This leads me to the third thing we need to do: We must reject any forms of fundamentalism, or racism, or a belief in ethnic superiority that makes our traditional identities irreconcilable with modernity. Instead we need to embrace the tolerance that results from respect of all human beings. Hmm so is he against morals, values and principles? Or just being strict about following the letter of the belief? How would he view fundamentalism when applied to law and order – we know that answer. He does not accept that He has to follow the laws of our country as written if he can find a way around them. I am personally against Islam given all I have researched. I honestly can not figure out how one who is a faithful Muslim can interpret most of the Quran in any other light than strict adherence and frankly strict adherence sucks for the innocent, women, guilty, and non-Muslim.
It’s a truism that global integration has led to a collision of cultures; trade, migration, the Internet, all these things can challenge and unsettle our most cherished identities. We see liberal societies express opposition when women choose to cover themselves. We see protests responding to Western newspaper cartoons that caricature the Prophet Muhammad. In a world that left the age of empire behind, we see Russia attempting to recover lost glory through force. Asian powers debate competing claims of history. And in Europe and the United States, you see people wrestle with concerns about immigration and changing demographics, and suggesting that somehow people who look different are corrupting the character of our countries. Choose to cover themselves? Really if there were no fear of reprisal or death would those same women honestly cover themselves to the point they can barely see where they are walking? I wondered when he would get in a jab at Russia. Again he castigates the US, but then we know he has been instigating mass immigration and prime example just hit the news about 5,000 from the African continent being held at a Mexican border. Looking different isn’t a problem otherwise would Obama have made it so far in the US? It’s the intent behind the face, willingness to bring death, unwillingness to assimilate, and degree of anger within the heart that presents a national security hazard.
Now, there’s no easy answer for resolving all these social forces, and we must respect the meaning that people draw from their own traditions — from their religion, from their ethnicity, from their sense of nationhood. But I do not believe progress is possible if our desire to preserve our identities gives way to an impulse to dehumanize or dominate another group. If our religion leads us to persecute those of another faith, if we jail or beat people who are gay, if our traditions lead us to prevent girls from going to school, if we discriminate on the basis of race or tribe or ethnicity, then the fragile bonds of civilization will fray. The world is too small, we are too packed together, for us to be able to resort to those old ways of thinking. I can hear some Imam in a mosque complaining Obama has broken faith with these words.
We see this mindset in too many parts of the Middle East. There, so much of the collapse in order has been fueled because leaders sought legitimacy not because of policies or programs but by resorting to persecuting political opposition, or demonizing other religious sects, by narrowing the public space to the mosque, where in too many places perversions of a great faith were tolerated. These forces built up for years, and are now at work helping to fuel both Syria’s tragic civil war and the mindless, medieval menace of ISIL.
The mindset of sectarianism, and extremism, and bloodletting, and retribution that has been taking place will not be quickly reversed. And if we are honest, we understand that no external power is going to be able to force different religious communities or ethnic communities to co-exist for long. But I do believe we have to be honest about the nature of these conflicts, and our international community must continue to work with those who seek to build rather than to destroy.
And there is a military component to that. It means being united and relentless in destroying networks like ISIL, which show no respect for human life. But it also means that in a place like Syria, where there’s no ultimate military victory to be won, we’re going to have to pursue the hard work of diplomacy that aims to stop the violence, and deliver aid to those in need, and support those who pursue a political settlement and can see those who are not like themselves as worthy of dignity and respect.
Across the region’s conflicts, we have to insist that all parties recognize a common humanity and that nations end proxy wars that fuel disorder. Because until basic questions are answered about how communities co-exist, the embers of extremism will continue to burn, countless human beings will suffer — most of all in that region — but extremism will continue to be exported overseas. And the world is too small for us to simply be able to build a wall and prevent it from affecting our own societies. Proxy Wars? What is he aiming for? NATO is a proxy kind of military.
And what is true in the Middle East is true for all of us. Surely, religious traditions can be honored and upheld while teaching young people science and math, rather than intolerance. Surely, we can sustain our unique traditions while giving women their full and rightful role in the politics and economics of a nation. Surely, we can rally our nations to solidarity while recognizing equal treatment for all communities — whether it’s a religious minority in Myanmar, or an ethnic minority in Burundi, or a racial minority right here in the United States. And surely, Israelis and Palestinians will be better off if Palestinians reject incitement and recognize the legitimacy of Israel, but Israel recognizes that it cannot permanently occupy and settle Palestinian land. We all have to do better as leaders in tamping down, rather than encouraging, a notion of identity that leads us to diminish others.
Harvard http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~hireview/content.php?type=article&issue=spring01/&name=myth Before 1948, Palestine did not exist as a country or nation or sacred Arab location except for a few. Mostly the those who moved into the area were nomadic. Then they were convinced by Imams that religious destiny required them to show population force to thwart the Israelis.
Whoa, throw Israel out with the bath water of a camel herder I guess. Only ones I see fueling and funding racial problems here in the US are Obama and his minions, Soros and others with a different agenda that does not represent our people or cultures.
Part 5 of 7