The Civilized World – Who Us?

Society, so we claim, has risen above barbarism into an enlightened stage of development.
Great scientific achievements have become a norm. Humans have found ways to improve their lives by developing technology and devices that do just about everything. People venerate and strive for sophistication, learning, and success. We are in an age of continual progress and mounting capability, where people delight in feeling civilized. Does all this justify our hanging a ‘civilized’ plaque on the office wall for all to see? Can we, really, even consider ourselves civilized at all?

Civilized is defined as “Having a high state of culture and development both social and technological.”[i] Another definition which adds a different aspect to what being civilized means is, “To rise from barbarism to an enlightened stage of development; bring out of a primitive or savage state.”[ii] At first, it is easy to think to ourselves, “You see, we are civilized. We are hardly primitive, and the world today is full of culture and development.” But let us not rush to any conclusions before we really give this question some just thought. It is too undemanding and painless to let the glitter of our achievements gloss over the shadows of our misdeeds. The real question should not be about whether we are or are not civilized. Any dictionary will affirm what we have already convinced ourselves of. The real question we should ask ourselves is: Can a civilized society still consider itself civilized, in spite of its cultural and developmental achievements, if that society commits inhumane, violent, and irresponsible behavior that is destructive to humanity and the very planet which sustains it?

Ambrose Bierce said, “Men become civilized, not in proportion to their willingness to believe, but in proportion to their willingness to doubt.” Let us attempt, for a moment, to doubt what the dictionary tells us being civilized means. Is there more to being civilized than “having a high state of culture and development?” It seems almost glaringly obvious that there are several very important essentials, which are indispensable to a truly civilized society, whose mention has been neglected, not only in the dictionary but in our own evaluation of ourselves.

Elements such as justice, compassion, taking care of the weak and poor, and being educated about the surrounding world, are vital within any civilized society. Without justice, for instance, resent within the people will build up, and slowly the stitches that hold the society together will begin to unravel. The mark of distinction which uplifts and venerates a truly civilized society is not only due to its just and good elements; a lack of corruption, apathy, selfishness, violence, and ignorance in the disposition of the people, and the government, is equally important.

It sounds too good to be true, like Utopia. Not because it is far fetched or impossible, but because we are so far from it. Our unrestrained and destructive way of life has become so normal, and in our denial, even comfortable, that most quickly brush off what is truly civilized as an unrealistic fairy tale that is only spoken of by those who are naïve. To expect and call for the best from our or any society is not naïve, on the contrary, for a nation or a people to honestly examine and scrutinize themselves and in turn, strive to improve upon their flaws, is an indication of strength and civility that is rarely seen at all.

What we do see is a lot of dismissal and disregard, on the part of those who are considered or consider themselves to be civilized, towards their own problems. The reality is that it is easier to turn our head than it is to face the truth. It is easier to think that someone else will do it, that someone else is responsible for solving the world’s problems. What is truly ironic is how motivated and capable we suddenly become when it is to our own personal benefit.

We regard ourselves as civilized while we carelessly and continually pollute, overuse, and waste the precious resources of our planet. Our lives hinge on the health of our earth’s delicately balanced ecosystems.[iii] The water we drink, the air we breathe, the fuels that supply our heat and means of transportation[iv], and the forest and the land that supplies our food and medicines. We have the technology and the knowledge to develop sustainable and efficient uses of our resources. Why are we destroying the very planet that enables our survival?[v]

During the 1990s one U.S. citizen was consuming 30 times that of a citizen of India.[vi] Everyone knows there are starving children across the world, but the most an average ‘civilized’ person will do with that knowledge is admonish their child with it when there are unfinished green beans on their dinner plate. Is our culture ‘highly developed’ enough to see that our consumer economy is encouraging irresponsible damage and depletion of our planets resources and that we might possibly be using more than our share? Yet, in our unwillingness to admit to the faults of our comfortable system, we continue to consume.

To gather together and discuss the effects of poverty and pollution on our planet is not enough.
How capable are we, really, if we cannot successfully eradicate or better yet foresee and prevent poverty and pollution?[vii] Are these unrealistic expectations of humanity today?

We regard ourselves as civilized, yet, in all honesty, we weigh the value of a human life according to various combinations of nationality, wealth, and proximity to ourselves. We are calloused and indifferent towards the plight of hundreds of thousands of children all over the world. Children, who live as slaves, fight as soldiers, live in orphanages, and are often left to die.[viii] These children, to the majority of the ‘civilized’ world are “excluded and invisible.” [ix] Yet, we show intense interest when we hear about a kidnapped American girl, or the story of the six year old Cuban boy, Elian Gonzalez, who was found off the Florida Coast in 1999.[x]

In 1994, 800,000 Rwandans were viciously murdered in 100 days. That is 8,000 people, hacked up with large knives or shot, every day for three months, and the ‘civilized world’ did nothing but evacuate their own people.[xi] Rwanda is slightly smaller than Maryland.[xii] If this happened in Europe or the United States would the world merely talk about what they should do? When the U.S. looses 1/200th of that many American lives, we literally turn the world upside down. Is one human worth more than another solely because he or she was born in a ‘civilized’ country?

Albert Einstein rightly said that, “Not until the creation and maintenance of decent conditions of life for all people are recognized and accepted as a common obligation of all people and all countries – not until then shall we, with a certain degree of justification, be able to speak of humankind as civilized.”

We regard ourselves as civilized yet we spend billions, if not trillions, of dollars funding wars and the research and development of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons.[xiii] [xiv] In 2004, the U.S. exceeded the combined military spending of the entire developing world.[xv] We are far more capable of destruction than of conflict resolution. It is not only contradictory but somewhat arrogant that while we continue to spend grossly on weapons of mass destruction, we invade and vilify other ‘less civilized’ countries for doing the same thing, only on a much smaller scale.

Would it not be more civilized and beneficial for humanity to spend even a tenth of what we spend on war and weapons for environmental conservation or clean and safe energy production?

These examples are only a few of many problems our world is facing. Too often is our ‘barbarism’ camouflaged by our wealth and technology or by our appealing lifestyle. Perhaps it is the human tendency to see only the good in ourselves, while the bad is so readily apparent in others. We think so highly of the civilization we are a part of while we looking down upon those that are different or do not measure up to our own expectations of them. When we take the time to honestly examine our tendencies and conduct as a group, it is a little more than obvious that while we have many achievements to boast of, we have just as many offenses not only to face, but to fix before we can justifiably call ourselves civilized.

SOURCES:

[i] Dictionary.com <http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=civilised>.
[ii] Dictionary.com <http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=civilized>.
[iii] For more information about the Earth’s ecosystems and how they shape our world <http://earthtrends.wri.org/>.
[iv] “The world supply of oil is projected to last approximately 50 years at current production rates. (1997) Worldwide, the natural gas supply is adequate for about 50 years and coal for about 100 years. These estimates, however, are based on current consumption rates and current population numbers. If all the people in the world enjoyed a standard of living and energy consumption rate similar to that of an average American, and the world population continued to grow at a rate of 1.5%, the worlds fossil fuel reserves would last about 15 years.”
“Analyses suggest that at present (1998) the United States has consumed about three-quarters of the recoverable oil that was ever in the ground, and that we are currently consuming the last 25% of our oil.”
“Will Limits of the Earth’s Resources Control Human Numbers?”, David Pimentel, O. Bailey, P. Kim, E. Mullaney, J. Calabrese, L. Walman, F. Nelson, X. Yao; Environment, Development and Sustainability, Issue 1, 1999.
Online Posting available at <http://www.oilcrash.com/articles/limit.htm>, Pg 7.
[v] “Environmental pressure from the human population is the prime destructive force on Earth and is the primary cause of reduced biodiversity.”
“Will Limits of the Earth’s Resources Control Human Numbers?”, David Pimentel, O. Bailey, P. Kim, E. Mullaney, J. Calabrese, L. Walman, F. Nelson, X. Yao; Environment, Development and Sustainability, Issue 1, 1999.
Online Posting available at <http://www.oilcrash.com/articles/limit.htm>, Pg 9.
[vi] The United Nations Population Fund. “Consumption & Resources.” Online Posting. Sept. 1999. <http://www.unfpa.org/6billion/ccmc/consumptionandresources.html>.
[vii] Join the 2005 Poverty Campaign for the eradication of extreme poverty at www.makepovertyhistory.org It’s Easy! The UN Millennium Development Goal #1 is to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger. Goal #7 is to ensure environmental sustainability. <http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/>.
[viii] Human Rights Watch World Report. “Children’s Rights.” Online Posting. 1999. <http://www.hrw.org/worldreport99/children/index.html>.
[ix] UNICEF. The State of the World’s Children 2006. Online. <http://www.unicef.org/sowc06/index.php>.
[x] Potter, Mark. “Cuban Boy Found Off Florida Coast.” CNN.com 27 Nov 2002. <http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/South/11/26/cuban.boy/index.html>.
[xi] Human Rights Watch. “Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda.” Online Posting. March 1999. <http://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/rwanda/>.
[xii] CIA Factbook. “Rwanda.” Online Posting. 1 Nov 2005. <http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/rw.html>.
[xiii] Shah, Anup. “High Military Expenditure in Some Places.” Online Posting. 1 June 2005. <http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/ArmsTrade/Spending.asp#USMilitarySpending>.
[xiv] Alliance for Nuclear Accountability. “The US Nuclear Weapons Production Complex in the Year 2005.” Online Posting. <http://www.ananuclear.org/Map2005final.pdf>.
[xv] Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. “Recent Trends in Military Expenditure.” Online Posting. 2005. <http://web.sipri.org/contents/milap/milex/mex_trends.html>.

IF ISLAM DOES NOT PROMOTE TERRORISM THEN WHY ARE MANY OF THE TERRORISTS MUSLIMS?

It is hard for people to listen to and believe the majority of Muslims who openly say Islam does not promote terrorism. Almost every day, people see brutal and ruthless acts of terrorism being carried out by people who call themselves Muslims. The question undoubtedly arises: If Islam does not promote terrorism, then why are many of the terrorists coming from Muslim countries and killing in the name of Islam? An honest examination of this question will show that a huge part of the problem is the injustice, instability, poverty, humiliation and oppression that Muslims around the world are experiencing daily as a result of wars started or induced by war profiteers which have destroyed critical infrastructure in Muslim societies. Muslims themselves need to accept some responsibility, not only for their unfortunate circumstances, but for the terrorism wrongly committed in the name of Islam. Unfortunately there are Muslims who have taken it upon themselves to interpret Islam in a way that supports their objectives. This false interpretation is taught to ignorant Muslims, who often live in perpetually appalling and humiliating conditions, and out of hopelessness and ignorance, blindly follow and trust their teachers.

The core teachings of Islam are not open to individual interpretation. They are firmly established, and neither Muslims nor non-Muslims can take those teachings and decide for themselves what they mean. Anyone who wants to learn or teach Islam must use the proper sources and study the context of any given teaching to ensure that their understanding is correct.

One of the most misunderstood aspects of Islam is jihad. If we are to understand why so many acts of terrorism are being committed by so-called Muslims, then we need to be able to see that the concept of jihad has been widely misunderstood and misused by both Muslims and non-Muslims.

The word jihad literally means “to struggle or exert effort.” It applies to any colossal effort, not just warfare. Jihad may even be to refrain from fighting or to resist one’s own desires or evil inclinations. Even making peace could be jihad. There is no such thing as “holy war” in Islam or in the Qur’an. This is a mistranslation of the word. Holy war is carried out to forcibly subject others to one’s religious beliefs. This is expressly forbidden in Islam.

Fighting in war can be jihad, but under what conditions? Muslims fight in defense, but so do others. What makes such fighting a jihad? The answer is that fighting only becomes jihad if it is for the sake of being obedient to God and in accordance with His divine law. It is not jihad to fight for wealth, nationalism, territory, honor, race, and so on. Jihad has a strong element of self-restraint not seen in any other forms of warfare. Even fighting against people who attacked first would not be jihad if the Muslims were to strike back in revenge.

The Qur’an makes it clear that it is permissible for people to fight back against those who attack them. God says, “Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loves not transgressors.” (Qur’an 2:190)

God says, “And why should you not fight in the cause of God and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)? Men, women, and children, whose cry is: ‘Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors, and raise for us from You one who will protect; and raise for us from You one who will help.’” (Qur’an 4:75)

The Qur’an also makes it clear that when the other party refrains from aggression, it is not permissible to attack them. God says, “But if they (cease and desist), God is oft-forgiving, most merciful. And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression and there prevail justice and faith in God. But if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression.” (Qur’an 2:192 – 193)

It is permissible to fight against oppression and persecution. This does not apply only to Islam and Muslims, because everyone has the right to worship God. God says, “To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight) because they are wronged and verily God is most powerful for their aid. (They are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right (for no cause) except that they say, ‘Our Lord is God.’ If God did not check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of God is commemorated in abundant measure” (Qur’an 22:39 – 40) This clearly means Muslims must fight to protect and defend people of other faiths if they are in areas where Muslims have effective power. The life, honor, and property of all people are considered sacred whether they are Muslim or not. All people must be free to worship God. They must be free to make their own choices. God explicitly says, “There is no compulsion in religion.” (Qur’an 2:256)

From all of this it is easy to see the position of Islam on terrorism. Terrorism is against Islamic principles. Terrorism is a form of warfare in which innocent people are specifically targeted in order to instill fear in a society. Even during war, when the Muslims are defending against an aggressive enemy, they are never allowed to target any civilians, or to destroy crops, trees, or livestock. This is strictly prohibited by Islamic law and the clear examples of the Prophet Muhammad. The killing of innocents is murder and a crime against God and humanity, even during times of war and even when the other side does not similarly respect civilian life. One who intentionally kills innocent people is a murderer who deserves the punishment for murder. Terrorism is categorically prohibited in Islam and Islamic law rejects the premise that a non-legitimate tactic can ever lead to a positive result. Those who go against this established principle of Islamic law are fighting in contradiction to Islamic principles. It is ludicrous for anyone to call this fighting a jihad, a word that means striving for the cause of Islam. They are murderers in the light of Islamic law and should be treated as such.