Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Survey of World's Muslims Yields Dismaying Results - Pipes

Survey of World's Muslims Yields Dismaying Results
by Daniel Pipes
New York Sun
June 27, 2006

How do Muslims worldwide think?

To find out, the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press carried out a large-scale attitudinal survey this spring. Titled The Great Divide: How Westerners and Muslims View Each Other, it interviewed Muslims in two batches of countries: six of them with long-standing, majority-Muslim populations (Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Turkey) and four of them in Western Europe with new, minority Muslim populations (France, Germany, Britain, and Spain).

The survey, which also looks at Western views of Muslims, yielded some dismaying but not altogether surprising results. Its themes can be grouped under three rubrics.

A proclivity to conspiracy theories: In not one Muslim population polled does a majority believe that Arabs carried out the attacks of September 11, 2001, on America. The proportions range from a mere 15% in Pakistan holding Arabs responsible, to 48% among French Muslims. Confirming recent negative trends in Turkey, the number of Turks who point the finger at Arabs has declined to 16% today from 46% in 2002. In other words, in every one of these 10 Muslim communities, a majority views September 11 as a hoax perpetrated by the American government, Israel, or some other agency.

Likewise, Muslims are widely prejudiced against Jews, ranging from 28% unfavorable ratings among French Muslims to 98% in Jordan (which, despite the monarchy's moderation, has a majority Palestinian Arab population). Further, Muslims in certain countries (especially Egypt and Jordan) see Jews conspiratorially, as being responsible for bad relations between Muslims and Westerners.

Conspiracy theories also pertain to larger topics. Asked, "What is most responsible for Muslim nations' lack of prosperity?" between 14% (in Pakistan) and 43% (in Jordan) blame the policies of America and other Western states, as opposed to indigenous problems, such as a lack of democracy or education, or the presence of corruption or radical Islam.

This conspiracism points to a widespread unwillingness in the umma to deal with realities, preferring the safer bromides of plots, schemes, and intrigues. It also exposes major problems adjusting to modernity.

Support for terrorism: All the Muslim populations polled display a solid majority of support for Osama bin Laden. Asked whether they have confidence in him, Muslims replied positively, ranging between 8% (in Turkey) and 72% (in Nigeria). Likewise, suicide bombing is popular. Muslims who call it justified range from 13% (in Germany) to 69% (in Nigeria). These appalling numbers suggest that terrorism by Muslims has deep roots and will remain a danger for years to come.

British and Nigerian Muslims are most alienated: Britain stands out as a paradoxical country. Non-Muslims there have strikingly more favorable views of Islam and Muslims than elsewhere in the West; for example, only 32% of the British sample view Muslims as violent, significantly less than their counterparts in France (41%), Germany (52%), or Spain (60%). In the Muhammad cartoon dispute, Britons showed more sympathy for the Muslim outlook than did other Europeans. More broadly, Britons blame Muslims less for the poor state of Western-Muslim relations.

But British Muslims return the favor with the most malign anti-Western attitudes found in Europe. Many more of them regard Westerners as violent, greedy, immoral, and arrogant than do their counterparts in France, Germany, and Spain. In addition, whether asked about their attitudes toward Jews, responsibility for September 11, or the place of women in Western societies, their views are notably more extreme.

The situation in Britain reflects the "Londonistan" phenomenon, whereby Britons preemptively cringe and Muslims respond to this weakness with aggression.

Nigerian Muslims generally have the most belligerent views on such issues as the state of Western-Muslim relations, the supposed immorality and arrogance of Westerners, and support for Mr. bin Laden and suicide terrorism. This extremism results, no doubt, from the violent state of Christian-Muslim relations in Nigeria.

Ironically, most Muslim alienation is found in those countries where Muslims are either the most or the least accommodated, suggesting that a middle path is best - where Muslims do not win special privileges, as in Britain, nor are they in an advanced state of hostility, as in Nigeria.

Overall, the Pew survey sends an undeniable message of crisis from one end to the other of the Muslim world

Sunday, June 25, 2006

Empire Discussion with Niall Ferguson

Great discussion here on the rights and wrongs of Empire (in general, and the British in particular). Ferguson is my hero, this Colley woman is ok, then a whinging old Marxist and a couple of trendy lefties to get your right-thinking hackles up! About 30 mins and well worth it!

Radio 4's Start the Week - Empire Discussion

This week Andrew Marr presents a special edition of Start the Week. To mark the end of Radio 4's This Sceptred Isle: Empire series, some of this country's best-known historians will be examining how Britain and other countries around the world have been changed by their experience of empire. They'll be discussing whether Britain should apologise and make reparation for its imperial past or glory in it, and asking whether the twenty-first century will see the birth of new empires. Eric Hobsbawm, Niall Ferguson, Robert Beckford, Linda Colley and Priya Gopal join Andrew Marr.

  • The War of the World: History's Age of Hatred by Niall Ferguson is published by Allen Lane.

  • Jesus Dub: Theology, Music and Social Change by Robert Beckford is published by Routledge.

  • Literary Radicalism in India: Gender, Nation and the Transition to Independence by Priyamvada Gopal is published by Routledge. Her essay on a Moral Empire can be found in the collection she is editing with Neil Lazarus, which will be published in the autumn as a special issue of the journal New Formations, to be called, After Iraq: Reframing Postcolonial Studies.

  • The Age of Extremes by Eric Hobsbawm is published by Abacus, as is Nations and Nationalism since 1780.

  • The Ordeal of Elizabeth Marsh by Linda Colley will be published by HarperCollins in the autumn. Captives is published by Pimlico.


Saturday, June 24, 2006

Polish anti-semitism on the rise

Ghetto survivor warns of Polish 'fascism'
Telegraph
24/06/2006

As a 24-year-old banished to the Warsaw ghetto with thousands of fellow Polish Jews, Marek Edelman decided that the only way to fight the Nazis was to take up arms.More than six decades later, the last surviving leader of the ghetto's courageous but doomed uprising of 1943 said he thought similar action justified in today's Poland."If we want to save Poland, my advice would be to take up the knife and hit them where it hurts," Mr Edelman, 87, said in his flat in the central city of Lodz.

His anger is directed at the conservative government, which was elected eight months ago, and two nationalist and radical Right-wing parties that were recently invited to prop it up: the League of Polish Families (LPR) and Self-Defence, whose leader has praised Hitler's economic policies.

Poland's entry to the European Union two years ago has generally been hailed as a success. But it has brought with it heavy doses of illiberalism that are embarrassing the champions of EU expansion. The nation of 40 million is in danger of becoming a hothouse of extremism and Catholic nationalism. Ten days ago the European Parliament condemned "a rise in racist, xenophobic, anti-semitic and homophobic intolerance" and urged the government to tone down its rhetoric or risk sanctions. Drawing parallels with the rise of fascism in the 1930s, Mr Edelman said: "If this coalition continues to shape the country, I truly believe that our freedom is threatened. Persecution starts with small things: first language, then beatings, then murder."

This week a report alleged that the deputy chief of state television had published a neo-Nazi magazine calling for the expulsion of Jews from Poland. Piotr Farfal, 28, claimed that he had only "lent his name" to the magazine. Asked to confirm his identity on a photograph of him giving a Nazi salute, he said: "You can also use this gesture to greet someone."

Gay rights groups around the world protested after Wojciech Wierzejski, the deputy chief of LPR, speaking before the country's annual gay rights march, referred to gays as "deviants" who should be beaten with sticks if they marched without a permit.

But the main focus of detractors' wrath is Radio Maryja, a popular Catholic radio station that is openly anti-semitic and racist. The station was crucial to the electoral success of the Law and Justice Party, which squeezed into power on the back of public dissatisfaction with the previous Left-wing government's corruption and poor economic management. As a result, the station has acquired a huge influence on government business.

Its listeners are, like the supporters of LPR and Self-Defence, typically rural, elderly, staunch Catholics who feel betrayed by the country's free market transformation. Numbering up to four million, they pay for the station through donations and in return lap up not only the morning doses of prayers, recipes and household tips but also the evening political broadcasts and phone-ins in which government figures regularly take part.

In March Mr Edelman wrote an angry letter to the prime minister after a broadcast in which a regular Radio Maryja commentator said that Poland was "being outflanked by Judeans" who, with their "greasy palms", were "trying to extort money from our government". "I wanted to point out that the government is lending support to the most reactionary currents of xenophobia and anti-semitism," said Mr Edelman, a retired heart surgeon. "Radio Maryja should be closed down."

The government rejects the charges, talking of a Left-wing smear campaign. All Polish Youth, the youth wing of LPR, says it is only by making Poland a Catholic state that its future will be secured. "We do not want to become like Holland with its free drugs and gay marriage," said Konrad Bonislawski, 23, a senior member. "Since joining the European Union we have seen attempts to destroy our Catholic values."

One of the government's most controversial moves has been to announce the reintroduction to schools of lessons in patriotism, in which pupils will celebrate their heritage through history lessons and singing the national anthem. The initiative prompted schoolchildren to form the Pupils' Initiative and to storm the education ministry this month, demanding the sacking of Roman Giertych, the education minister and the leader of LPR.

"You can't teach patriotism," said Karolina Szczepaniak, 18, who attends a convent school in Warsaw. "The government is trying to force on us its religious ideas, its homophobia, its racism, as it tries to turn Poland into a Catholic state. "Look at all the cases where fundamentalists impose their ideas on states and you see how dangerous it can be."

-----------------

JP Note: according to the stats here, the Jewish population of Poland is 25,000, ie 0.065% of the population

Friday, June 23, 2006

The public feels patronised, bullied and betrayed

Here's a good piece on Labour in the Guardian.

The public feels patronised, bullied and betrayed
Jenni Russell

The saddest and most puzzling aspect of this rift is that the party adopted the top-down creed of technocratic managerialism just as business was realising the limitations of that approach. These days, successful workplaces are all about delegation and trust. Already the Conservatives have seen what potentially rich territory this is. They are talking of the need to trust people again.

There are signs of hope. Some young Labour ministers think and talk like human beings and would like a new approach. If Labour is to win the next election, it's vital that this more open, less defensive generation of politicians are allowed to start thinking about how they can construct a better relationship between them and us.

Thursday, June 22, 2006

An Englishman's home isn't his Castle

A new property law enables the council to confiscate your home if it has been empty for over six months.

It's an old saying, a trope or a truism if you prefer, that "An Englishman's home is his castle". Whatever happens outside in the streets, whatever idiocies the current political pygmies have decided to inflict upon the populace, the possession and enjoyment of one's own property was safe, guarded by both law and custom. Certainly there were eminent domain purchases, broadly in line with American practice but as of the first of this month the government no longer even has to pay.

Yes, you did read that correctly, your paid off, unmortgaged, fully owned property can be taken away from you without your even being paid for it.

The law is here: The Housing (Empty Dwelling Management Orders) (Prescribed Exceptions and Requirements) (England) Order 2006. Something of a mouthful, I know, but what this and the preceding pieces of legislation actually state is that if you leave a property uninhabited for 6 months then the local council can take it from you and rent it to whomever it likes. There are a few exceptions, such as vacation homes and so on, but at a stroke the entire basis of property law has changed. Instead of it being yours to do with as you wish it is yours as long, and only as long, as you do as the government wishes.

The set up is that if you have left the property empty then the local council must make reasonable efforts to contact you to let out the house or apartment. If you still decide that you don't want to, then they will do it for you. Worse, far worse, is if their "reasonable efforts" don't actually find you, then they'll do it without actually telling you. These orders allowing them to do this will last 7 years, and can be extended. Yes, this will even be possible in the case of a death: the inheritors have 6 months (not from probate, but from the granting of representation: and there are many only even mildly complicated estates that can take more than 6 months to run the executor's course) to dispose of the property or conceivably have it compulsorarily rented out from underneath them.

That local council can charge you a management fee for this service that you obviously don't want and should then pass on to you whatever is left of the rent they have been charging your new unwanted tenant. Your new tenants will not, of course, be quite from the top drawer of society, for like anywhere else in the world, that's not the social stratum from whom the inhabitants of "social" housing are drawn. Yet you will be responsible for the costs of ensuring that said housing is maintained to the highest standards, whether or not they actually pay any rent; indeed, you won't actually be able to evict them if they should trash the place for, of course, you are not the manager or agent for the property; that is the local council.


Here's the full article.

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

A Natural History of Jewish Intelligence

The Lessons of Jewish Genes
by Steven Pinker
The New Republic
17/6/06

My grandparents were immigrants from Eastern Europe who owned a small necktie factory on the outskirts of Montreal. While visiting them one weekend, I found my grandfather on the factory floor, cutting shapes out of irregular stacks of cloth with a fabric saw. He explained that by carving up the remnants that were left over when the neckties had been cut out and stitching them together in places that didn't show, he could get a few extra ties out of each sheet of cloth. I asked him why he was doing this himself rather than leaving it to his employees. He shrugged, tapped his forehead, and said, "Goyishe kop," a term of condescension that literally means "gentile head."

He wasn't exactly serious, but he wasn't exactly not serious either. Jews have long had an ambivalent attitude toward their own intelligence, and toward their reputation for intelligence. There is an ethnic pride at the prevalence of Jews in occupations that reward brainpower. A droll e-mail called "New Words to Add to Your Jewish Vocabulary" includes "jewbiliation, N: pride in finding out that one's favorite celebrity is Jewish" and "meinstein, N: My son, the genius." Many Jews subscribe to a folk theory that attributes Jewish intelligence to what would have to be the weirdest example of sexual selection in the living world: that for generations in the shtetl, the brightest yeshiva boy was betrothed to the daughter of the richest man, thereby favoring the genes, if such genes there are, for Talmudic pilpul.

But pride has always been haunted by fear that public acknowledge of Jewish achievement could fuel the perception of "Jewish domination" of institutions. And any characterization of Jews in biological terms smacks of Nazi pseudoscience about "the Jewish race." A team of scientists from the University of Utah recently strode into this minefield with their article "Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence," which was published online in the Journal of Biosocial Science a year ago, and was soon publicized in The New York Times, The Economist, and on the cover of New York magazine.

The Utah researchers Gregory Cochran, Jason Hardy, and Henry Harpending (henceforth CH&H) proposed that Ashkenazi Jews have a genetic advantage in intelligence, and that the advantage arose from natural selection for success in middleman occupations (moneylending, selling, and estate management) during the first millennium of their existence in northern Europe, from about 800 C.E. to 1600 C.E. Since rapid selection of a single trait often brings along deleterious by-products, this evolutionary history also bequeathed the genetic diseases known to be common among Ashkenazim, such as Tay-Sachs and Gaucher's.

The CH&H study quickly became a target of harsh denunciation and morbid fascination. It raises two questions. How good is the evidence for this audacious hypothesis? And what, if any, are the political and moral implications?

Tuesday, June 13, 2006

The Positive Case For Globalisation

An excellent article in the Times on the positive benefits of Globalisation and why it is important to defend it against a rising tide of criticsm. And the Author? Mr Gordon Brown. If he keeps this up I might even vote for him!

The whole article is worth reading but I wanted to pull out these quotes:

'“Economic patriotism” across Europe, with country after country blocking cross-border acquisitions, is antithetical to both the spirit and the rules of an open single market. Protectionist calls from parts of the United States, which would seek to halt necessary change, also send out the wrong message, implying that globalisation is a threat, not the opportunity it should be.

The rising tide of populism in Latin America and continuing protectionism in Asia are direct assaults on the very idea of globalisation itself. Everywhere, instead of barriers coming down, they appear to be going up.'

'Ironically, even globalisation’s beneficiaries — the millions who are seeing cuts in consumer goods prices, lower inflation and lower interest rates, and higher economic growth and employment — are acting as if they are victims. With even winners thinking like losers — and the popular focus on lost manufacturing, lost service jobs off-shored, lost jobs to newcomers moving into their communities — the argument is being run by the hardest hit producers, forgetting the benefits to consumers.

But it is not the side-effects or the inevitable strains of globalisation that they have put under attack. Under assault are the very foundations of globalisation — the free movement of capital, goods and services, and labour — that would be destroyed by this three-pronged attack from protectionism, economic patriotism and anti-immigrant sentiment.

The world is being given a wake-up call about the dangers of retreating back into the kind of beggar-thy-neighbour, heads-in-the-sand protectionism that set nation against nation in the 1930s.

So our first task, indeed our responsibility as economic leaders, is to demonstrate to an insecure and uncertain public that either defending a status quo that cannot endure, or retreating into protectionism is a false prospectus.'

Monday, June 12, 2006

Civilian deaths in Gaza

It's hard to write about this without sounding like a complete apologist for any action carried about Israel. Just for the record, I'm not defending the shelling of picnicing families. However, just read this (via biased-bbc), which made think that the story was at the very least worth keeping an eye on. (Worth reading for the surprising - to me, anyway - revelation that the Palestinian boy shown cowering behind his father, was not, after all, killed by Israeli bullets.) Good post on moral equivalence from HP too.

In God We Trust (a bit less)

Tipped off to this by the fun-loving National Secular Society:

Although the US is far more devout than Europe (a point frequently made by M. Steyn) a new study suggests that Americans too are beginning to stand in the corner losing their religion. According to the authors of the American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS), the number of respondants claiming no religious affiliation has risen from 8% to 14%.

I realise it probably looks like I'm making some kind of 'aha! they're as godless as us!' point - but I'm not. It's one survey and the numbers aren't exactly massive. Just thought it was mildly interesting. Anyway, you can read more about it here, if you're so inclined.

Friday, June 02, 2006

Hamas leader's three sisters live secretly in Israel as full citizens

Hamas leader's three sisters live secretly in Israel as full citizens
Telegraph
02/06/2006

Israel regards Ismail Haniyeh, the Palestinian Hamas prime minister, as an enemy of state. But three of his sisters enjoy full Israeli citizenship, having moved 30 years ago to the desert town of Tel Sheva. Some of their offspring have even served in the Israeli army, the force responsible for decades of Israeli occupation in Gaza and the West Bank, an occupation that the Islamist movement, Hamas, was founded to fight.