It boggles my mind listening to NPR-type commentators minimizing the downside of an Islamist victory in Egypt's impending election. I hear them suggesting that the more "moderate" of the two fundamentalist candidates might actually not be so bad, that he might turn out to be conveniently pragmatic on enough things to balance the significant dose of Islam that most Egyptians want in their lives.
What kind of mental reality do they live in? Don't they understand that this "moderate" will impose a theocratic dictatorship that will regulate almost every aspect of private life, including free speech, freedom of religion, education, you name it, not to mention the imposition of restrictions on women? Religious minorities will be persecuted. And the peace treaty with Israel will be scrapped as they funnel arms into Gaza.
Why does the "left" not understand that there is no compromise with the principle of excluding religion from political power? The fusing of church and state always destroys democracy and freedom. Fundamentalist religion (based on divine revelation) cannot abide dissent, cannot coexist in power with pluralism.
You expect this from the "right" not the "left," the so-called liberals. I see a combination of patronizing elitism and wishful thinking. They see the poverty stricken, repressed Arab world as pitiful. They think it is probably "our" fault. They think we should not impose our culturally-biased political principles on them, ergo we should accept anything they come up with as "their way of doing things." Give them the benefit of the doubt. Don't criticize. Hope for the best.
No comments:
Post a Comment