Just thought I'd start a topic about Tariq Ramadan- he has some very interesting viewpoints both about Islam and Islam in the West

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/encounter/stories/2008/2179446.htm

I have highlighted some excerpts below....

I'm used to say when I begin a lecture to try to identify myself by saying, look, first remember I'm not representing all the Muslims because there are trends. So you are helping me to say this. I'm from the reformist trend, which is saying something which is simple. I want to be faithful to the Islamic principles but to take into account the context and the situation, the environment within which I live. I would say that if you look at the Muslims throughout the world, even in this country, it is the mainstream. The mainstream are reformists. Now that's true, that you have people...and you know the six categories are not closed categories. The mystics can be also reformists or they can be literalists or traditionalists, it depends.
....

The second thing which I wanted to raise is with our presence in the West we are facing theoretical challenges that have to do with religious concerns, the way we are reading the scriptural sources, how to be a Muslim, how do we read the scriptural sources, the Koran and the prophetic traditions? How do we redefine some of the concepts that we are using? How do we have to deal with the new context? And then, because we have a new context, to come back to the sources and to be able to look at the sources in the way these scriptural sources were connected to a specific context. So it's a double dialectical process, us and the context coming back to the scriptural sources, the scriptural sources and the context, to be able to extract from those scriptural resources the principles, and to come to the principles to the new context. Not easy. It's not easy but it's essential.
.....

So what we have to do is to come back to this and to be able to say, okay, in my own experience, what is cultural and what is religious? And then also to come to the scriptural sources, and here we need specialists to be...this is in the text, we can extract it in the way, it's immutable. For example, the Five Pillars of our practice is not cultural. You go from Africa to Indonesia you will find the people doing exactly the same, we practice the same. This is why we are speaking about one Islam. There is one Islam but many Islamic cultures depending on the geography. And there are many readings, by the way. This is why we explain diversity.


But the Arab culture is not the Asian culture, and now what we are experiencing is that in every single country we will have something which is an Islamic Australian culture. And even in Europe. I'm speaking about a European Islamic culture but it's not exactly right. If you go to Europe you have to understand that the French Islamic culture is not the British Islamic culture. Put the French Muslim and the British Muslim together and you will see the difference. They have something which is coming from their specific culture. The way they think about pluralism, they way we deal with religion is completely different. They are nurtured by their cultural environment.


This will be the future. So to be able to say to the people who are coming from Turkey, who are coming from Lebanon, who are coming from every majority Islamic country, anyone coming here, the first step is yes, you are going to be protective but the way forward is to be able to remain faithful to the principles, to leave what is cultural and to integrate from the Australian culture everything which is not in contradiction with your principles. In fact you have to be inclusive on the cultural ground.

......

All of us here, Muslims and non-Muslims here, we have to show respect to the people who are going through this experience. It's never, never, never easy to leave some roots and to build a new home. Anyone of you who know the meaning of exile...you know, exile is not that you are only doing it physically, exile is just to consider yourself in the new home here, it's my home, and just to go from the roots of the memory of my fathers and mothers and then to come here. I went through this experience when I was very privileged because I didn't go through the economic exile, it was a political exile, and still it was very difficult, just to be able to stay here.


So this we need to have it done through a very strong theoretical framework where we are building the first dimension. And here we come to the second dimension - identity. It's really important to be able to build the positive identity. So once again we have two ways, it is to say you have your Muslim identity, it's a closed identity, rely on it and everything else is not you. So you have two ways to build your identity, it's an identity against the other or it's an identity in the name of who you are and you are trying to build, in the name of some of the principles that are not cultural but they could be religious but open to everything which is cultural. This is why I try to do...when I was writing to be a European Muslim I came to the Islamic identity and I say what are the principles that are beyond the cultural reality?

By the way, one of the quotations here is coming from a woman who is saying...she cut the reference here; look what he's saying, he's saying help your brother when he is right or wrong. Cut him. Not saying the second part of it, and the second part is the essence of the whole thing, that one companion said, 'I know how to help my brother when he is right. How could I help him when he is wrong?' 'Prevent him from doing wrong'. Look at that. Your belonging - brotherhood means critical approach towards your own brother. You are right, I am with you; you are wrong, I will prevent you from doing wrong. So it's not a blind support. So my belonging to my community is something which is critical. When the Muslims are right, I will support, but when, for example, they are going to kill innocent people in the States or innocent people in Bali or innocent people in London, I have in the name of my religion to say this is against Islam. It's not only non-Islamic, it's anti-Islamic. So I have to stand up and to say no, this is my belonging to the spiritual community based on principles.

....

I have a great respect for the Christians and the Muslims during the Vietnam War who said, 'I can't do that. I can't go to kill the people.' And now what we are saying about them, that we show respect for them. They were put in jail. So it's a personal decision, at one point you have to decide. And of course you have to be committed to the legislation of the country. We have to stop talking about if the enemies are Muslims you don't go, if they are non-Muslims go and kill. This is un-Islamic, this is wrong and you have to come to...you belong to your country, you have a tacit contract and in some situations ask your conscience. Are you ready, yes or no? And by the way, I hope that every one of us is doing this in every situation of his life or her life. Is it right or not? Because our silence sometimes is not dignified, it's not the right way to be in such a situation.

....

Just after July 7 I was involved in the task force in the UK with the government, and I was talking to the Australian government when we had this video conference. Look, when we are talking about integration, what do we mean? Mainly we mean social integration, cultural integration, intellectual integration. Social integration meaning you have jobs and you are in the society. Cultural integration, you are westernised or you know the surrounding culture, and intellectual integration, you have been educated. So there is something which is a sense of going through the whole dimension of what integration is in our mind at the social level. 95% of the people who were involved in the suicide bombings in the UK and in the States were having all these parameters and these conditions. Westernised they were, culturally integrated. Intellectually some of them had PhDs, very well educated, no problem about education. They were not marginalised people. And then at the same time socially integrated, they had jobs.


So what was missing? What was missing? Born and raised in some European countries or in Britain. You listen to the video of Mohammad Sidique Khan and you understand what the problem is. He's telling his own fellow citizens, 'You are killing our brothers there, we are going to kill you here.' It's an us-versus-them rhetoric. He doesn't feel that he belongs to the country, 'this is not my country'. So he got all the parameters of what we call integration except one, which is the psychological integration, to feel at home. Here we have a theoretical challenge, and in fact a time will come here in your country where you will have to say what we are trying to say now in Europe. The true success of integration is to stop talking about integration because a long as we talk about integration it is still an us-versus-them approach.


Second, this is why I'm advocating a post-integration discourse, which is now we have to go beyond that. Of course you are at the beginning of a process. In France, in the UK we are reaching now the fourth or fifth generation. Where lies the problem? After five generations we still call them British citizens with an immigrant background. Four generations. So when do we start to lose that 'with an immigrant background'? Because in Australia you are much more than us even in Europe, it's really a country of immigration. You are all immigrants, the only difference between...not the indigenous and the people who were there, but the people who came after, the only difference is that we are older immigrants. It's a question of time.


So we have to think about in which way we go beyond this, and here it's a very important Muslim discourse on the belonging, you belong. So on the culture that we accept, on the rules that we respect, on the people that we live with, the pluralistic dimension of the society, and to be able to say 'this is my Umm'.

....

Ah, they don't seem to identify with locals... second... or at all fd...

abu_rashid wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 5:34pm:



Right there is the snag. Muslims, like everyone else, must integrate into democracy - otherwise it is not democracy.

You have to become part of , in-corporate, into the whole, into society. Then you can exercise your democratic rights and responsibilities.

You outlaw yourselves in the long run if you claim the protection and privileges of democracy but signal that should you become dominant, you will do away with these very protections and privileges for others. Mohammedan doctrine not only signals this but openly declares itself anti-democratic. 

Do not claim the rights, you only parade your hypocricy.

Quote:


I thought you'd say that. Can you think of a way for me to verify this independently? It's a shame because he seems pretty sensible.

Quote:


Isn't the brotherhood associated with terrorism?

Quote:


I see. Are there any other pillars? Is this what inspired Pratchet's turtle?

Quote:


Unless of course a better option comes along in the form of an ISlamic caliphate, right?

Quote:


Soren, what Tariq was getting at is that there are many subtlties involved. You cannot make blanket statements about integration or non-integration.

Quote:


Yes, that is troubling. I don't think Tariq comments on this. He explained that you can be Australian by nationality and Muslim by religion, without one having to come first. But he did not elaborate on how this might clash - such as if a caliphate arose or Muslims gained enough power to overthrow our government. Presumably the caliphate would come first and 'genuine' Muslims would leave Australia, unless they wanted to spy.

soren,

Quote:


I know some Christian groups who also don't agree with integrating into the Democratic system, they refrain from participating in it, and live as seperate communities. Do you consider them to be the same as you consider Muslims? Do you wish to force them to 'integrate'?

If it's really democracy, then the idea of forced integration would be wrong. Because democracy is about freedom, and people should have the freedom not to integrate if they want to.

Also I suspect we have some difference of opinion on what integration means.

freediver,

Quote:


You mean apart from the fact he's barely known outside of a few European countries?

Quote:


And I thought you'd say that

Yes, his 'brand' of Islam is specifically manufactured for your consumption. It's quite ironic, because you constantly accuse me of lying and deceiving you about Islam, yet I've consistently told you the truth, even if it's been quite obvious you'd be adverse to it. Yet this guy is telling you a fairytale, but since you like hearing it, he's 'sensible'... Interesting.

Quote:


No doubt, as are most Muslims... Says more about the pathetic Western propaganda about terrorism than it does about the MB.

Quote:


Dunno, perhaps. Those are the two most fundamental group of pillars though. And the only 2 groups that come to mind. (no doubt I'm going to be accused of deceiving you though, as I don't want to tell you about the 8 pillars of conquering the infidels  )

Quote:


Lost me there, sorry.

Quote:


Since you seem to know it all so well, why even ask? You like to be deceived?

As I've told you many times, a Muslim is bound by his oath of citizenship, and must have loyalty to his country, even if it is unIslamic. Even if a Caliphate existed, and I chose to remain in Australia, the Caliph would have no responsibility regarding me, and neither would I to him. This indicates that the bond of loyalty is to the state one resides in.

What I think you're confusing is the bond with the Muslim Ummah, which is more akin to a family bond (even though you wrongfully claim to be a 'bond with foreigners'). Do you consider your bond with your family stronger than your bond with Australia? If one of your parents moved overseas and became a citizen of a foreign country, would that mean you'd have a stronger bond with foreigners than with fellow Australians? Such a concept is really just ludicrous, and I wouldn't believe from anyone else but you.

Quote:


That's because there's no clash, not except in your mind anyway.

Quote:


That's a different issue. As for spying, even Western allies spy on one another, so don't try to use it to make Muslims sound like some foreign other. It's well known for instance that many Jews spy on the USA for Israel, yet nobody comes out and claims all Jews are a fifth column, do they? (Yes I know, you're going to claim it's a deflection and I'm always pointing to the Jews, just realise their situation is similar, so they're bound to be used as an example. Get over it and accept it.)

Yes fd I'd hate to think "The Muslim Brotherhood" was mainstream similarly for "Hizb-ut-Tahrir".

Now for this little gem...

Quote:


Well that's not quite true, loyalty to the Cailphate... is the Islamic way.  Just not to any other form of society.

Quote:


Well it's really just lip-service until, through weight of numbers or some other means the country becomes Islamic.
Quote:


Pardon?

Quote:


Even the most blinded Mutliculturalists espouse Integration as the goal of Multiculturalism.  Well most of us know it is not and it is a farce allowing division and disharmony through diversity.  But if you don't want to INTEGRATE and become Australian become part of our societ then can I suggest you go elsewhere.

Quote:


Ah just how is Integration undemocratic?

Grendel wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 7:07pm:


it was just an example and he did say 'most'. and to be honest when discussing this with Australians, this has been one of the most common things that is brought up

not just that muslims dont drink, but that they are also not sposed to be around people who are drinking (even if they don't drink themselves)

many people see this as muslims alienating themselves from 'the australian way of life' and not integrating.

for me personally the word integration is more along the lines of people interacting, not being insular within whatever 'community', feeling a sense of belonging within the country as a whole. and of course the regular stuff like jobs, setting up businesses, schools etc etc

I think some people can confuse integration with assimilation- the two seem to be conflated at times in some people's minds and that's where the trouble is. because then integration starts to mean "becoming the same"

to me integration is more like retaining difference, recognising similarities, celebrating both and the all important interacting.