In this editorial in Asharq Alawsat, Editor-in-Chief Tariq Alhomayed argues that the Arab world is in dire need of some introspection. While various sources calling for temperance in discourse, society seems to turn a deaf ear. People seems to be able to turn anything into a shouting match or a fist fight. The lack of tolerance can be seen in classrooms and in the violent actions of those who seek to justify terrorism. The cause of all this, Alhomayed argues, is unsound education. Professors, he says, aren’t professional. Instead of educating students, they seek to convert them to particular ideologies. Nor is there accountability in either private or public life. He points to the example of Saddam Hussein. While he may no longer be on the scene, the hundreds and thousands who accepted gifts from him still are, with not a whisper that they might share in his guilt through enabling and supporting him.
Why Don’t We Admit the Truth?
Tariq AlhomayedThere is a defect in our ethical system, and it’s one of values, there is also a defect in our culture system, and it’s one of education. We are not good at managing disputes and dialogue, despite the fact that we hide behind a mountain of slogans and proverbs and verses of poetry, all of which say that there should be civility in disputes, hostility, and even war.
Clashes and political crises take place as a result of football games, and there are insults and abuse in the newspapers, in the corridors of politics and even at Arab Summits, and those who tell lies do so without being held accountable or removed from the scene. Saddam Hussein was removed from power however none of his agents in the Arab world have followed him; none of those who accepted oil coupons, or even any of those who accepted a case of whiskey from him as a gift. He died and we forgot all about them and they remained on the political and media scene…and there are no checks and balances.
…
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
April:13:2010 - 14:32
I find this article interesting because I myself have wondered (not specifically about Arabs) how a people in general can be more verbose, quick to anger, more intolerant, prone to violent outbursts while another culture is fairly mellow and sort of just quietly clicks along day after day taking it’s bumps and bruises more or less in stride, learning from them and moving forward…quietly, peacefully, methodically.
Perhaps it is pride. but I do think it has to do with education for even in the more “violent” cultures it seems that those among them who are educated are slow to join the fray. They take a more temporal view of a situation and are slow to take offense.
VERY, very interesting for me. Perhaps a good subject to study anthropologically speaking.
April:13:2010 - 14:37
Chiara, will you comment or shall I risk distortion by quoting you?
April:13:2010 - 14:39
I have to say I am proud to say I don’t accept tainted F in gifts nor will I ever because that crap comes back to freaking haunt.
Pure gifts like money that hasnt beeen stolen is o.k. or money that wasn’t skimmed of the backs and buildings of original owners. I say amen I say amen about reading into oneself and examining it.
I don’t know about conversion, but I know that many have just plain lost hope that what they can do will make a difference or that they have a voice. People so aimed at converting need to convert themselves.
April:13:2010 - 15:44
Solomon2–I am curious as to what you will quote, but I will comment and you can let me know about the quote.
I found the article an impressive litany of sins but with little to say about the mechanisms of change. I take his point though about how it is important first to recognize the problem and it isn’t sufficiently recognized.
I wouldn’t say that some of what he critiques is true only of Arab societies, but rather unfortunately common eg in what passes for debate and discussion in television talk shows, even some high end ones, and among certain professors no matter what ideology they are introducing to sensitive young minds required to regurgitate it back for marks.
Now, let me know what you were going to quote, while I go back to preparing my post on nukes, Iran, Israel and Saudi…oh my!
April:13:2010 - 18:13
” rather unfortunately common eg in what passes for debate and discussion in television talk shows,”
Good Lord! I hope they don’t judge USA by Jerry Springer!
April:13:2010 - 18:21
“The less knowledgeable person has a harder time sorting truth from fiction when the shadings are subtle, the ignorance deep, or the prejudices high. Sometimes the fiction is part of the official discourse, and all pervasive, so that there are only glimmers of dissent from either native or non-native listeners. Expressing this dissent may have repercussions best avoided and so while not all are duped, and certain families, friends, or groups may share alternate realities these are kept private. It is not that people don’t know; it is that they wisely keep it to themselves and a few trusted others. Sometimes, telling the truth to someone not from the culture is too fraught with misunderstandings and so easiest left unsaid.” link
April:13:2010 - 19:19
Solomon2–Wow! I’m flattered! Nice choice of quote for this, and I agree with me!
(Something makes me think we will disagree on some matters 
)
Seriously, I’m flattered you read my blog. Feel free to comment,dissent respectfully stated is welcome!
April:13:2010 - 19:20
Oby–I wasn’t going nearly that low, but yes, it is frightening to think what might pass for normal to those not familiar with a culture, and I always find that a useful caveat where I don’t know a culture well.
April:13:2010 - 22:29
Chiara, was it your natural modesty holding you back? Or couldn’t you remember, or perhaps subconsciously you didn’t want to remember, what you had written two days ago?
April:14:2010 - 08:29
Solomon2–What I wrote is a longstanding belief/realization that I write/say in many versions in many different fields. It must have been the nukes that got my brain, because, honestly, that set of thoughts never crossed my mind when I read this post. Thank you for bringing it to my attention, and including it here. Shall I admit I needed to check the link, to find where I wrote it? No better not, no one would believe I could be that nuke’d! LOL
April:14:2010 - 09:14
Shall I admit I needed to check the link, to find where I wrote it?
Solzhenitsyn’s opinion (and mine) is that the bias of an author is more evident by the knowledge he or she knowingly or subconsciously omits, rather than by what they actually write. You married into the “Arabs Need to Look at Themselves” culture, Chiara. You don’t think that just because you’re a psychiatrist you are immune, do you?
April:14:2010 - 09:55
You don’t think that just because you’re a psychiatrist you are immune, do you?
I don’t think being a psychiatrist makes me immune to anything, including obtuseness. I am not sure I understand the rest of your comment. If you explain I will be happy to comment.
April:14:2010 - 11:30
Simply that you may be seeking, consciously or unconsciously, to protect or divert yourself from self-examination.
Especially because you are a shrink, with specially trained sensitivity. Ever read Douglas Adams’ Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy? A telepathic race hires Disaster Area, “a plutonium rock band from the Gagrakacka Mind Zones…generally regarded as not only the loudest rock band in the Galaxy, but also as being the loudest noise of any kind at all” just so they don’t have to hear themselves think. Could “nukes, Iran, Israel and Saudi” be serving the same function for you?
April:14:2010 - 12:15
Solomon2–not at all. I am open to self-examination and have friends who do the same for themselves and others, including me. I have probably a more balanced view of myself and Arab/Saudi/Muslim culture than you or others may give me credit for. I don’t much respect knee-jerk, or one-note repetitive narrow world views, though.
The Nuclear post was because of the summit just finished in the US, which dealt often with the issue of Iran having nuclear military capacity, and a relevant Doha Debate on Iran and its promises of peaceful nuclear capability, held Nov 9, 2009. As you know relevant Doha Debates are a feature of some of my posts. That topic was timely.
Whenever Iran and nuclear are invoked the threat to Israel is invoked, and the issue of Israel’s nuclear military capacity–alone among the states in the region–is raised. They are all tied in, not to mention Netanyahu’s refusal to attend the summit in the US being a major news item, with the explanation that he doesn’t want to answer about Israel’s nuclear warheads and their ranges.
The post for anyone who is interested is open for comment and debate:
Nuclear Warheads: If Israel, why not Iran, Saudi, the GCC, or MENA? The Doha Debates Chez Chiara
As is discussed in the introduction, Saudi and nuclear technology is a fraught topic as well.
April:14:2010 - 12:36
Chiara, the first paragraph of what you just wrote says “no” but doesn’t the rest of your comment say “yes”?
April:14:2010 - 13:09
Solomon2–no.