Art by Nermine Hammam
Executively Produced by KRIKOS
Presented by Colours of the Culture
Art by Nermine Hammam
Executively Produced by KRIKOS
Presented by Colours of the Culture
A more liberal strand of Islam might argue that cultural identity is tied to Islamic heritage. Furthermore, it encompasses all philosophy and knowledge into Islam, as opposed to radical Islam which excludes philosophies from the Enlightenment, Renaissance, and the mystical indigenous religions of various regions in the world, like Central Asia and Latin America.
What if identity, whether it is Chinese, or Syrian, is also tied to an Islamic consciousness?
Let us say for example that Confucius was a Muslim. But only in the philosophical sense.
Let us say that Islam, is a philosophy too, a form of consciousness that becomes intertwined with language and custom.
If that is the case, instead of isolating extremism in Islam – what if we look at national struggles for national representation as well as national struggles for independence through the lens of a struggle for a higher level of consciousness?
In communist China, Islam is systemically suppressed. In the West, Islam is discriminated against. In the Middle East, from where it originates, it is disenfranchised from the political process. Palestine, the crux of Islamic scripture, remains occupied. Mecca, resides in a politically corrupt nation-state. The vast majority of Muslims, shiite or sunni, are living in poverty due both to foreign occupation and arbitrary authoritarian government. Russia is united with many forces, some its enemies, like the US in the fight against radicalism, of course, without looking at the initial cause.
In today’s world we see North Korea and Russia and Iran and China as US arch-rivals. But how can we be so sure? It appears premature to assume that enemies on the media aren’t cooperating behind closed doors. Does the US not benefit from the existence of a constant menace? Fanatical ideology or religion, whether it is coming from ISIS or North Korea, isn’t the concern of the great powers.
The world powers are still playing their great game, and they are doing their utmost to prevent the emergence of an autonomous Middle East (or Latin America, Central Asia, Southeast Asia) that can balance their power, out of arrogance as well as out of the desire to exploit resources and prevent any fair competition in the Middle East.
And fanaticism is working in their favor too, because it does nothing to promote national sovereignty – in fact, it is almost carrying out the neoconservative deed under the guise of a Salafi strain of Islam.
A united, moderate and tolerant Middle East would counter all of these forces – but the greatest obstacle to this includes all the puppet regimes in the Middle East which have resisted challenging Israel militarily – the crucible of Middle Eastern conflict and instability. Once the leadership in countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt is overthrown, the Arab front against imperialism can actually hold its ground.
The so-called Arab Spring was a delusional, western manufactured initiative distracting everyone from the real cause of conflict in the Middle East – Occupation.
Democracy is a concept meant for parts of the world where religious sensitivity and culture does not overwhelm the philosophical expectations of the individual. Ideologies like neoconservatism and communism all have threatened the peace and sovereignty of the Middle East. The Arab Spring was a farce attempt in this regard, as much as communism was to liberate Afghanistan, America to liberate Afghanistan afterwards, or Iraq, Libya, Yemen and so forth.
Whether political immorality is exercised by the Chinese, Russians or the Americans, does not matter – the point is that a brainwashing game is being played on the media to blur the lines between good and bad.
But all you need to do to understand who the bad guy is have a basic understanding of boundaries – and that when boundaries are crossed, war ensues.
That boundary has been, since 1948, Palestine.
Until sovereignty is respected, the brainwash will continue, and so too shall conflict.
Democracy will save nothing – unity will.
Terrorism is a tactic adopted by particular groups for a political objective. The individuals that partake in this violence often exhibit common characteristics. One of these characteristics is impoverishment (Lee 2011). In parts of the world where state capacity to serve the public is low, terrorist group participation is more likely. In other words, these individuals come from poor backgrounds. But contrarily, individuals from higher economic classes, also tend to be involved. This suggests that the middle class is least likely to join in, while the lower middle and upper class are more vulnerable (Kavanagh 2011).
On the other hand, terrorism has a different motive. In this case, terrorism is analyzed from the individual perspective, versus the structural perspective. Concepts like emotion and humiliation are considered here to be powerful motivators towards violence. The underlying belief is that, particularly in the Islamic world, a sense of humiliation drives individuals to terror. This humiliation stems from cultural factors such as shame-based traditions as much as it does from a history of subordination to outsiders such as Europe and America, through arrangements like Sykes-Picot. Humiliation can be exacerbated by internal inequalities within nation-states (Fattah & Fierke 2009). Perhaps a less romanticized perspective argues that existential factors like desire and glory motivate individuals among other factors that are political to engage in terrorism (Cottee et al 2011).
The most compelling argument seems to focus on the political orientation of terrorism through the individual lens. This is because it considers the cultural dimension of politics which drives individuals to retaliation or aggression. Social factors like poverty and authoritarianism cannot be separated from the external powers at play, and their influence historically and in today’s world on regions where terrorism is most prevalent. Equally, we cannot ignore the complicity of national governments in worsening conditions and enabling terrorism.
Cottee, Simon and Keith Hayward. 2011. “Terrorist (E)motives: The Existential Attractions of Terrorism.” Studies in Conflict and Terrorism 34: 963-986
Fattah, Khaled and Fierke, K.M. 2009. “A Clash of Emotions: The Politics of Humiliation and Political Violence in The Middle East.” European Journal of International Relations 15(1): 67-93
Kavanagh, J. (2011). Selection, Availability, and Opportunity: The Conditional Effect of Poverty on Terrorist Group Participation. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 55(1), 106-132.
Lee, A. (2011). Who Becomes a Terrorist? Poverty, Education, and the Origins of Political Violence . World Politics , 203-245.
White Supremacy is real.
At one time in America’s history, it was a norm.
Today, it is more veiled – nonetheless in today’s political arena, we are witnessing the ugliness of America’s culture of bigotry creep in.
The Republican party has been reduced to a conservative, racist party of white men & their brainwashed minority of immigrants – Carson & Rubio.
But the vast majority is more of the Paul Ryan look.
These Republicans are against a real competition – which is ironic because they run on the platform of free markets & individual liberty. What the GOP really means is exclusive markets & liberty for White America.
In other words – apartheid. Even though White Americans make up the majority of the US population, the nation will be a majority-minority nation by 2050.
Maybe the GOP realizes this and is working against it.
But why work towards depriving human beings of democracy? Why can’t we all have a shot? Why can’t we all have individual rights and access to the free market?
And why do Republicans act like used public services and collective initiatives are not equally responsible as their own individual initiatives in helping them to achieve their status?
Republicans want to paint anybody who supports freedom for all minorities too – as a danger to America; as a danger to the values of free markets; etc.
But how could this be possible in a democracy, where limits on the executive and elections limit tyranny?
It appears that, in a democracy, Republicanism functions more like Communists in an authoritarian regime – both seek to preserve an elite exclusive culture as the expense of equal opportunities for all.
These dudes just fear competition – an old guard.
And they don’t like the idea of a Black president; a Hispanic CEO; a Jewish athlete; a Muslim doctor; a gay teacher; etc. But these are all the fruits of a truly free society, that encourages competition and dignity for all – democracy ; whereas the GOP’s brand, called capitalism, echoes communism; and means freedom for a small bunch of white dudes.
Initiatives such as ending immigration reform; preventing prison reform; these are continuations of an age-long American/Anglo-Saxon tradition of politicized, institutionalized superiority complexes.
You see this in the ongoing police brutality which has claimed a disturbing number of lives of innocent African-American…youth.
But we have been desensitized by the media which conflates the victim’s flaws; and justifies the oppression.
I do think that with more legal action and reform, we can stamp out the “culture of racism” which has been disguised as “freedom-loving” in the US once and for all and provide a future for our children, of all colors and orientations, that gives them all the opportunity to either fail – or succeed – but nonetheless – giving them the opportunity – at best.
Album: Rise of the Eastern Son
Genre: Hip-Hop/Rap & Pop
Recorded at Real Feel Recording.
Engineered by KRIKOS, Palmyra & Chinese Delegation by Thanks Joey.
Themes: Politics, Religion, Culture.
STREAM via Spotify: Spotify – Rise of the Eastern Son
Purchase via iTunes: iTunes – Rise of the Eastern Son
Stream KRIKOS’ latest releases via SoundCloud:
Watch the video for the single, The Numbers, directed by Masood Ahmed, via YouTube below:
Album #2 coming this January. The legend of the eastern son continues. 📷 by Hana Maatouk. Salute to “Kustom Sounds” studio.
Walberg, Eric. Postmodern imperialism: geopolitics and the great games. SCB Distributors, 2011.
Recent history has introduced a period of heightened military conflicts, uprisings and contentions. This has resulted in many shifts in global patterns. Competitiveness between empires has intensified and further complicated the quest for understanding the global political dynamic. In his book, Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics & the Great Games, author Eric Wahlberg seeks to clear the air. The author’s main premise is to illustrate the shift from a bi-polar global dynamic, once dominated by the US on one end and the Soviet Union on the other, to a unipolar world, where the US is largely uncontested in its position as the global hegemony. Proxy wars, insurgent movements and radical militants have filled this void, which, as the author argues, has pinned the US and its main ally against anti colonial movements, Israel, against a loosely defined cooperative of movements and states, as well as a ambiguous enemy – the terrorist.
The author presents a historical backdrop from which he draws his assertions. This stretches from the earliest expression of the Great Games to their modern manifestations, as the Wars on Terror, and the neoconservative crusade for democracy. The consequence is increased exploitation of resources and the rise of untraceable insurgent networks that target their national governments as much as western societies. The double-dealings and inconsistencies of the West are evident here, which taints the reputation of western civilization. This is underscored by the author’s sympathies with the anti-capitalistic Soviet philosophical foundation.
The book is divided into five segments, organized chronologically, in which the author elaborates on the historical backdrop of the Great Game dynamic which has led to the current landscape. Wahlberg begins with the 19th century onset of the great games as played out between the British and Russian empires, followed by the communist revolution, WWII, the Cold War and the post 9/11 era. The author focuses on the British tactic of pinning forces against each other, a strategy which has been arguably adopted by the US in modern times, evidenced by its double-dealings with authoritarians and the radical insurgent movements threatening to depose them.
The three major sections in the book are categorized as GG I, II and III. GG stands for Great Games, and each numeric represents a period in time, in respective chronological order, beginning with the games as they panned out in the early 19th century, onto the WWII period, and finally, to GGIII, the post-cold war era. GGI refers to imperialism that took place during the nineteenth century until WWII. GGII covers the Cold War in which the two global superpowers, the USA and the USSR, competed for global influence. GGIII is focused on the post-Cold War era beginning in 1989 to the present. Imperialism cannot be discussed without dissecting the role of the British Empire, a main focus of the author throughout the book. The British assumed hegemonic power by constructing a global economic network which would serve the interests of the core to the misfortune of the periphery, and where diplomacy failed, the use of military power was utilized. The key focus of the book is the Middle East and Central Asia, “the heart of Eurasia”. It has been argued that the Eurasian heartland is a key geographic location; in other words, he who that controls the heartland controls the world.
The author suggests that in modern times, Islamic movements have replaced communism as the new anti-imperial force. The two primary agents of imperialism, argues Wahlberg, is an alliance between the US and Israel. The war on Iraq, and subsequent interventions in Libya and Egypt, are expressions of this new imperialism, and perhaps fall right into the hands of the main players in the global Great Games. The author suggests increasing tensions and growing insurgencies as a direct result of a stubborn imperial alliance between the US & Israel. Rising tensions in the Middle East and the growth of radical Islam in Central Asia are indicators of this reality. The US’ inconsistent foreign policy will only further retaliatory measures. The players of the great game must decide once and for all what is of greater priority; playing a fair game, or winning.
Four years later, in 2014, with the country now under military rule, Youssef announced his show “Al-Bernameg” had become too dangerous to produce. He was repeatedly harassed by lawsuits and arrested, and he feared for his family’s safety.
On 1 January 2013, the daily Al-masry Al-youm reported that an Egyptian prosecutor was investigating Bassem Youssef on charges of maligningPresident Mohammed Morsi, whose office claimed that Youssef’s show was “circulating false news likely to disturb public peace and public security and affect the administration.”
On 30 March 2013, an arrest warrant was issued for Youssef for allegedly insulting Islam and Morsi. The move was seen by opponents as part of an effort to silence dissent against Morsi’s government.