대문

아래 필자가 자신이 말하고 있는 이슬람은 근본주의적 이슬람(Fundamentalist Islam)이라고 한정하고 있기는 해도, 그 이슬람은 공산주의 이데올로기의 국가사회적 기능을 행하고 있다고 그는 주장한다. 즉 공산국가가 보여주었던 그대로의 행적을 이슬람 국가는 그 이데올로기적 측면에서 같다고 필자는 보고 있는 것이다--예를들어 20세기 초에 터어키에 의해 행해진 아르메니안 대학살과 그리고  인민을 감시하고 있는 사우디아라비아의 2010년 현재 종교경찰 등 등. 모든 이슬람 국가의 전체주의적 성향도 그 예가 될 수 있을 것이다. 자신들의 '선'한 목적을 위해서 정치가가 종교를 이용했든 아니면 종교가가 정치적 이데올로기를 사용했든  위의 예들은 하나의 역사적인 사건으로 구체화 한 것들이다. 제도로서의 공산국가 또는 사회주의 국가는 이슬람 국가 보다  훨씬 역사적으로 늦다

나는 필자의 그러한 생각에 어느 정도 일리가 있다고 생각한다. 파키스탄의 예를 들어 보자. 1970년 12월 파키스탄에서는 처음으로 1인 1투표 선거가 있었는데, 이 해의 선거에서 새로 창당된 인민당은 '우리의 신앙은 이슬람교, 우리 정치는 민주주의, 우리의 경제는 사회주의." 라는 슬로건을 내걸었으며, 이 후 대통령이 된 그 나라의 대통령 줄피카르 알리 부토(Zulfikar Ali Bhutto)에 의해서 사유재산이 몰수된다. 공산당의 사유재산 몰수와 재 분배 정책이 이슬람 국가 파키스탄에서 실시된 것이다. 알제리와 리비아 등 등의 이슬람 국가 역시 그 비슷한 사례가 될 수 있을 것이다.

그러나 공산국가 이데올로기를 제공한 카알 맑스에 따르면, '종교(기독교)는 민중의 아편'(헤겔 법철학 비판 서문)이며 그리고 이러한 종교들 중의 하나인 이슬람 역시 민중의 아편이 될 수 밖에 없을 것이다. 그러나 이슬람은 아편이기를 거부할 것이며 마찬가지로 무신론이기도 거부 할 것이다. 그렇다면 이슬람은 이데올로기에 있어서든 통치행태에 있어서든 근본적으로 공산주의적이지 않아야 할 것이다. 본디 이슬람은 공산주의적 사상과 철학에 들어맞지 않도록 되어 있다. 그럼에도 불구하고 하나의 이데올로기로서 국가와 사회 안의 개인들에게 강제 될 때 이슬람은 구체적인 공산주의적 모습을 띠기 시작하는 것이다. 이 둘이 서로 융합하고 있음을 위 역사적인 예들이 보여주고 있다.

아래의 글에서 그 필자(Maya)는 종교를 인민의 아편으로 보는 모든 형태의 공산주의 체제에 공통적인 것은 그것이 개인의 생각과 말의 자유를 물리적인 힘(폭력)과 군대로 억압하는 데에 있다고 갈파한다. 바로 제도로서의 국가에 의한 그리고 사회 속의 집단에 의한 개별성 말살의 가장 큰 위협으로 공산국가와(사회주의 국가) 그리고 서유럽과 북아메리카 내(內) 맑쓰주의자와 사회주의자들로 보았던 것이다.

그는, 그러나, 냉전을 거치면서  말과 생각의 자유을 위협하는 주류는 서구유럽과 북 아메리카에서는 결국 사라졌으며, 심지어 현존하는 사회(공산)주의 국가에서조차 그 자유를 인민에게 어느 정도 허용 할 수 밖에 없었다고 한다. 중국의 경우 중간계층의 자유를 어느 정도 누슨하게 보장 해 주고 있으며 쿠바 역시 이전처럼 자유를 억압하고 있을 수 만은 없게 됐던 것처럼 말이다.

필자의 강조 점이 현재의 맥락에서 드러난다. 왜냐하면 그는 공산주의에 의한 위협은 서구유럽과 북 아메리카에서 사실상 제거 됐지만, 옛날의 공산주의을 대신하여 그 지역에 들어 서고 있는 새로운 형태 이데올로기 곧 '근본주의적 이슬람'(Fundamentalist Islamism)으로 인하여 개인의 생각(사상)과 말(언론)의 자유가 심각한 위협을 받고 있으므로 그러한 위협을 해소시키는 것을 자신 글의 주안 점으로 삼고 있기 때문이다. 개인의 사상이나 언론의 자유가 이슬람에 의해 억압되고 있다는 것은 영향력있는 언론이나 개인의 말 한 마디 한 마디를 주시하여 그것이 자신들의 '신성모독' 이라는 기준에 어긋나면 때로 지구 끝 어디라도 쫓아 가 그들을 죽이라는 명령(파트와)을 내리는 종교가 이슬람이라는 것은 그에 관한 뉴스를 조금이라고 체크하여 보면 금방 현재의 역사로 드러난다. 개인과 집단의 근원적인 자유를 총과 칼로서, 즉 알라의 이름으로, 억압하는 것이다. 현재의 지금 이 시점에서 그렇다는 말이다--1981년에 교황을 암살하려 했던 터키 무슬림 청년이 있지 않았는가.

이러한 관점에서 아래의 글 필자는 공산주의 이데올로기를 대신하여 서구유럽과 자유주의 진영에 들어 서고 있는 (근본주의적) 이슬람에 관하여 다음처럼 말 하고 있는 것이다:  현대에는 이슬람이 개인의 생각과 말의 자유, 즉 언론의 자유와 사상의 자유를 말살하는 중대한 위협으로 국가와 사회 안에서 기능하고 있다.

이슬람에 의한 이러한 위협을 소멸시키기 위한 대안으로 필자는 '교육'과 온건 이슬람 지원을 내 세우고 있다. 그러나 이것은 가능하지도 않으며 현실성도 없다고 나는 본다. 합리적인 교육이나 인격적 감화를 통해 설득한다고 해서 종교적 신념이 결국 바뀌는 것은 결코 아니기 때문이다. 일시적인 호감에 의한 개종적 행위가 가능 할 것이기는 해도 말이다. 차라리 솔직하게 힘의 균형에 의한 각 종교들 사이의 '협약'이 낫지 않을까?  만약 유일한 궁극적 해결책이 있고 그리고 그것이 가능하다면, 그것은  모슬렘 각 각을 다른 종교로 개종시키는 것 보다는 거꾸로 각 개인을 모두 모슬렘으로 개종시키는 것 뿐일 것처럼 여겨지기도 한다. '범-이슬람주의' 또는 전 지구의 이슬람화 즉 인류를 알라에게 복종시키는 것, 바로 이것이 소위 근본주의자들이라 칭해지는 무슬림들 뿐 만 아니라 모든 온건 무슬림들의 궁극적인 목표이다--그 수단에 있어 무슬림들 사이에 혹간 의견차이가 있을지는 모르겠다. 그러나 이를 위해서 취하여지는 모든 수단은 설령 살인이라고 하더래도  그것은 '선'한 것이며 그리고 그러한 살인은, 성전(지하드) 중에 죽는 것이나 자폭하는 테러리스트들의 경우에 있어서와 똑 같이, 천국으로 가게하는 일등 보증수표가 된다는 신념이 이슬람 신앙의 핵심적인 부분들 중의 하나이다. 공산주의 이데올로기적 이상과 일치하는 정치적 이데올로기가 바로 이슬람의 그 '이상'인 것이다. 자살을 '순교'로 보는 이러한 관점에 있어서도 이슬람과 공산(사회)주의 이 양자 이데올로기에 있어 일치하지 않는가. 사회주의(예를들어 민노당)적 사상을 가지고 있는 자들은 이러한 맥락에서 곧 잘 '자살한 것을 순교한 것이다' 라고 표현 한다(세속화된  종교). 물론 비유적인 뜻에서 그랬을 수도 있지만 말이다.

아무튼 이들에게 있어, 총이든 칼이든 설득이든 평화이든 사랑이든 그러한 개종 목적(이상)을 위한 행위 수단은 모두 선이다. 거짓이든 위선이든 상관없다.실제로 그 개종을 위해 이슬람에서 다른 종교로 개종하여 다른 종교인인 척 하는 이들도 극 소수 현재 있다. 타 종교인구가 압도적인 지구 상 현존 최고 국가에서 대통령이 되려면 그 종교인인 척 척 해야 하지 않겠는가? 누구처럼 열 살 이전에 태러단체에서 실지 교육을 받았다고 하더래도 말이다

바로 이러한 이데올로기가 이슬람의 정치적 실천 동기이며, 그리고 그 이데올로기가 개인으로 하여금 자유롭게 생각하는 것과 그리고 각 자가 자유롭게 말하는 것을 폭력으로 억압한다. 아래의 글 필자가 가장 염려하고 있는, 민주국가 구성원인 개별 국민의 심각한위협(the threat to individulaity)인 것이다-서구 개인주의에 있어 중요한 부분은 (정치적) 자유이다. 그러나 동양의 전체주의는, 예를들어 이슬람, 그 개인(의 자유)을 없에야 만 한다-희생하는 정도가 아니다.


아래 필자의 글 출처:  http://www.mightyquill.com/Essays/islamcomm.htmlViewer

-------------------

Islamism ?a peril to the civilised world

Marx once said Religion is the opiate of the people. He had a tremendously correct point, although ironically his own theories and opinions on society were (and still are) misused to subdue the masses in much the same way. As with all religions, Marxism comes in different guises or sects, Socialism, Communism, Maoism, etc. For the purposes of this article, Communism is used to represent such ideas and systems.

The various forms of Communism may originate from a similar view point and ideal, but have certainly metamorphosed into rather different structures, at different stages of maturation in their respective societies. The Soviet methods were not something that China followed or liked, just as many socialist states would abhor the idea of being labelled as Communist.

Nevertheless, such forms of government and society share one thing in common. That is the threat to individuality, freedom of speech and thought. This oppression is almost always maintained by means of physical might and arms.

This same threat seeped through borders and infected what is commonly called the West. Many individuals believed in the ideals of Communism. They felt that free markets, Capitalism and even Democracy were not the right way forward for humanity. These individuals grew in numbers all around the world and were strongly supported by the pillars of Communism.

The West, the areas of the world striving to maintain their freedom, peace and stability, spent most of the twentieth century guarding itself against the Communist world. The two sides fought each other through proxies all over the globe. Small and large scales wars flared all throughout Africa, Asia and extended to Latin America. The standoff on actual battles between the two superpowers resulted in the lengthy cold war.

Developed society, mostly found in Western Europe and North America, struggled, but managed to keep its head above water. Meanwhile, the main threat to its existence started to crumble and eventually withered away.

Today, even the world뭩 remaining Communist regimes are slowly freeing their markets and copying the Capitalist market ideas. They are largely compelled to concede certain freedoms to their people. The Cold War is but a distant memory for most people these days. Even China뭩 government is loosening its grip and a rather well-off middle-class section of society is evidently enjoying many privileges.

All remaining bastions of Communism are fast falling or metamorphosing beyond recognition. For instance, Cuba, a stalwart of Communism, is unable to carry on in the same manner as before. It is allowing a small amount of free enterprise to flourish and is relying heavily on a growing tourist industry.

The present

With the threat posed by Communism virtually removed, one may have hoped that the future would pan out smoothly. The developed world might have lived in peace, while waiting for others to catch up with our way of life, to develop. Could this happen or is that a na?e expectation? Immediately, it is best to opt for the negative side to answer this question. It would be na?e to expect a smooth transition into developed society for many a developing country.

The negative feel is due to a number of reasons, such as the danger of a fairly imminent change in the American economy, the fore-runner of Capitalism. It is also clear that the terrorist threat, which the USA has set out to fiercely fight against since 11th September 2001 is the big peril of today. Taking these examples shows that any threat to the world뭩 remaining superpower is something that the rest of the free world should and does take seriously.

The methods employed to fight such threats vary largely dependant on opinion, resource and the political policies of each country. Many of these policies may be over the top, and only some successful. For instance, the USA along with its allies has chosen to go for a full on war against terrorism. This is something that many others have chosen to steer away from.

The question of which group is right in their decision, is something that only time will answer. The history books of the future can dwell much on the finer details of this point. Hypothesising, based on today뭩 facts, some future possibilities can be discussed. Firstly, however, it is worth considering the form of the threat to our future.

Where is today뭩 threat going to come from?
US Economic blip

An economic blip in the USA would throw the workings of the world뭩 money machine into a potentially devastating pitfall. As this is not the main topic of this essay, one can make some general assumption about it, in order to progress further.

It is possible to consider an economic downturn, a recession, to be the sort of event that can and probably will be fixed in a relatively short time period. The world뭩 governments and businesses would work hard to compensate for the deficiency of a strong economy and there could be a drive within the USA itself to deal with any crisis.

Within a decade of any such problem, recovery is likely to start, although the globalisation effort would have slowed down. Trade deals might have changed and generally the world뭩 economy would have suffered. Simply put, a recession, or even a depression, is part of an economic cycle and is something whose eventual defeat is guaranteed.

Thus this issue need not be catastrophic for our way of life. As long as each country or union of countries?leaders are prepared for this and policies are put in place for the possibility, things should be manageable. However, there is a danger of a far greater magnitude that is becoming all too real as the days go by. This peril manifests itself in the form of a new ideology, one which has pretty much replaced the threat posed by Communism. It is known as Fundamentalist Islamism, referred to as Islamism in this article.

Ideological difference

Assuming that a recession or depression will not cause anarchy and chaos, the free world is left with the predicament of the current wave of terrorism. Rogue groups, united mostly by religion, but also by a common feeling of lack of prospects, freedom and choice are led by opportunists who drive them to extreme action with the promise of a rich reward in their afterlife.

This phenomenon is known as Islamism. It operates at two levels, that of the individual and that of a government.

Micro level

Many elements have contributed to the growth of this phenomenon and continue to do so all over the world. The very same opiate Marx depicted is the main driving force behind its success. The devout believer is taught she or he must follow the Imam뭩 teachings and accept his interpretation of the Koran, in order to escape the eternal damnation that is god뭩 hell.

It is not uncommon for the Imam to display or even distribute keys to the gates of heaven amongst his listeners whilst he asks them to become martyrs for his cause. He justifies his cause by claiming his enemies are infidels who are exploiting the brothers and sisters of his audience. His impassioned mannerism, holy knowledge and authority leave no room for doubt. His followers must follow what he says, for they are believers.

This level of organisation is next to impossible to combat using traditional methods. A rocket attack here a bomb there will is not only ineffective in solving the problem, but it is likely to further exasperate it. Such attacks simply confirm that the Imam was right in his analysis and that the infidels are truly out to destroy the believers.

A key figure in tackling this matter, worldwide, is the said Imam. It certainly is not everyone of his kind that harbours such extreme views. Many of these preachers are peace-loving and moderate. They understand the need for tolerance and co-habitation in this world, some perhaps even go as far as condone modernising Islam.

If an Imam sums up his Friday prayers with a speech on how it is thanks to the engineers of the West that cars and buses are there to transport us around or mentions the effect of the medical breakthroughs achieved as a result of research in Israel, USA and other infidel countries, his followers?views would certainly change.

When he can stand in front of them and praise a Jew or an American for their achievements, is when his followers can open their minds, too. He must remind them that the technology to allow them to telephone their families came from the presumed enemy뭩 camp. It is his responsibility to highlight how the Israelis and the Americans too believe in the same god as them and follow their sacred prophets.

The individual Imam can in this way change the minds of a few and sway them from their cultural and ideological collision course with the rest of the world. However, no matter how important and effective that is, individual Imams?efforts alone will not solve today뭩 problem. It is thus necessary to look at the bigger picture.

Macro level

In the same way that Communism뭩 spread started with a revolution in Russia and expanded its wings throughout the world, the idea of Islamism too started with just one revolution. When in the winter of 1979, Iran뭩 revolutionaries united under the banner of Islam and an Islamic Republic was formed, the world once again changed.

Following the trend of onset of Communism, this had a snowball effect, and infected several areas of the world. The heated revolutionaries took their cause across the globe supported by their government. They exported their beliefs, skills and rather importantly guns. Just as the USSR supplied missiles to Cuba, Iran supplied arms to the Lebanese Hezbollah, the Sudanese Muslims and Algeria뭩 Islamic Front and so on.

Even today, despite the moderate presidency backed by a mainly moderate parliament, certain factions within Iran continue their support of such rogue fighters and groups. This support ranges from financially, by the wealthy and powerful individuals within the hardliners?group to providing a safe-haven, training and even sending trained men to battles and demonstrations.

This help and unity is not limited to the mentioned factions, but extends much further. For instance, the mainly Sunni Al-Qaeda may not share their exact views with the Shia Iranians, but they have something more important in common. They share an enemy, one who is a real threat to their very existence. This enemy is so powerful that it can even cause the opposing sections within Islam to unite to an incredible degree.

Their perceived enemy is not simply the US government nor an individual Jewish person, but what the 멬estern World?stands for. The West represents an entity that is a non-believer, who represents modern free living, and is a threat to their power. However, in the order of rankings, it is certainly the government of the USA and the state of Israel that are the number one enemies.

This has led to numerous people, whose identities are often based on Islam, feeling threatened. Regrettably, a large number of threatened masses will always strike out at their enemies. Even if they do not think that they will win their battle outright with small assaults and skirmishes, they know that they will be able to hurt the enemy. This is a large part of how the minds of the terrorist cells work, for they feel they have nothing to lose, but everything to gain, even if this is not material wealth, or in this life.

How to progress

This is a difficult question to ponder and resolve. Firstly, it is essential to consider whether the current attitudes of both sides are likely to work in the long term. Secondly, the important factors of tolerance and understanding play a large part in progress. The later come mainly from education, a key to a better future world.

Looking at the operatives in these networks of Islamism, one can find a whole range of society, from the super-rich to the well-educated to the poverty-stricken with no prospects. These people are all under the influence of one belief, praying to one god represented to them by one prophet.

It is exactly through this same religion that the future path can be changed and a modern Islam can blossom. Only such a move can avoid greater conflict and clashes between these two worlds. The current methods on the other hand are cumbersome, costly and very risky.

It should be a fairly straightforward affair to travel down the education road. There are leaders within the various sects of Islam who are modern, moderate, forward-looking and tolerant. These are the people that should be encouraged and supported by the free world.

It is precisely such individuals as well as local secular politicians that need to be involved in the future planning of events such as the Middle-East Roadmap for Peace or tackling, at least part of, the 멇xis of evil?

This is not a question of promoting 멬estern?culture in the east or corrupting the Islamic culture. Just the same as it is not a question of accepting fundamentalist behaviours. The objective is to accept and tolerate others?cultures, beliefs and values.

One cannot naively believe this will be a smooth road ahead. The elements that encourage and instigate this ignorance, on both sides, will not easily let go of their positions of power. They tend to be ingrained parts of the establishment on either side of this divide.

However, with perseverance within a generation attitudes of both the governments and the populace should change and mellow somewhat. Tolerance and understanding should then become a normal affair rather than the exception it seems to be today.

By MaYa.