At 41, Mohammad has led a varied life. He moved to Canada from Iran in 1988, 3 months before the Iran-Iraq war ended, having completed his military service. Now an artist-cum-curator of contemporary art, he reads Philosophy and Iranian studies. He told me he's post-Muslim. I asked him what that means. I am italicizing some bits below:
Post Muslim is a complex case. Not easy.
My mother's
maternal grandfather was a founding member of the social democratic
party (later on the communist Toodeh party) and was elected to the
first constitutional assembly in Iran (1906) from Tabriz.
My mother's paternal grandfather was a Syrian Jew who moved to Iran and
converted to Islam and became a very wealthy land owner and lived 108
years… Even though aristocratic, he had a love for poetry (and
property!) and donated a lot of his money to modern/moderate Shie
establishment in Kermanshah.
For
me to be post Muslim, I had to first be anti Muslim. From 1992 to 2001,
I was a strong and vocal anti-Islamic activist. Back then nobody,
including Zionists, dared to point to what was wrong in the strict
interpretation of Quran. I
was a neocon before The "clean break" was ever commissioned [1996]. I dreamt
about American intervention to liberate Iran (what a nightmare; now I
know after Iraq) . I used to wear a star of David around my neck to
piss off my community. I used to say a lot of things before they became
state policy in USA and the west.
However, I never stopped
identifying with the problems of Palestinians even in the thick of my
anti Islamic period. My main theory was that the larger and more
determinate conflict in the middle east is between religious
nationalistic Jews and secular progressive ones, not between Arabs and Israelis, and my theory was that once the internal Jewish conflict is
settled, Palestinians will automatically receive their fair share of
the land/political process. The election of Sharon and the breakdown of
peace process and the growth of Jewish nationalism in Israel following the second intifada shattered my hopes.
Then
9/11 changed what was left of my anti Islamic sentiments. It was only
after my 10 year rhetoric was adopted by Bush that I realized I must
have been wrong all along.
I'm going to fast forward to now
because I don't want to bore you. But right now for me post Muslim
means an atheist liberal support for the foreign policy of Iran, since
it has really transformed into a force for good in the region. From Afghanistan
to Palestine, the Iranian strategic interest is accidentally aligned
with the good of the people of the region including even Israelis! (if
you want, in a later email, I can get into explaining this.)
I am a
non-ideological atheist who thinks religion is an empty signifier, an
empty form that can carry good or bad, can be utilized for a good cause
or evil or operate as just a sign, a vase on the shelf, and there should
be nothing wrong with that. I also consider the human rights/democratic
regimes as a religion/ideology that can be used for good or bad or just
an empty cute ornament on the display… nothing wrong with that
either. Even though I don't personally believe in Allah, I think others
could, or better said, others should be allowed to believe in Allah
without harassment or embarrassment. I don't see any difference between
Quran and Vogue International. (And I like Vogue International…)
I
think people of the west are more ideological than fundamentalist Muslims, since fundamentalist Muslims choose to think the way they do
in spite of growing global evidence they are aware of that is contrary to their belief. They have to challenge themselves and remain
"faithful" since they know that the basis of their beliefs are
metaphysics and mythology. No sane person, even a religious
fundamentalist, can assume that god is there. Believing in Allah in
the early 21st century is like being a person who is determined to lose
weight in spite of a slow metabolism and abundance of greasy high
calorie fast food; the only way you can do this is by working hard
everyday on the treadmill or else the fat is going to come back–the
fat being doubt about Allah, god, and divine justice.
And yet westerners really believe, even though they think they are beyond faith. Mostly because they dont have to make an effort to believe; everything
around them already is naturally constructing the belief system, since
their beliefs are based on the three pillars of science, history and
philosophy [Didn't you leave out the Pillar of Tom Friedman, Mo?]. Much more "concrete" and therefore more scary. Especially
history :)
I used to hate Ahmadinejad in opposition to the
reformers, but given what he has achieved internally and globally, I
hope he gets elected for another term. This is absurd because even my
best friends and family back in Iran have a hard time understanding my
logic. Don't forget Ahmadinejad's deputy president spoke about Israeli
people not being enemies and even though a lot of people asked for his
resignation, Ahmadinejad did not fire him.
I believe that
Israel's a semi-legal entity since it has failed to ratify its
existence through a Palestinian consensus. I wish Israel would use its
power and influence to organize a referendum of all Palestinians to
accept a Jewish state behind 1967 borders in exchange for a sovereign Palestinian state. Right now Zionism damages every one almost
everywhere. Once Palestine is created, the hazards of Zionism will only
damage Jews. I let brave people like you and those inside Israel bring
down Zionism then.
I prefer a vague statement in the
referendum preamble in the hope of one day joining these two states
into one– once the people of both sides are ready to join together.
[Chomsky says something like this too] Iranian "hardliners" have already signaled that they would encourage
and accept a situation like this. The goal of Israeli boycott should be
to force Israel to help organize and accept the results of a
referendum. I would personally vote for the ratification of the Jewish
Zionist state behind 1967 borders, if there is a willingness at least
in language for a future one state for all. Let Zionism be a Jewish
problem, rather than a Muslim or a world problem.
But right now we just have to stop the killing and lift the siege.
Have
you read BOBBY SAIED: FEAR OF FUNDAMENTAL? Its an essential reading in
the fall and rise of Islamism (or the rise and fall of secularism) in
the region. Bottom line: secularism is not the solution for the Muslim world,
we need to modernize and democratize Islamism, and for this there is
only one model: Islamic republic of Iran. Have you ever wondered why
after the invasion and regime change in both Afghanistan and Iraq with the help of USA and the support of Israel, both of those countries are called Islamic Republics and their constitutions are copied out of Ayatollah Khomeini's
vision for Iran? So was Khomeini a great visionary or a backward
ayatollah? And if Islamic republicanism is the future of the Muslim
world, why not let this happen naturally and without billions of dollars
of American money wasted on the project?
[As we say in Vogue International, genius!]
Brilliant.
Time for secular anti-Zionists with Jewish roots to announce their adherence to "post-Jewish" identity.
Memory of the stetl and Yiddish-speaking grandparents does not justify keeping membership in the increasingly racist and supremacist tribal entity that modern Jewish ethnicity has become.
And what that secular "Jewish" identity ever had to do with ultra-orthodox religious fanatics or Arabic speaking "Oriental" Jews is only the acceptance of Zionism as a unifying ideology.
Phil,
I think it critical that you report on this from Pat Lang's Web site. I will quote in full here because it's relatively short:
link to turcopolier.typepad.com
/>
Ayatollah Khamenei's statement of 12/28/2008 is one such case. You can find the text @ link to english.khamenei.ir
His statement characterizes the Israel-Hamas War as the analogue of the wars of the Prophet against the idol-worshippers of Mecca. With a few words, Mr. Khamenei has shaped the Muslim view of the Israel-Hamas War for years, if not decades, to come.
No Muslim political leader can challenge his statement , for doing so now will be tantamount to going against Islam. No religious leader – Shia or Sunni – will dispute his statement.
Here is Prince Turki al-Faisal of Saudi Arabia (a moderate according to the common US-EU usage of that term) in a speech at the opening of the 6-th (Persian) Gulf Forum on January 6th, “The Bush administration has left you (with) a disgusting legacy and a reckless position towards the massacres and bloodshed of innocents in Gaza…Enough is enough, today we are all Palestinians and we seek martyrdom for God and for Palestine, following those who died in Gaza.”
In my opinion, Israel has now blundered into an implicit war with Islam. Mr. Khamenei’s statement has closed the door to any peace plan along the lines of Oslo, Taba, the Quartet, Tony Blair, etc. All that is now even theoretically possible is a Hudna – a long cease-fire. A separate Syria-Israel peace track is no longer possible since the Alawite Elders will not go against the rest of Islam by having Syria conclude a separate peace treaty with Israel.
Which brings me to my final opinion: even a Hudna will presently require the formation of a Concert of Middle East or some such.
Babak Makkenijad
Why is this critical? Israel didn't "blunder." It set the US up. It has really endangered us by this action.
Mohammed's post is genius. He catches nuances. Ask him to write some more for you. I enjoy Jack Ross and James North and AC, AP, or whomever he is.
@MRW: I think you are greatly overstating the importance of the post on Pat Lang's site. Read the comments there and you will see that Babak is severely exaggerating Khamenei's importance. The very idea of there being a single human authority that is accepted by all Muslims (even all Sunnis and Shiites) at this point is simply ridiculous. Khamenei is a very big deal in Iran, but not so much outside of it.
This liberal “ex communist” epitomizes how easy it is for Judeofascists and Neocons to co-opt left-liberalism on their own behalf. He says he wore a Star of David to irritate his Islamic bretheren; he says he recited Neocon talking points before Bush made them fashionable. No doubt he believed he was “getting” his conservative community for being so “backwards.” He did all of this even after the Nakba, even after it was clear that Israel was a quasi-fascist state.
The only position that Neocons and Judeofascists have to take to get useful idiot liberals into bed is one anywhere to the left of authentic Christians, Muslims and anyone else who believes in a wholesome, simple, traditional way of life. It’s particularly ironic, given that liberals also pose as anti-corporatist, anti-consumerist, anti-crass capitalist environmentalists.
I guess it’s just another in a long line of internal contradictions that demonstrates why establishment left-liberalism is such a pathetic “foe” to Neocons and Judeofascists. In fact, it is no “foe” at all, even though it poses as one. At best it is neutral, because it completely falls for the Neocon pretext of bringing feminist and homosexual rights to the Mideast. I’ve heard that a lot of Nazis were queer, too. I bet many left-liberalis would have fallen into bed with Nazism if the Nazis and Communists hadn’t ended their partnership.
What a despicable collection of flakes. Easy pickings for the Neocons and Judeofascists, that’s for sure.
"Mohammed's confession" isn't all that interesting. One could find the same rather ignorant interpretation of religion in the work of any atheism activist. He seems to have no idea of his own biases and naively conflates his point of view with reality. I really don't know why you bothered posting this, Phil.
'And yet westerners really believe … their beliefs are based on the three pillars of science, history and philosophy.'
AW, c'mon Mo. What do you think we are … INTELLECTUALS?
The average American believes in baseball, hot dogs, apple pie and Chevrolet. And 'shop till you drop.' Anything more abstract than that is just way too taxing. — BURP –
' … establishment left-liberalism is such a pathetic “foe” to Neocons and Judeofascists. In fact, it is no “foe” at all, even though it poses as one. At best it is neutral, because it completely falls for the Neocon pretext of bringing feminist and homosexual rights to the Mideast.' — Ed
Immediately after reading Ed's comment, I stumbled upon a perfect illustration of his thesis –
————
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) – The first openly gay Episcopal bishop will offer a prayer at the Lincoln Memorial at an inaugural event for President-elect Barack Obama.
The selection of New Hampshire Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson for Sunday's event follows weeks of criticism from gay-rights groups over Obama's decision to have the Rev. Rick Warren give the invocation at his Jan. 20 inauguration.
Robinson, 61, said both Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden will attend the event, and Obama is expected to speak. As for himself, Robinson said he doesn't yet know what he'll say, but he knows he won't use a Bible.
"While that is a holy and sacred text to me, it is not for many Americans," Robinson said. "I will be careful not to be especially Christian in my prayer. This is a prayer for the whole nation."
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D95LLG5G0&show_article=1
————
This is so Clintonian, such a collection of cliches, that one hardly knows where to start.
A token gay bishop, delivering a harmless, feel-good non-sectarian prayer, in a temple solemnly dedicated to a syphilitic mass-murderer, striking an anodyne bipartisan note, while at the same slyly appealing to the deluded millions who improbably believe that one party is kinder, gentler and more 'liberal' than the other.
Oh Jeebus, I don't know whether to laugh, cry or take a dump. What did I do to deserve getting thrown into this demented comedy show from hell? May I please be excused?
i used to wear a star of david because I was too ideological about human rights and democracy to understand that there is a threshold for the effectiveness of a any political ideology. I had personally and through reading on Israel had come to believe that Israel IS the only democracy in the middle east and we need to support it. My neoconservative stance was really prior to not only Bush's but even that of Jewish and Christian Conservative Zionists who owned and operated in the media. I could never even get a letter through in the 1990's, (An anti Islamic triad by me was published some time in 1999 by Vancouver Sun. I remember in a house party, I was attacked by Marxists palestinians who called me a 'race traitor' . That opinion piece made me and the editor of the paper receive denunciation in Pakistani mosques all over Canada for a few weeks prompting her to leave the editorial pages and take on the job of editing the lifestyle section!) Back then, the politically correct atmosphere would not have allowed any critical dialogue (valid or not… mine was pretty invalid) about Islam to be disseminated.
Then all of sudden we went from one extreme to the other. It was this overnight adaptation of my own very ideas that made me suspicious at first. Dear Ed, I love authentic Jews, Christians, Muslims and anyone else who believes in a wholesome, simple, traditional way of life. That's why I oppose ideological atheism. I don;t advertise my atheism and I am very supportive of those who use religion as a shield against the excesses of capitalism consumerism and the hedonistic tendencies of the global culture.
I only agreed to being published here because i respect Philip more immensely and if he thinks a few words by me are worth of this valuable blog, who am I to disagree?
dear Jim, maybe by westerners I am not referring so much to joe the plumber, but the educated masses of the west, those with a bachelor degree and higher who really think they "know" and that they are "smart" and that they have transcended beyond ideology. Otherwise I agree with you abouyt the masses.
But even on the mass level, people are easily manipulated through the use of science, history and philosophy as these discourses or disciplines are flow downwards from the elite to the average person. For example, people are comfortable to consume because they heard is somewhere credible (Tom Friedman) that their country's prosperity has to do with a liquid consumer economy. But most of the time my theory refers to people like Tom Friedman who really think they get it. And yes. he definitely considers himself an intellectual.
According to muslims one state solution is best because soon these muslims can easily out number Jews. with their dream of taking over the world they can continue marrying multiple times, having tens of babies so that they can easily out number jews. In the process they will also refuse to go to regular school and they will continue going to their religious(hate) schools. they will also refuse to integrate with main stream people. As a result muslims will remain isolated, uneducated and poor. Then instead of looking into their own issues they will easily blame it on Israel and tell look how bad muslim's condition is in Israel, it's all because of the greedy Jews and their discrimination against muslims! Well can there ever be co existance with such people? As a result there will be suicide bombing everyday, terrorist attacks everyday. The world instead of educating these stupid suicidal terrorists will blame Israel and hold Jews responsible for this terrorism! This will keep repeating
Iran is NOT an advocate of acceptance.
I appreciate Muhammed's position that he respects (more than tolerates) Jews, Christians, Muslims that seek to self-identify to achieve a genuine connection to community and reality/spirituality, beyond commercialism.
I think he is jumping the gun on insisting that accepting Zionism should be conditional on overt acceptance of an eventual single-state.
The process of integration could only come slowly, one acceptance following another.
There is MUCH to reform in Arab society currently, if Muhammed's values are to be applied, particularly in relation to Jews, whom are still denied common civil rights in many Arab states, including Gazan and West Bank Palestinian.
Very intelligent and well written except the part that Moe tries to legitimatize Ahmadinejad. Not that Ahmadinejad is the lucifer the western Media tries to picture. But there is a part that you should study on before jumping to fully support this lunatic's foreign policy.
Ahmadinejad belongs to Mesbah Yazdi Sect of Islam. This sect of Islam known as former HOJATIYEHs believe in resurrection of Jesus (EISA MASSIH) and like the Christian extremist, they believe that their 13th Imam is going to land soon along with Jesus. They think Jesus's revolution has already started and the hidden Imam is preparing the final Revolution. Come on Moe, with all the respect to your great view of Islam and other radical and politically correct views of today's problems in GAZA, when you get to a complex creature such as Ahmadinejad, you ought to be more careful and cautious of giving him too much credit. Do not forget that some of Ahmadinejad's basics and foundation was created and manifested by KKK & David Duke. Nothing is wrong with the deniers of Holocaust trying to express their ideas but there is everything wrong when a leader bases his policies on David Duke and Rudolf. Moe you know how the White Aryan Nation has survived for many years? They find nests to penetrate. Once they go to Qaddafi for support and the other day they go to their Aryan brother, Ahmadinejad whose gay bashing policies are worse than their FUHRER Adolf Hitler.
I do not care about Aryan Nations hate of the Jews or Zionism (Under freedom of Expression's acts). What I dislike is that they try to mobilize through systems that have conflict with the Western system. Yes David Duke is fighting the current system in USA and Israel but this fact doesn't put me right beside him in fighting with capitalism. David Duke or Ahmadinejad may expose and reveal part of the crimes of Zionism and people in power but they never become revolutionaries. Because, they themselves commit crimes against Humanity. we shall not fall in their internal fights as they are two sides of the same coin. For the region to become peaceful; all these elements have to be replaced with real alternatives that believe in democracy, peace and justice. Anyways, I liked this piece as it had so many interesting points….
Good luck
@aaa on Muslims: "they will also refuse to go to regular school and they will continue going to their religious(hate) schools. they will also refuse to integrate with main stream people. As a result muslims will remain isolated, uneducated and poor"
The West needs to totally re-evaluate this mindset. What's wrong with the humble, traditional, dirt-poor Islamic lifestyle if that's how they want to live? Does everyone the world over need to be a crass consumer, and lap up whatever swill the corporatists and other money-interests serve up to our societies? Particularly in this age of environmental stress and taxed resources, is the post-Christian, "secular" money-worshipping Western consumer culture really the ideal vision for the future, or is it a recipe for global suicide?
There is something about the secular Western mind that demands conformity and uniformity to the Western way. Perhaps this is a carryover from Christianity, which demanded conformity, and perhaps Islamic demands for conformity would turn Islamic converts to Western consumerism into fanatical shop-til-you-droppers, too.
We all know certain Jews and corporatists love their money, but are we going to let them murder the planet in order to get rich?
—
@ Haygood: Xymphora had an interesting post about Rev. Warren:
"For some people, Warren is the most dangerous man in the world. Why? He's an influential American Christian evangelist who isn't a Christian Zionist. Warren could single-handedly blow up the entire Zionist-Christian Zionist gay-marriage-made-in-hell, the one started by Begin back in the 70s which has led to such a disaster for the United States and the world. That's why he's receiving the full defaming from 'Hollywood', using the ruse that he is being attacked because of his bigotry."
link to xymphora.blogspot.com
/>
—
Warren has also made some noises about a Christian reconciliation with Islam. Can't have that, say the Corporatists and the Zionists, and so they promptly send their liberal wing out to publicly tar him as a "homophobe."
The two-party regime and its apparatus is certainly comprised of sophisticated demagogues, character assassins and money grubbers, but that’s about the extent of their sophistication.
I could say that I am also "post-Muslim". An agnostic born in a Muslim family, I believed in Kemalist model of modernization until 2006.
But I strongly disagree on Ahmadinejad, Iranians deserve better. Hopefully, someone like Khatami will win next presidential elections.
Ahmadinejad being Hojatieh is not true at all and it's a simplistic view.
What happened in the 2005 elections in Iran was very complex and I will address it properly one day. Ahmadinejad is just a person. he represents actual social movements and layers of society. and those groups and sectors backed him up, especially in the second round of elections for different reasons. one thing for sure, Ahmadinejad's most ardent supporters are "justice seeking" student movement that is basically a n islamic social democratic movement that opposes Globalization, privatization and neo liberal agenda. The Ahmadinejad campaign was designed by masters students at Imam Sadegh University. These kids read Zizek, Focault, Derrida, Deluze, and of course Marx.
Their approach to winning against the establishment candidate (Rafsanjani) was very modern: to identify social classes that can be influenced based on class issues not religious issues. They went after poor, and the Iran-Iraq war veterans who were disappointed. They ran a very smooth campaign for Ahmadinejad and got him elected and so far, Ahmadinejad has not betrayed his promises of resisting privitaization and neoliberalism and defiance on the nuclear issue.
It's true that these students are islamist and support hezbollah and Hamas, but their main allies internationally are Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela. Also their view about the whole cultural war between islam and secularism is that in the years after the war, Rafsanjani divided the Iranians by telling war veterans and islamists that "our problems are the gay guys and bahais and women who are not observant of islamic law" at the same time that Rafsanjani told the secular Iranians that "your problem is these islamist hooligans" thats how Rafsanjani could divide and rule for so long.
This younger generation of islamists think that a true islamic agenda first and foremost should be economic and social justice not cultural. For instant their web site link to
is a great source of long translations from Haaretz and other western press that they find sympathetic to their causes.
My mother's paternal grandfather was a Syrian Jew who moved to Iran and converted to Islam – Mohammad
Ergo, Mohammad is a self hating Jew and possibly a Fairy. I love this guy!!! (full disclosure: I'm straight) Where the hell do you find them Phil???
Come on Mohammed,
Are you sure you are getting your information from the right sources? As far as I know as a guy here said Ahmadeninejad believes in the hidden Imam He even said it in United nations mny times. I checked You-Tube. Your support for him is like the love of the slave to his rapist master. I think your hatred towards your Jewish backgroud has pushed you towards Ahmadeninijad. I think you just see things the way you want to see and your hatred has shut your vision. Israel is wrong and should cease fire on the innocent people of Gaza however that doesn't mean theocrats in Iran are good. Your god helps you Mr. Post Muslim.
Well I am glad at least we agree on something. I agree with you, hell with everything else I had to say. Let's stop the killing.