Holistic Glasses

The Arab Spring has come and gone and despite the sharp erosion of stability in the region, several states hope to emerge victorious from the rubble.  They continue to strive on towards that ultimate goal that first ignited the roaring wave of revolutions and conflict: democracy and equality.  Initially, people in western democracies felt excitement.  They lived vicariously through the Tunisian protestors, the courageous Egyptians who stood unflinching before the police, and the Yemenis who went out in protest day after day until their ruler abdicated his seat.  Today, however, those same westerners have traded in their excitement for apprehension.

Westerners felt delight at hearing that countries such as Tunisia and Egypt were holding fair and open elections.  Yet their tune changed dramatically when news began to spread of religiously-based political parties that took the lead in pre-election polls.  Instead of delight, westerners began to feel trepidation.

In the days before last year’s elections in Tunisia, for instance, Al Jazeera reported that Ennahdah (The Rennaisance) was leading opinion polls[1].  Despite stressing their support for full democracy and pluralism, westerners are wary of this party.  In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood has stolen the spotlight.  Just a few days ago, Time published an article that exemplifies western sentiment towards the Muslim Brotherhood and non-secular Middle Eastern politics in general[2].  Regardless of what these parties stand for, it seems as though the biggest problem westerners have with these parties is that they are openly Islamist.

Now i should clarify two points here.  First of all, i’m not addressing the aforementioned parties’ platforms.  The issue here isn’t whether or not i agree with any of their policies; rather, my focus is on why the west seems to distrust them and, more importantly, whether or not westerners are right to be suspicious.

Second, when i say that these parties are Islamist, i am saying that they freely admit to being based at least in part- if not wholly- on Islamic ideals.  This is not to be confused with the idea of political Islam, which carries the connotation of radicalism and the establishment of Sharia law.

It is, of course, interesting to note that the most vocal westerners- especially in the U.S.- who oppose these Islamist parties are often vehement supporters of parties based on Christian beliefs and values.  But that’s not the important thing here.  What’s important is that when discussing the issue of politics in the Middle East, religion takes center stage.

Westerners are all too aware of the presence of religion in Middle Eastern politics and this awareness leads many to roll their eyes and ask, “Is democracy even possible in the Middle East?”  And i have an answer for those individuals.

Yes.

As simple as my answer is, the question is actually a difficult one to address.  And it all comes down to culture.

In the west, democracy is seen as inherently secular[3].  This is because the first modern democracy in the west was founded in the U.S. at a time when cultural and religious pluralism was perhaps the greatest and most mind-blowing characteristic of the young nation.  Secularism became a necessity.  Although a majority of Americans were Christian, they came from a number of different sects, which means that establishing a fundamentalist Christian government was simply out of the question.

Additionally, there is the issue of Christianity and politics.  Christianity is rather distinct from the other Abrahamic traditions because unlike Judaism and Islam, Christianity does not lay down the framework for social and state structure.  It has long been used as a political tool (and vice-versa), but at its roots, Christianity does not define political roles or other power structures.

The result of all of this is a definition that makes democracy as we know it incompatible with Middle Eastern culture.  However, this definition does not need to be so solid.  Democracy is an adaptive concept and there’s no reason its plasticity should fail in the Middle East.

In Islamic culture, faith and legislature go hand-in-hand.  This is not necessarily a bad thing.  Fundamentalist Sharia law is indicative of extremism, but that’s not what many prominent Islamist parties (such as the aforementioned Ennahdah) are proposing.  Rather, they simply use basic Islamic ideals and values to guide their platforms.  And believe it or not, that may actually be a good thing in the long run.  Allowing true Islamist parties may very well be the one thing in Middle Eastern culture that could ensure progress and equality in the region.

For instance, one common concern regarding Islamist parties is fear that religious minorities might get the short end of the stick.  But that fear would be unfounded (or at least minimized) should a truly Islamist party be elected to office.  Why?  Because Islam is actually compatible with religious pluralism.  The Qur’an states:

“Surely the believers and the Jews, Christians, and Sabians whoever believes in God and the Last Day, and whoever does right, shall have his reward with his Lord and will neither have fear nor regret.”  (Q. 2:63)

With regards to cultural diversity, the Qur’an states:

“O humankind, We have created you, male and female and made you nations and tribes, so that you might come to know one another.”  (Q. 49:13)

Worried about women’s rights?  The Qur’an states:

“O you who believe!  You are forbidden to inherit women against their will.  Nor should you treat them with harshness.  On the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity.  If you take a dislike to them it may be that you dislike a thing through which God brings about a great deal of good.”  (Q. 4:19)

Concerned that they might choose to launch a jihad?

“And fight in the way of God with those who fight you, but aggress not: God loves not the aggressors.”  (Q. 2:190)

“If your enemy inclines towards peace, then you too should seek peace and put your trust in God.”  (Q. 8:61)

“Had Allah wished, He would have made them dominate you, and so if they leave you alone and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah allows you no way against them.”  (Q. 4:90)

Long story short, Islamic democracy might sound like an oxymoron to western ears, but it may very well be the best tool for turning dreams of equality into a reality.  Will Islamic democracy last?  I can’t say.  But at the very least, it can lay the foundations upon which states may build societies of tolerance and equality.

True equality isn’t something that can happen overnight.  It’s something that takes generations to accomplish.  Just look at how long it’s taken the U.S. to get where it is today.  Roaring into another country and demanding that they establish a secular democracy isn’t going to work and it may actually lead to just the opposite.  So perhaps the best thing for us to do is simply back off and see whether or not Islamic democracy can work.

“How do you love the ugly boy?”

//

I was out of town last weekend.  I drove a few hours away to visit a close friend and she insisted that we go to a nearby Zen center.  To be fair, she suggested more than insisted, but i’m fairly certain she was determined to get me there, come hell or high water.  Zen isn’t really my preferred flavor of Buddhism, but we went anyway and i’m truly happy we did.  There were a few things that didn’t quite float my boat, but with all said and done, it was a great experience.  Even a week later, it remains fresh in my mind.

One thing that really stands out in my memory is when one of the more experienced folks sat before everyone and asked us to think on the nature of true love and how it is distinguished from everyday love.  I even remember the tone and cadence of her voice when she asked the same questions that her teacher once asked of her:

“How do you love the ugly boy?  How do you love the unruly student?  The angry neighbor?”

Loving your family, your spouse, and your friends is an example of everyday love.  Love that goes beyond that- an unconditional sort of love for all beings- is true love.  But to take things one step further:

“How do you get to true love?”

That was particularly interesting to me because only moments before, i’d been meditating on the connections shared by all living things and how compassion- the root of true love- is something we can experience not just with people, but with the rest of the natural world as well.  After her questions, i immediately linked true love to compassion.  But then my mind went a bit further and i began to think about the role of empathy in being able to practice true compassion.

The day before our visit to the Zen center, my friend and i went hiking in a nearby state park.  It was nothing majestic- nothing at all like the iconic national parks that draw thousands and millions of visitors each year.  But that didn’t matter.  It was still a place where one could escape- temporarily, at least- from the exploitative touches of mankind.  As much as i appreciate human civilization and cultures, i never feel more comfortable or peaceful than when i’m outside and surrounded by the natural world.  There’s something almost magical about it.

As strange and crazy as this might sound, believe me when i say that the energy of life is in everything.  Animals have more obvious energies because they are the most noticeably animated, but this isn’t limited to animals by any means.  It’s there in trees and even rocks.  It’s carried along by wind and water and direct touch.  Trees are sometimes slumbering and heavy, and sometimes they’re just waking and full of such brightness that it’s contagious.  Rocks are dormant and powerful.  All things are vibrating with energy.  This energy can be felt and tasted.  Texture and sound and taste make it tangible and so very, very real.

And so when we were hiking along and i found a particularly interesting tree, i didn’t stop to think before running my fingers along its bark and wrapping my arms around its trunk.

The energy i’ve described creates an undeniable connection between the individual and everything around them.  This connection makes it possible to experience and practice compassion not just with humans and animals, but to every other natural thing in this world.  In the practice of tonglen, the individual imagines breathing in the sufferings of others and exhaling happiness.  This meditative practice is one that i believe can be translated into something actionable in everyday life.  It’s a physical reflex.  It becomes part of the practice of compassion.

Compassion is a very important part of my life.  Through compassion, i have come to realize many things about myself, others, and the world around me.  And through compassion, i continue to encounter new realizations and growth.

But it is not enough to simply know what compassion is.  We must know how it comes about, where it is rooted.  From where does compassion flow?

For me, compassion presents the same problem i encounter with large words.  I often don’t ask myself to define large words because i’ve read and heard them in context, and i simply know what they mean and how to use them.  So when someone asks me to define them, i find it difficult to give a simple, dictionary-type definition.  I can only define them through context.  By taste, concepts, feelings, textures, colors, and sounds.  Senses and abstracts.

Compassion is much the same way.  I feel as though i’ve long understood the concept, but i didn’t reach that point by reading its definitions and origins.  However, i continue to think more on the matter and now i see.

The root of compassion is empathy, and it is through understanding where compassion comes from that we might find ourselves in a better position to practice it to greater effect and- through example- better share that understanding with others.

The difficulty with empathy is that although we all have the capacity for it, most of us aren’t as open to it as we could be.  Everyone experiences empathy to different degrees without even realizing it.  If we can come to realize empathy, its role, and our own levels of openness, we can then let the gates open even wider and become even more empathic.  Empathy is a two-way experience and in opening those gates, we open ourselves to the world.

It’s give-and-take.

Empathy allows us to take in the suffering of others and give compassion in return.

And now we come to the point where the root of compassion is made clear.  Its strength comes from the power of empathy.

If we wish to better practice true love, we must know compassion.  And to know compassion, we must know empathy.  And to know empathy, we must open ourselves to the energy around us.  Not just the energy of other individuals and animals, but that of all living things and the earth upon which we tread.

So now i ask you: “How do you love the ugly boy?”

I’ve long been an advocate for minimalism and cautious consumption, and as i’ve mentioned before, i’ve spent the last few years of my life in a gradual shift.  Just over three years ago, i decided i would start to “trim the fat.”  It wasn’t a sudden, radical shift.  I simply vowed to make it a habit to put more thought into whether or not i needed something before buying it, and to not hesitate to donate or sell something that sat unused for four to six months.  It’s made a huge difference.

I still have plenty of junk (much of it family “gifts” that i can’t get rid of without inciting a great deal of unwanted fury) and i continue to slowly trim away at my belongings.  Despite that, the fact is if i had to leave in a hurry (i.e. flee from a sudden breakdown of social order, alien invasion, or natural disaster), i could carry with me everything i needed and i wouldn’t shed a tear over anything i’d left behind.

Now i’m moving on to the next (and seemingly inevitable) phase: tiny living.

I already share a house with four other adults and a child.  My bedroom is a converted attic (admittedly spacious despite not being able to stand up completely in a few spots).  Everything else- kitchen, bathroom, living room, laundry facilities, utilities, and so on- are all shared with others.

I know this isn’t going to last and that’s why i’ve been looking into the possibility of building my own home.  It would have an upper limit of about 500 square feet and i’d consider building it on a trailer bed so i could move it anytime i wanted (which is perfect since i seem to have a disease that makes me painfully uncomfortable with living in the same place for more than a few years).  Of course, this would likely be anywhere from five to ten years from now, so i’m not going to set anything in stone.  It’s just something i’ve put a lot of thought into.

It would be easy enough to do.  Additionally, it would be entirely possible to build it mostly or entirely out of recycled materials.  It’s not terribly hard to find reusable lumber, for instance.  Lighting wouldn’t be much of an issue since i could install skylights and it would only take a couple of lamps to light such a small space when i couldn’t rely on natural light.  And speaking of using lamps- since my habits are pretty low-energy to begin with (no TV, sound system, etc.), i’d be able to get most- if not all- of my power from solar panels.

I know that tiny homes have started to become more and more popular over the past couple of years.  Much of it is spurred on by economic pressure, though there are still plenty of folks who see it as a way of minimizing their ecological impact.  Either way, there are plenty of places to find inspiration and the Tumbleweed designs are a good place to start if you’ve got any budding interest to feed.

Here are a couple of the mobile house plans they have that’ve caught my eye:

The Weebee

The Tarleton

The Popomo

Those three are good starting points for the sort of thing i’d like to build, but they’re not exactly what i’m looking for.  For instance, i’d definitely make sure i can fit in one of those tiny washer/dryer combos so i don’t have to worry about laundry.  I’d also have to consider the cost of the truck i’d have to use to move them.  But there are pros and cons to everything, so i’ll just have to weigh my options.

There are also a ton of free plans online, though i think it goes without saying that anyone using them should make sure they’ve done their research first.

I know that some people might ask why i don’t just move into a small camper or RV.  For one, these small houses have more of a home feel that i like.  Second, and perhaps most importantly, i’d be building it myself and i could customize it to fit me.

Anyway, that’s enough for now.  But you can be sure this is an idea i’m spending quite a bit of time on.

I. Start Here

Syria is in a state of civil war and, as i’ve mentioned before, has been for some time.  It’s just taken the press a very, very long time to catch up.  Now that they’re starting to, there’s a disturbing trend: calls for intervention.  Questions of legality and morality aside, there are three reasons the thought of intervening in Syria makes me want to slap some pundits in the mouth.

First of all, there’s the issue of division amongst the populace.  Syrians aren’t exactly a united people.  Then there are the foreign powers working behind the scenes, effectively using Syria as their own little battleground.  And lastly, there’s the fact that neither side is innocent in this conflict.  I’m going to do my best to touch on each of these concerns without making this too long of a post.

Yeah, about that… 

II. People

NATO’s role in the 2011 ouster of Gaddafi is fresh in everyone’s minds.  What many of them seem to have conveniently forgotten is that the aftermath hasn’t exactly been pretty.  Libya is a state fractured by numerous tribal factions and loyalties, making unity and stability more than a tad difficult.  Estimates place the number of tribes in Libya at over 100, about a third of which have some political and social power.  If you were to consolidate that list of 30-ish “powerful” tribes even further and single out the major players (each of which have sub-groups, of course), you’d still end up with a very divided state:

It’s like “pin the tail on the donkey” except with camels.

Iraq is another example of what happens when the intervening powers either don’t or fail to set up a stable governing system.  The instant US and Coalition forces removed Saddam’s regime from power, they opened the door to an almost non-stop stream of overwhelming sectarian violence.

Hm.  I’m sensing a pattern here…  Wait, no.  That’s just gas.

The fact that the US and Co. failed to successfully address the issue indicates either a lack of solid planning or a lack of caring.  But that’s not the point.

The question here isn’t whether foreign intervention is good or bad.  What i’m pointing out is there’s a trend of traumatic instability and/or significant losses in the wake of foreign intervention.  This may not always be the case, but it occurs all too often.  And it’s not just Libya and Iraq.  We don’t have to look too far back to remember things like the 1999 NATO intervention in Kosovo, the Vietnam War, and so on.  In areas such as Libya and Iraq, this is a particular dangerous component of the overall situation.

And here’s why all of that is important in the case of Syria:  Syria is divided both in terms of religion and ethnicity.  Just under three quarters of the population is Sunni Muslim; the remaining 16% of the Muslims in Syria are made up of other groups such as the Shi’a and Alawi.  There’s also a significant percentage of both Druze and Christian populations.  On the ethnic side of things, we’re looking at a makeup of about 83-87% Arab, 9% Kurdish, and 3-7% Syrian Turkmen.  The remainder includes Armenians and Circassians.  And not to be forgotten are the estimated 400,000-500,000 Palestinians and roughly 1,000,000 Iraqi refugees[i].  Oh yeah, and these groups don’t always get along.

Hey, remember that pattern i mentioned?  Yeah…

III. Puppet Masters

There are two very powerful states with interests in what happens to Syria and they’ve been playing games in the country for a long time now.  I’m talking about Iran and Saudi Arabia.

You know, that’s not too far off.

Iran and Saudi Arabia are pretty powerful and they like to dick around in interesting ways.  In the case of Syria, they’re perfectly opposed.  You see, the two major factions in the Syrian uprising are the Regime and the Opposition.  (You know all those helpless civilians getting blown up and making headlines?  They’re the ones getting caught in the crossfire, and it’s not just the Regime pulling the trigger.)

The Regime is backed by Iran.  This is nothing new.  They’ve been doing it for years and they will continue to do it for as long as Syria sits between them and Israel.  The Opposition (a.k.a. Free Syrian Army and Co.) is largely composed of guerrilla fighters, a significant number of whom all have good ol’ terrorist training and fighting experience.  And this is where Saudi Arabia comes in.  They’ve been funding militant extremist groups for decades and the ruling House of Saud has had personal ties with al-Qaeda since before Prince sang about a girl with a raspberry beret.

Oh, and guess what.  A lot of al-Qaeda members who left Syria to fight in Iraq are now coming home.  Their current leader, al-Zawahiri, has even released a video encouraging the Opposition to take a stand against the Regime[ii].

To be clear, i’m not saying Oppositionists are al-Qaeda members, but rather that many of them either are or were associated with al-Qaeda.  And you can bet that they’re benefiting from their training and fighting experience.

So for those of you who support intervention in Syria, let me ask you one question.  Who would you rather support?  Iran or al-Qaeda?  I’m just sayin’…

IV. Go Plead the Fifth

As mentioned in the previous section, the civilians we see in the news are caught in crossfire.  Yes, the government is oppressive.  Yes, they have taken some innocents’ lives.  However, the violence didn’t really begin until the Oppositionists decided to take up arms and Salafists joined them.  I’m not condoning the government’s role in all of this, but i will say that a majority of their efforts have been directed towards countering an insurgency.  They’re not the ones planting bombs or launching suicide attacks that take out civilians[iii] [iv].  That’s the hallmark of al-Qaeda.  And even though many people have tried to blame those attacks on the regime, i’m really nowhere near convinced that the government perpetrated those attacks.

In short, any action taken to address the oppressive government must also address the deadly and inconsiderate Opposition.  They are both guilty of violence.  To condemn one and not the other is to spit on the graves of the victims of both.

The thing is, we’re not capable of addressing both…

V. Conclusion

I’m not even going to bother writing a conclusion.  Maybe i’ll come back and edit this later, but i think i’ve said enough for the time being.  Instead, i’m just going to leave you with this:

Never  forget that the world isn’t all doom and gloom.