« Entrepreneurship: a clarification | Main | Philanthropy vs redistribution »

February 09, 2008

Comments

dearieme

"Threats to liberty don't just come from people with dusky skins." That may be the first time in my life that I've ever seen anyone deny a belief that nobody in the history of the world has ever held.

diggaway

I have a theory about this, which i did think of posting in responce to your 2nd feb. post about the arch-bishops views, if i had, i would have said that his use of the term 'dominant discourse' betrays the link between a post-modernist/post colonial studies perspective and a kind of gullable but self serving authoritarianism.
And his views on sharia law are surrounded by yet more terms that are routine in post-modernism ('face up to the fact','seems unavoiable' etc) but have wound up people who arent used to such an underhand rhetorical style.
i think post-modernism is actually a way of seeing things morally, and not really. And when you do that, you abandon principle: that which is universal (and rational perhaps), in favour of that which is arbitrary and peculiar. by seeing subjectivity as a higher form of truth the archbishop (or post-modernist) tries to place authority beyond critisism.
the link with nu-labour is spin: just like a post modernist historian, everything tony blair says is true;its just not true in the way you are supposed to think it's true. politicians have always lied, but this is worse, i think in 1997 we accidentley voted in the worlds first post-modernist politicians. they see things arbitrarily, morally, but never really. if they see any wrong, its moral wrong and its the people who are always to blame, always revealing their innate sinfulness, needing to be controlled by the establishment, the elects, concern for public morality.

william

you're just being silly, aren't you.

diggaway

who me? yeah i probably was, sounded ok in my head though before i wrote it down.

ortega

Labour, a christian heir like all the 'progresive' politics, wants to change things. Like christians, it believes that 'the best is yet to come' and is never happy with the actual state of things.
Sharia, following the spirit of the muslim religion, does not pretend, nor wishes, to change anything in this world. The law is made once for all, not because it is good (e: alcohol is forbidden but paradise will be a non ending drunkness) but because is God's will, wich is fixed.
The fact that both have some illiberal behavors seems rather secondary to me.
By the way, by thinking to introduce some aspects of the sharia to the british law, the Archbishop has shown what a good christian he is, all willing to improve the society. A muslim would have never thought of that.

Cleanthes

Ortega,

"By the way, by thinking to introduce some aspects of the sharia to the british law, the Archbishop has shown what a good christian he is, all willing to improve the society. A muslim would have never thought of that. "

Because I doubt that any sensible muslim would agree that sharia will improve society.

Allan MacBarr

Although I'm an atheist, I might be prepared to accept certain aspects of Sharia law in British society.

Living in small-town Scotland, I often wish that the women round here had to wear the veil!

Allan MacBarr

Plus, I already wear the beard.

ortega

Cleanthes,

I was meaning he was willing to improve society, not that the sharia way is the right one.
A sensible muslim will never accept 'partition' of the sharia, it does not make sense to him.

chi flat iron

CHI flat iron by Farouk system. Direct from the manufacturer, this genuine Chi ceramic iron comes with valid, one year warranty!

The comments to this entry are closed.

blogs I like

Why S&M?

Blog powered by Typepad