muslim) women.


Based on my cursory review of governments and cultures in a subset of Arab countries, it appears the most stable, most liberal, the most egalitarian, and the most peaceful arab countries are those where women are empowered. Specifically, places like Bahrain, Qatar, UAE. These are relatively liberal constitutional monarchies, with universal sufferage (women included), universal education, near 100% literacy among women, universal health care, and colleges that have more women than men enrolled. Evidently women can serve in Parliament, in the professions, and in high levels of government ministries.


Contrast these liberal arab constitutional monarchies with Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Afganistan (and soon to be Iraq): conservative, theocratic, male-dominated societies.



SHORT VERSION: Give women equal power, and watch these countries become relatively liberal, relatively egalitarian societies, where the extremist mullahs and crazy conservative theocrats are marginalized -- A country with an even division of responsibility and rights between men and women functions best. :cool:
Click to expand...


I like the idea. How do you propose it happens?
 
Cypress said:
No, not with more Pentagon spending.

No, not with Bush's bunker-busting tactical nukes.

No, not with waterboarding and sleep deprivation.


The answer is:

Empower arab (and muslim) women.


Based on my cursory review of governments and cultures in a subset of Arab countries, it appears the most stable, most liberal, the most egalitarian, and the most peaceful arab countries are those where women are empowered. Specifically, places like Bahrain, Qatar, UAE. These are relatively liberal constitutional monarchies, with universal sufferage (women included), universal education, near 100% literacy among women, universal health care, and colleges that have more women than men enrolled. Evidently women can serve in Parliament, in the professions, and in high levels of government ministries.


Contrast these liberal arab constitutional monarchies with Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Afganistan (and soon to be Iraq): conservative, theocratic, male-dominated societies.



SHORT VERSION: Give women equal power, and watch these countries become relatively liberal, relatively egalitarian societies, where the extremist mullahs and crazy conservative theocrats are marginalized -- A country with an even division of responsibility and rights between men and women functions best. :cool:
Click to expand...

Cypress, I think it's because of the mullahs and crazy conservatives that women are marginalized. There's just more of them and they're far more powerful in the more theocratic nations.

I really don't think women having power is the reason those nations are as they are. But because those nations are liberal, they give women more power.
 
Well, think about it like this.

What's the most regressive state in the Union? Mississippi. It is also the poorest state.

What's the most liberal state in the Union? Massachussettes. It's like the second richest.

Without the money to educate and train the kids and get them out of their old ways of thinking they can never go into a "renaissance" - they'll all just be stuck feeling like shit and looking for things to hate, like women.
 
cawacko said:
I like the idea. How do you propose it happens?
Click to expand...

cawacko,

I don't think there's anything directly we can, or should do. I'm hoping that NeoCons have learned their lesson: you can't export human rights and democracy at the point of a gun barrel.

Gender equality, equal rights, and institutions that represent the rule of law have to come organically from within a society. I mean, 30 years ago, Bahrain, Qatra, and UAE certainly were fairly backwards countries. Particularly with respect to gender equality. But liberal changes came organically from within those societies.

At best, all we can do is encourage it indirectly. Bascially that means doing what the founders of this nation intended: set a good example for the world, don't muck around in their internal affairs, trade with them, and try to be their friends.

The only thing realistically that we can do to foster indirect change, is to change our foreign policy, stop being sponsors for autocratic arab regimes, be an honest broker in palestinian israeli affairs, trade with arab nations, and generally stay out of their internal affairs. Our bad image in the arab world I think is a distraction for them....it gives autocratic rulers a convenient punching bag to distract people from dealing with issues in their own country.
 
Watermark said:
All of the nations you mentioned are rich as hell off of oil, though. I think with economic progress comes social progress.
Click to expand...

I don't think sheer weatlth is the measure of a societies health, equality, and egalitarianism.

If I recall, the small kingdom of Brunei is an oil rich monarchy. But, in their case, the monarch is the supreme ruler. There isn't a constitutional monarchy there. No parliaments, legislature, or elected bodies. And women, to a large extent, are second class citizens there. Its a very patriachical socity.
 
Cypress said:
No, not with more Pentagon spending.

No, not with Bush's bunker-busting tactical nukes.

No, not with waterboarding and sleep deprivation.


The answer is:

Empower arab (and muslim) women.


Based on my cursory review of governments and cultures in a subset of Arab countries, it appears the most stable, most liberal, the most egalitarian, and the most peaceful arab countries are those where women are empowered. Specifically, places like Bahrain, Qatar, UAE. These are relatively liberal constitutional monarchies, with universal sufferage (women included), universal education, near 100% literacy among women, universal health care, and colleges that have more women than men enrolled. Evidently women can serve in Parliament, in the professions, and in high levels of government ministries.


Contrast these liberal arab constitutional monarchies with Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Afganistan (and soon to be Iraq): conservative, theocratic, male-dominated societies.



SHORT VERSION: Give women equal power, and watch these countries become relatively liberal, relatively egalitarian societies, where the extremist mullahs and crazy conservative theocrats are marginalized -- A country with an even division of responsibility and rights between men and women functions best. :cool:
Click to expand...


They didn't become westernized from women being in power. Women are in power because the nation became somewhat westernized. You're got your chain of causality backwards.
 
AssHatZombie said:
They didn't become westernized from women being in power. Women are in power because the nation became somewhat westernized. You're got your chain of causality backwards.
Click to expand...


Women are in power because the nation became somewhat westernized.

No, women are enabled in those countries because they (and their male allies) demanded and fought for it. It didn't just magically happen.

How do you think women became empowered in this country? Because the founders wrote some fancy language in a 200 year old document? No, it's because women and their allies, fought for and took a slice of the pie.
 
Cypress said:
Women are in power because the nation became somewhat westernized.

No, women are enabled in those countries because they (and their male allies) demanded and fought for it. It didn't just magically happen.

How do you think women became empowered in this country? Because the founders wrote some fancy language in a 200 year old document? No, it's because women and their allies, fought for and took a slice of the pie.
Click to expand...

But in a non westernized islamic society, iran, afghanistan etc, they would have been killed for their dissent, not tolerated and capitulated to. So it's really a sign of an already somewhat liberalized society that they were even allowed to speak out.
 
Cypress said:
cawacko,

I don't think there's anything directly we can, or should do. I'm hoping that NeoCons have learned their lesson: you can't export human rights and democracy at the point of a gun barrel.

Gender equality, equal rights, and institutions that represent the rule of law have to come organically from within a society. I mean, 30 years ago, Bahrain, Qatra, and UAE certainly were fairly backwards countries. Particularly with respect to gender equality. But liberal changes came organically from within those societies.

At best, all we can do is encourage it indirectly. Bascially that means doing what the founders of this nation intended: set a good example for the world, don't muck around in their internal affairs, trade with them, and try to be their friends.

The only thing realistically that we can do to foster indirect change, is to change our foreign policy, stop being sponsors for autocratic arab regimes, be an honest broker in palestinian israeli affairs, trade with arab nations, and generally stay out of their internal affairs. Our bad image in the arab world I think is a distraction for them....it gives autocratic rulers a convenient punching bag to distract people from dealing with issues in their own country.
Click to expand...


So it's the U.S.'s (and specifically "neo-cons") fault that certain Muslim nations oppress women? I guess I don't really buy into that argument. You can attempt to appease them as much as you want and their leadership will find another bogeyman to prevent changes.
 
AssHatZombie said:
But in a non westernized islamic society, iran, afghanistan etc, they would have been killed for their dissent, not tolerated and capitulated to. So it's really a sign of an already somewhat liberalized society that they were even allowed to speak out.
Click to expand...

Tolerated and capitulated to? You are a real piece of work. Women can wield knives as well.
 
cawacko said:
So it's the U.S.'s (and specifically "neo-cons") fault that certain Muslim nations oppress women? I guess I don't really buy into that argument. You can attempt to appease them as much as you want and their leadership will find another bogeyman to prevent changes.
Click to expand...

I guess I don't see where he's making that argument.
 
cawacko said:
So it's the U.S.'s (and specifically "neo-cons") fault that certain Muslim nations oppress women? I guess I don't really buy into that argument. You can attempt to appease them as much as you want and their leadership will find another bogeyman to prevent changes.
Click to expand...

I never said that. You didn't read what I wrote. I said change has to be organic, and come from within arab society.
 
Cypress said:
I already covered this in great detail, genius.

I'm not going to re-write what I already wrote.
Click to expand...

Indirectly, by maintaining the carter status quo of financial empowerment of insane theocrats. Bad Idea.

And you still got the causality backward on the phenomenon you're discussing. And it's also what watermark said. He's right for once. Women are in power because the nations are more westernized, they weren't westernized by rogue islamic women who seized power from the men between gang rape sessions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top