Loaded Diplomatic Words

The Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel, crafted or had crafted a superb note of official congratulation to the newly-elected US President. Dripping with irony but absolutely correct in terms of expected language, formula and cliché, Kantian to boot.

“Germany and America are bound by their values: democracy, freedom, the respect for the law and the dignity of human beings, independent of their origin, skin color, religion, gender, sexual orientation or political position. On the basis of these values I offer the future president of the United States, Donald Trump, close cooperation.”

„Deutschland und Amerika sind durch Werte verbunden : Demokratie, Freiheit, Respekt vor dem Recht und der Würde des Menschen, unabhängig von Herkunft, Hautfarbe, Religion, Geschlecht, sexueller Orientierung oder politischer Einstellung. Auf der Basis dieser Werte biete ich dem künftigen Präsidenten der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika, Donald Trump, eine enge Zusammenarbeit an.“

Full report in the FAZ: http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/deutschlands-politiker-reagieren-gemischt-auf-trump-14520543.html

What Hath Brexit Wrought? Downsizing!

IMG_2330

The UK falls to ninth place, just ahead of Mexico and behind Indonesia. And that is the UK including Scotland. Data from the dastardly IMF, whose business is to be right about these things. Image of a graph in the Financial Times 2 July.

Jihad, Ijtihad and other Dialogical Wars

Western audiences, out of ignorance, yield too easily
to fundamentalist Muslim claims that Islam is prescriptive
in simple ways. To argue otherwise requires knowledge
of Islamic hermeneutics, dialectics, and dialogics.

— Fischer and Abedi, Debating Muslims (p. 147)

Twenty years ago I published an academic piece on three North African writers which went largely unread — par for that course to be sure.

Jihad Ijtihad and other Dialogical Wars

I offer this link to the past because its matter remains topical. It explains in accessible terms to readers of English the concepts of jihad and its cognate ijtihad, as well as the relationship of each to the other.

They anchor each end of a dialogical continuum running from holy war through conversion (by various means) and maieutic (giving birth to ideas) on to the hermeneutics of ijtihad, which might be defined as “interpretative work”. Ijtihad began before jihad, since Allah’s edict to Muhammad at the moment of revelation was إقرا iqra! read! / recite!, which does after all require interpretation.

As interpretation of the work for which jihad calls, ijtihad must be understood dialectically (in light of the range of counter-arguments), hermeneutically (in terms of allusions and contexts, nuances and changes in word usage), and dialogically (in relation to the motives and manipulations of political others to whom one is opposed).

Both jihad and ijtihad are “ethical discourse”. They are conducted in a communicative environment driven by dialogue with others, by attempts to persuade those others “to join one’s own moral and political community” (Fischer and Abedi, p. 146). It should therefore not be surprising that poetry sometimes plays a persuasive role in Islamicist polemic and propaganda: http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/dec/29/poetry-used-as-a-perfect-weapon-for-recruiting-violent-jihadis-study-finds.

My point? Just read the epigraph again.

If you have declared someone an enemy or have been declared an enemy by someone else, best learn to know them (dixit Sun Tzu in The Art of War). The way it looks for the moment, the jihadis of Da’esh have a better grasp of the vulnerabilities of the so-called West — susceptibility to bouts of collective fear, self-indulgent materialism  — than the West does of theirs, whatever either may be.