- In what ways can the global context influence
- What parallels can be drawn to the Bolshevik Revolution in
- Can religious identity sustain secular state institutions and serve developmental goals?
Friday, April 17, 2015
Group Ten Discussion
Blog post due at 11:55pm on April 21 and comment due at 11:55pm on April 24.
Iran
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
As it relates to the issue of religious identity, there is no society on Earth that can thrive effectively if they remain in a box on one side and out of the box on the other. State institutions must create an atmosphere where all can succeed and if conditions are impeded by a religious identity then that society will likely succumb to religious fanatics who will seek to impose there will on the whole of society.
ReplyDeletePeople have widespread opinions on religious identity. Finding a clear balance between religious identity and secular state institutions will continue to have complexities that cause new ways of looking at governing our nation and society.
DeleteThanks Melonia for the comments; here again we must underscore the critical issues that states operating on a religious platform is neither productive nor beneficial to the common person. It may unite those who share a common belief system; however it leaves those who do not share their philosophy marginalized and sometimes oppressed and cause for lack of economic growth.
DeleteWhat parallels can be drawn to the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the Islamic Revolution in Iran?
ReplyDeleteRussia suffered social, economic, and political crisis before the Bolshevik Revolution. The uprising was to bring forth state power and economical prominence to revolutionize a stronger society. Although Iran was largely populated, the Islamic Revolution embarked pressure isolation, and ideological conflicts.
The Shah ws not a very nice guy and a large portion of the country was afraid of him and his secret police, the Savak. Is their country stronger now than before the revolution? Maybe ideologically, now that they're united under a theocracy. However, they're hurting economically due to the sanctions imposed on them for their nuclear ambitions. We already know that communism in Russia was an epic failure. Hopefully Iran will give up its nuclear dreams and join the rest of the world.
DeleteCan religious identity sustain secular state institutions and serve developmental goals?
ReplyDeletePeople have a way of interpreting gods word in many different ways. Even members within the same religious identity have clashing ideas. That is why for example the muslim religion has many different sects within it. Each holding their own interpretations, views, laws, and ethics. Now with the added complication of political views, there could not be any harmony within a single state. For these reasons I don't think religion can sustain secular state institutions and serve the same developmental goals. Even public schools have taken religion out because it complicates things and has a tendency to cloud ones judgment.
I agree with you. Religion is very subjective and can be interpreted through many lenses. To attempt to consolidate a state into one religion with one set of beliefs and customs would be near impossible. There are too many people in this world, and there are too many different sets of consciousnesses, morals, perceptions for the compartmentalization of something as sacred and massive as religion. I don't think that religious identity will help to sustain secular state institutions and serve diplomatic goals.
DeleteI too agree that religion is open and subject to interpretation. In America there are multiple forms of Protestant denominations that focus on diferent aspects of Christian rules for living, Likewise, those differences could be applied to a religious constitution, that would call for continuous revision and changes. Economy, education, healthcare, and other parts of a government would lack stability, and be changing on a regular basis
DeleteCan religious identity sustain secular state institutions and serve developmental goals?
ReplyDeleteI think that it can, in that religious identity unites people and gives them a common purpose, or developmental goals, to work towards together. In Iran religion has been a part of government or leadership for thousands of years, it is a part of their heritage and the nation would be unrecognizable without it...the evolution of their beliefs IS the story of their country. Here in America our religious identity for many years was the absence of any state enforced religion. Backwards from Iran, yes, but still it united the people behind common goals and beliefs all the same.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI still disagree. I don't feel religion can sustain a secular state. There are just too many interpretations of God and laws. Iran is one country that it's working for. That's great. But me thinking about the US, this will not stand. Unless the entire country is one religion and it's made illegal to practice any other, people will have different religious opinions when it comes downto business. For example some of the muslims sects believe it is an honor to die in a terror attrack because you did it for a cause and others believe it's a sin. An African tribe used to circumcise females and others thought it was a form of mutalation. Religion can complicate things in my opinion. Even something as simple as a marriage.
DeleteIn what ways can the global context influence Iran's development from this point forward?
ReplyDeleteI think that Iran has a huge opportunity right now with the deal that is on the table concerning their nuclear energy program. The world does not trust Iran with the technology that could be used to produce a nuclear weapon. They've also stated in the recent past that they wish to see Israel destroyed. Being that Israel is a key ally in the region, the U.S. simply will not let that happen. Iran has an opportunity now to give up on their dreams of nuclear weapons, see the sanctions lifted, and join the rest of the world in modern society. We don't have to like each other but we can at least get along and not live in fear of a dirty bomb or a nuclear device being detonated in Tel Aviv or New York.
The parallels that can be drawn from the islamic and russian revolutions are that they were both revolutions mainly fed by an abuse of power and unjust and totalitarian like treatment of citizens. In both cases the regimes became exponentially oppressive and constrictive, to the point where the people had enough. Both of the revolutions gathered quick popularity and grew at a rapid pace.
ReplyDeleteIn the global context, Iran's development will hinge on the opportunities that the country creates for itself, as well as the fostering of diplomatic ties that will help them shed the label "rogue nation".
ReplyDeleteFor many years, the theocracy that has driven the government has been seen as hostile towards those not of their faith. The country has been a state sponsor of terrorism through their support of groups like Hezbollah, have refused to recognize Israel as a legitimate country, and conducted internal crackdowns of those that did not adhere to the edicts of the Shia Muslim faith. They have researched advanced weaponry, and can mobilize arguably one of the largest military forces in the region.
The country has one of the largest oil reserves in the world, and is a developed nation in terms of infrastructure and scientific development. It is however, still under economic sanctions, which limits the economy within the country's borders, as well as the subject of an arms embargo that limits the military technology that Iran can acquire.
As we move forward, Iran is exerting more influence within the region, intervening against the Islamic State (ISIS) in Syria, and are in the process of transferring weapons to Yemen in support of Shi'ite Muslim Houthis rebels who have managed to take control of a wide swath of that nation. Evidence also suggests that they are developing nuclear capabilities, as well as the launch vehicles to deliver them. This came about after the ill-fated American foray into Iraq, which destabilized the region by eliminating the deterrence threat posed by the secular government of Saddam Hussein.
The economy of Iran has been severely wounded by the continuing sanctions levied by the western nations. Unemployment has remained stubbornly high, the inflation rate jumped by 45% at one point. The pressure on the economy increased dramatically, when the EU joined the United States in levying sanctions, and the eastern countries of China, Japan, and South Korea slashed their oil imports to further curtail the cash flow. The quest for weapons of mass destruction as well as Iran's history with terror organizations was the root from which the sanctions grew.
In the future, the Iranian willingness to negotiate to ease the restrictions limiting their economy, as well as an interventionist policy within the region will have the country poised to develop at a greater rate. The abundance of natural resources as well as ridding themselves of the economic isolation imposed by the world through diplomacy will set them on a path towards further development. The only thing that might stand in the way of full growth might be the religious prohibitions that could be placed by the order of Iran's Supreme Leader.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/01/news/economy/iran-nuclear-deal-economic-potential/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/20/middleeast/iran-parade-pleitgen-amanpour/index.html
Do you think that the nuclear deal and subsequent easing of sanctions may help this process forward? As you say, Iran is fairly well developed at this point. It seems that, like many other large countries with mid-level economies (India, Russia, Mexico, South Africa, Brazil, etc.) they still have some work to do, but they are on the right track. If they can get investment and trading partners in the west, they may become a true powerhouse on the global stage in a few decades or even years. If sanctions are not raised, might China do what it has been doing in Africa (and most recently Pakistan) and take opportunity to invest before the west does?
DeleteEven as we speak, China and India are ratcheting up oil imports from Iran in anticipation of the easing of sanctions due to the nuclear arms agreement negotiated by the western powers as reported by Reuters (April 17, 2015). Furthermore, China has already raised their importation of Iranian oil to near record levels, topping out at a 14% increase in March over last year.(Reuters, April 13, 2015) Unfortunately for Iran, the sanctions have limited revenue for so long, that the production of their fields has dropped precipitously due to the lack of spare parts and technology needed to keep the rigs working at peak efficiency. Both China and India had cut back on imports under pressure from the west, but still ranked as the top two importers for Iranian light crude oil. Therefore, it would stand to reason that those two countries would be the first to jump at resuming imports to the pre-sanction levels.
DeleteAs it stands now, numerous countries seem to be chomping at the bit to normalize trade relations with Iran. It was reported last week that Russia was preparing to send missiles to the country, which will assist Iran in their interventionist pursuits within the region, such as the backing of Yemeni rebels.
The thing that is hardest to predict about Iran is the future. As I indicated during my presentation last night, the governmental shifts between conservative philosophies and moderation has tended to shift every 8 years, so for all we know, the diplomacy that President Rouhani has begun could very well revert back to the conservative hard line that Ahmandinjad had while he was in office. If that occurs, it would not be beyond the realm of imagination that economic sanctions would be renewed, and with the proper provocations, even countries like China might be pressured into honoring them.
Question 2:
ReplyDeleteBoth the Bolshevik and Iranian revolutions included radical young idealists — in the case of Russia, of course, there was Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin and the rest, in Iran, there was Ali Shariati and Jalal Al-e Ahmad. Shariati was influenced by a similar mix of thinkers to the Bolsheviks, too — including "Marxist sociology, Catholic liberation theology, the Algerian revolution, and ... Frantz Fanon's theory of violent Third World revolutions." (595)
Neither revolution was peaceful, nor did their architects expect them to be. It was expected that the oppressed classes would rise up violently and overthrow the oppressors. Of course, Communism was atheistic and the Islamic Revolution explicitly religious, but both held a potentially radical idea of equality and justice. The Russians justified it through history and philosophy, the Iranians through religion.
In culture, both countries were similar too — a small landed class, and a large poor population with little or no land. The rulers had made feeble attempts at reform, but these had not sated the poor in either country. Instead, they demanded revolution and a fairer — although not strictly democratic — system.
Religious identity often plays a large role in lives of some groups of people. I think it can be very hard to prevent religious groups from interfering in affairs of state, and making sure the state doesn't interfere in religious affairs. I do not think that religious identity can sustain secular state institutions and serve developmental goals. People will always want their own values projected in the policies of their government. Religious identity can create controversy in policy making because of the differences in views between different religions as well as different interpretations within the same religion. I think developmental goals can be more inclusive of many interests is they have minimal religious influence.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it is likely that religious identity could create controversy in a secular state. When religious people view laws and policies as being blasphemous and "ungodly" they tend to speak/act out against it even if the policy would benefit others. But I don't believe that "conflict" has to be a bad thing. When conflicting ideas come together a compromise must be achieved. Hearing both sides of the argument could lead to further understanding and compassion for the other side.
Delete
ReplyDelete•What parallels can be drawn to the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the Islamic Revolution in Iran?
The issues that were similar to the Rissian and Iranian revolutions were #1 Overthrowing a history of rule by a monarchy...#2 The expectations of the common man gaining an identity and hope through a egalitarian society. The Bolshiviks were sucessful because the poor farmers (formerly serfs under the monarchs control) had new expectations for equality in a class-less society of communism. Likewise, the poor Iranians hoped that the end of rule by a king would be replaced by a religious movement that would also spell equality for all Iranians despite socio-economic status. Afterall, all people are equal in the eyes of God....this would hopefully be an elevation in status for poorest Iranians. Unfortunately , neither Russians nor Iranians found the equality they sought in authoritarians regimes...neither communist, nor religious run governments.
•Can religious identity sustain secular state institutions and serve developmental goals?
Religious identity gives hope for change through a faith in Allah (God)...however it appears to lack the ability sustain secular institutions. Yes, developemental goals can be served in establishing a new foundation, but religion is open to the interpretation of those in power and therefore lacks stability or consistency. It can change as easily as the personality of the next leader in power.
Can religious identity sustain secular state institutions and serve developmental goals?
ReplyDeleteReligion is one of the most complex and confrontational concepts in history. One manifestation of secularism is asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people. However, religious identity can still play a role in secular states and their developmental goals; just because secular states do not identify with a particular religion, does not mean that religion is fully absent from its leaders moral guidelines.