Nothing particularly deep to say today. I've been a little tired these days. I'm still in the middle of reading Black Skin, White Masks. Some recent things happening in my life have made me go back to it. Fanon's a genius. BS, WM is a classic when it comes to understanding the ways in which racism influences personal relationships (romantic or otherwise).
I'm also in the middle of Wicked (it fleshes out the backstory of the Wicked Witch of the West, with a sympathetic eye). I'd definitely recommend it. This is the second time I'm reading it. The book has some meaty stuff in terms of the nature of evil and how it sometimes is a matter of perception. (But it goes further than just saying "One man's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter). It realistically fleshes out the world of Oz in terms of politics culture and religion. (The Wizard was a liar who used deception to overthrow Ozma, the legitimate ruler. And in order to concentrate the wealth necessary to actually build an Emerald City or a Yellow Brick road, he then used his power to exploit the neighboring kingdoms and disrupt their ecosystems. Basically the Wizard was a tyrant. The author, Gregory Maguire, also creates several religions for the land Oz. One is a pagan nature-based religion while another is more of an ethical monotheism... in fact, the witch is a "preacher's kid" ). There are also a number of other interesting touches which make the story rather compelling, especially if you are familiar with the original Wizard of Oz.
On deck:
I'm not sure if I'll actually make time to read this, but the other story which has been on my mind these days is M. Butterfly. It is allegedly based on a true story. (I guess truth can be stranger than fiction).
Monday, July 11, 2005
Sunday, July 10, 2005
don't ask for whom the bell tolls...
But seriously, I'm praying for peace in London and all over the world.
what is the islamic stance on the london bombings?
If Muslims are at a point where people actually ask this question and there is any significant degree of suspense about the answer, then the PR battle is already lost. But if you still need to look, here is a response from Faraz Rabbani from the Sunni Path website on the question: What is the Islamic stance on the London bombings?
(Note, the above answer is from the Hanafi perspective. If your name is Daniel Pipes, Steve Emerson or Ann Coulter and you happen to be reading this. You will have to check elsewhere to find out what the non-Hanafi position is)
Actually, I also included this page because there is a link to a paper from Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad called Bombing Without Moonlight: The Origins of Suicidal Terrorism which is a bit old (written last year) but which still makes timely and interesting reading. And from there one can also find links to other writings by Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad...
(Note, the above answer is from the Hanafi perspective. If your name is Daniel Pipes, Steve Emerson or Ann Coulter and you happen to be reading this. You will have to check elsewhere to find out what the non-Hanafi position is)
Actually, I also included this page because there is a link to a paper from Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad called Bombing Without Moonlight: The Origins of Suicidal Terrorism which is a bit old (written last year) but which still makes timely and interesting reading. And from there one can also find links to other writings by Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad...
we are all collateral damage
(a response to the London bombings)
We Are All Collateral Damage
By Zaid Shakir
The recent terrorist tragedy in London is disheartening. Once again some nefarious force has seen fit to totally disregard innocent human life in pursuit of a vile agenda that few of us know and even fewer could understand. The response of the world leaders assembled in Edinburgh for the G-8 Summit is perhaps more disheartening, as it promises more of the misguided policies that have proven so ineffective in prosecuting the war on terror. The leaders of the Western powers continue to imply that they will fight violence with more violence of their own. If current events are any indicator of future developments, such a policy will only serve to beget yet more terrorism.
This is a war being guided on both sides by self-righteous hypocrites whose motives and proclamations mirror each other. Each side sees God as being exclusively with them. That being the case, the restraint and judiciousness urged by Christian and Islamic theology to guide the execution of war is cast aside with wanton impunity. Each side manipulates a vulnerable public to create a climate that allows for the perpetuation and the inevitable escalation of the ongoing slaughter. Each side reserves the right to use the spectacle of indiscriminate violence to “Shock and Awe” the opposition, yet will deny that its tactics can be described as terrorism. Each side sees their civilian population as hapless, innocent victims, while the suffering innocent civilians on the other side are acceptable collateral damage.
There will never be any real progress in ending this terror war, until we realize that we have all become collateral damage, unacceptable collateral damage. That being the case, there is no they or we in this affair. We are they and they are we. When a child in New York never sees his mother again because she was crushed in a collapsed tower at the World Trade Center, we all have suffered an irreplaceable loss. When an impoverished family in Afghanistan is bombed from the face of the Earth by a misguided missile, something of our collective humanity is destroyed by the blast. When a child in Iraq is born with gross birth defects due to his mother’s exposure to depleted uranium, we have all been deformed. When London commuters fear ever again entering the underground, because of the ill-advised actions of a handful of desperate fanatics, their insecurity touches us all.
We, the collaterally damaged, will continue to exist in a state of dehumanizing loss, deformity, and insecurity until we rise up, unite, and refuse to support at any level the policies of leaders who continually fail to heed one of the surest of all political lessons: killing innocent civilians will never lead to a positive outcome for the transgressing party. This realization is the first meaningful salvo anyone could fire in a real war on terror. However, as long as we are not as moved by the suffering of innocent civilians anywhere as we are by the suffering of those close to us, it will be a salvo that remains unfired.
Imam Zaid Shakir
7/7/05
source
We Are All Collateral Damage
By Zaid Shakir
The Roads to Peace
The roads to peace are paths of war,
The gentle dove will leave her scar.
The moral men to say the least,
Will kill us all to get their peace.
The roads that lead to victories gained,
Are filled with people full of pain.
Only our Creator knew,
We’d kill so many to save so few.
The recent terrorist tragedy in London is disheartening. Once again some nefarious force has seen fit to totally disregard innocent human life in pursuit of a vile agenda that few of us know and even fewer could understand. The response of the world leaders assembled in Edinburgh for the G-8 Summit is perhaps more disheartening, as it promises more of the misguided policies that have proven so ineffective in prosecuting the war on terror. The leaders of the Western powers continue to imply that they will fight violence with more violence of their own. If current events are any indicator of future developments, such a policy will only serve to beget yet more terrorism.
This is a war being guided on both sides by self-righteous hypocrites whose motives and proclamations mirror each other. Each side sees God as being exclusively with them. That being the case, the restraint and judiciousness urged by Christian and Islamic theology to guide the execution of war is cast aside with wanton impunity. Each side manipulates a vulnerable public to create a climate that allows for the perpetuation and the inevitable escalation of the ongoing slaughter. Each side reserves the right to use the spectacle of indiscriminate violence to “Shock and Awe” the opposition, yet will deny that its tactics can be described as terrorism. Each side sees their civilian population as hapless, innocent victims, while the suffering innocent civilians on the other side are acceptable collateral damage.
There will never be any real progress in ending this terror war, until we realize that we have all become collateral damage, unacceptable collateral damage. That being the case, there is no they or we in this affair. We are they and they are we. When a child in New York never sees his mother again because she was crushed in a collapsed tower at the World Trade Center, we all have suffered an irreplaceable loss. When an impoverished family in Afghanistan is bombed from the face of the Earth by a misguided missile, something of our collective humanity is destroyed by the blast. When a child in Iraq is born with gross birth defects due to his mother’s exposure to depleted uranium, we have all been deformed. When London commuters fear ever again entering the underground, because of the ill-advised actions of a handful of desperate fanatics, their insecurity touches us all.
We, the collaterally damaged, will continue to exist in a state of dehumanizing loss, deformity, and insecurity until we rise up, unite, and refuse to support at any level the policies of leaders who continually fail to heed one of the surest of all political lessons: killing innocent civilians will never lead to a positive outcome for the transgressing party. This realization is the first meaningful salvo anyone could fire in a real war on terror. However, as long as we are not as moved by the suffering of innocent civilians anywhere as we are by the suffering of those close to us, it will be a salvo that remains unfired.
Imam Zaid Shakir
7/7/05
source
Saturday, July 09, 2005
memin pinguin pulled
I guess public pressure can account for something. Fox finally caved and the racist stamps were recalled.
stop trippin'
Sunan Abu Dawud Book 41, Number 5097
Narrated AbuHurayrah:
Narrated AbuHurayrah:
The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Allah, Most High, has removed from you the pride of the pre-Islamic period and its boasting in ancestors. One is only a pious believer or a miserable sinner. You are sons of Adam, and Adam came from dust. Let the people cease to boast about their ancestors. They are merely fuel in Jahannam; or they will certainly be of less account with Allah than the beetle which rolls dung with its nose.
kerry descended from the prophet muhammad?
This news is a bit old but I didn't hear about until recently and it seems interesting enough to share. Apparently, according to the genealogists at Burke's Peerage, former Presidential candidate John Kerry is actually a descendent from the prophet.
It sounds impressive, and in some sense it is, but if you think about it isn't so amazing. It's similar to how if you are in a room with 23 or more people, it is really likely that there is a pair of people with the same birthday. If you stop and think about all the co-incidences which have to happen in order for it NOT to be the case, it makes perfect sense.
In the case of looking at geneaologies, start with one individual. They have 2 parents, 4 grandparents, 8 great-grandparents, 16 great-great-grandparents, etc. in a quickly growing geometric series of ancestors back through the generations. Now, in order for two people to NOT be related, that means that they don't share a common ancestor. And that would mean if you look back at their two geometrically increasing sets of ancestors, they don't overlap. But as you go into the past, in every generation, the number of ancestors is approximately doubling, but the world population of is getting smaller and so eventually it becomes nearly impossible for two people to be unrelated, especially if they are of the same "race". So for example, it has been said that every white person alive today is descended from Charlemagne!
Harold Brooks-Baker, Publishing Director of Burke’s Peerage, said [...]that, “Senator Kerry, unlike all of the former presidential hopefuls, is a virtual walking United Nations of Christian, Muslim, Jewish and other descent onlrivaleded by his distant cousin, Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain”.
Such a rich, cultural and religious heritage should give Senator Kerry a great advantage in understanding the complex political issues in the world today, especially those of the Middle East. He is a kinsman of the Shiite Shahs of Persia, the most famous of whom was Shah Abbas I who reigned from 1587 to 1629, and also the Muslim Kings of Tunisia, both of whom descend from the Prophet Muhammad; he is also descended from Alexius I, the Greek Orthodox Emperor of Byzantium who ruled the Eastern Roman Empire from 1081-1118 and via that link is a kinsman of the last Greek Orthodox Emperor Constantine 11th Palaelogus who was slain by the Turks in 1453 while defending Constantinople. Burke's Peerage has documented the SenatorÂ’s kinship with the Christian kings of Jerusalem and Cyprus and through them, the Bourbon monarchs of France including Louis XV, XVIXVIII XVIII and Charles X of France.
It sounds impressive, and in some sense it is, but if you think about it isn't so amazing. It's similar to how if you are in a room with 23 or more people, it is really likely that there is a pair of people with the same birthday. If you stop and think about all the co-incidences which have to happen in order for it NOT to be the case, it makes perfect sense.
In the case of looking at geneaologies, start with one individual. They have 2 parents, 4 grandparents, 8 great-grandparents, 16 great-great-grandparents, etc. in a quickly growing geometric series of ancestors back through the generations. Now, in order for two people to NOT be related, that means that they don't share a common ancestor. And that would mean if you look back at their two geometrically increasing sets of ancestors, they don't overlap. But as you go into the past, in every generation, the number of ancestors is approximately doubling, but the world population of is getting smaller and so eventually it becomes nearly impossible for two people to be unrelated, especially if they are of the same "race". So for example, it has been said that every white person alive today is descended from Charlemagne!
the (real) da vinci code
So I finished the Da Vinci Code yesterday. It was a pretty entertaining book. Not great, but interesting. Assuming they get some decent actors and a good budget, the movie should do pretty well. A friend of mine already lent me a copy of Angels and Demons (the book to which The Da Vinci Code is actually a sequel which deals with the Illuminati and the Vatican).
Anyway, part of the The Da Vinci Code really focuses on a secret stash of documents which establish a radically different alternative understanding of Christian history. I'm not going to spoil the novel by giving away whether the characters find this hidden stash or not. But in the "real world", if you are curious, you might be interested in checking out some of the many resources out there associated with early alternative forms of Christianity.
The most significant alternative form of early Christianity is Gnosticism.
A good resource for looking at many of these alternative texts (Other gospels, the Nag Hammadi texts, the Dead Sea Scrolls, etc.) is the Gnostic Society Library
Another good place to look is the Wesley Center Online's page on Noncanonical Literature or the early Christian writings page
There is a large amount of overlap among these pages but you they each have their differences too.
From a Muslim perspective this literature is especially interesting because it can help fill a particular gap: If Jesus was a Muslim, then where did the original Christians go, and where did the Pauline Christians come from?
By looking at these alternative texts maybe we can come closer to the actual Gospel of Jesus; the Injeel described in the Quran. And by looking at the history of these other groups perhaps we can understand the process by which Christianity went from the original teachings of Christ, to spreading and "mutating" into a larger movement with ALOT of theological diversity, and then changing again into the official religion of the Holy Roman Empire.
For example, some Christian groups had different understandings of the crucifixion and saw Jesus as a human and not as the divine second person of the Trinity.
Anyway, part of the The Da Vinci Code really focuses on a secret stash of documents which establish a radically different alternative understanding of Christian history. I'm not going to spoil the novel by giving away whether the characters find this hidden stash or not. But in the "real world", if you are curious, you might be interested in checking out some of the many resources out there associated with early alternative forms of Christianity.
The most significant alternative form of early Christianity is Gnosticism.
A good resource for looking at many of these alternative texts (Other gospels, the Nag Hammadi texts, the Dead Sea Scrolls, etc.) is the Gnostic Society Library
Another good place to look is the Wesley Center Online's page on Noncanonical Literature or the early Christian writings page
There is a large amount of overlap among these pages but you they each have their differences too.
From a Muslim perspective this literature is especially interesting because it can help fill a particular gap: If Jesus was a Muslim, then where did the original Christians go, and where did the Pauline Christians come from?
By looking at these alternative texts maybe we can come closer to the actual Gospel of Jesus; the Injeel described in the Quran. And by looking at the history of these other groups perhaps we can understand the process by which Christianity went from the original teachings of Christ, to spreading and "mutating" into a larger movement with ALOT of theological diversity, and then changing again into the official religion of the Holy Roman Empire.
For example, some Christian groups had different understandings of the crucifixion and saw Jesus as a human and not as the divine second person of the Trinity.
Thursday, July 07, 2005
"and the indians, give them whatever they want"
One of the most interesting passages in the John Grisham novel, the Pelican Brief, is the scene where the fictional Supreme Court justice Abe Rosenberg, is looking at a varied collection of protestors, each with their own set of issues:
I don't think I've ever seen a "complex" political philosophy, encapsulated so briefly. I occasionally wonder if I can sum up my own beliefs as concisely. Sometimes I feel like my views are more the product of ad hoc sympathies and "teams" that I root for than the product of an objective overarching political ideology. (Would it be fair to say that Muslims are especially susceptible to this?) But then again, I think my views do tend to fit into Rosenberg's list above.
I've recently come to realize that I value freedom of speech more than the average person. A free marketplace of ideas is necessary for the truth to come out. Especially when it comes to criticizing government policy.
Obviously on religious grounds one should strive for adab (good manners) and treat people well, and not gossip, lie, back-bite, slander, etc. One should speak in the best of terms.
But if someone is going to use a racial slur against me, for example, I think I would much rather to have the right to call them out as a racist prick than have the legal authority to punish them for their words.
The other response I would have to Rosenberg's list would be to make the part about "Indians" (dispossessed refugees, pro-independence, pro-autonomy forces) much more central. Whether you are talking about Puerto Rican nationalists, Kurds, Kashmiris, Chechens, Palestinians, etc. I think government should depend on the consent of the governed and there are certain places around the world where some groups have clearly withheld their consent. At the same time, there are clear advantages to international organizations like the UN or NATO or OAS etc.
I guess if I were Emperor of the Planet, I would cut up countries into smaller pieces according to national/ethnic/linguistic/religious boundaries but then at the same time I would like to encourage cooperation within voluntary international organizations of nations.
`Biggest crowd ever!' Rosenberg yelled at the window. He was almost deaf. Jason Kline, his senior law clerk, stood behind him. It was the first Monday in October, the opening day of the new term, and this had become a traditional celebration of the First Amendment. A glorious celebration. Rosenberg was thrilled. To him, freedom of speech meant freedom to riot.
`Are the Indians out there?' he asked loudly.
Jason Kline leaned closer to his right ear.
`Yes!'
`With war paint?'
`Yes! In full battle dress.'
`Are they dancing?'
`Yes!'
The Indians, the blacks, whites, browns, women, gays, tree lovers, Christians, abortion activists, Aryans, Nazis, atheists, hunters, animal lovers, white supremacists, black supremacists, tax protestors, loggers, farmers - it was a massive sea of protest. And the riot police gripped their black sticks.
`The Indians should love me!'
`I'm sure they do.' Kline nodded and smiled at the frail little man with clenched fists. His ideology was simple; government over business, the individual over government, the environment over everything. And the Indians, give them whatever they want.
I don't think I've ever seen a "complex" political philosophy, encapsulated so briefly. I occasionally wonder if I can sum up my own beliefs as concisely. Sometimes I feel like my views are more the product of ad hoc sympathies and "teams" that I root for than the product of an objective overarching political ideology. (Would it be fair to say that Muslims are especially susceptible to this?) But then again, I think my views do tend to fit into Rosenberg's list above.
I've recently come to realize that I value freedom of speech more than the average person. A free marketplace of ideas is necessary for the truth to come out. Especially when it comes to criticizing government policy.
"'What kind of jihad is better?' He replied, 'A word of truth in front of an oppressive ruler!'"
(Sunan Al-Nasa'i , No. 4209)
Obviously on religious grounds one should strive for adab (good manners) and treat people well, and not gossip, lie, back-bite, slander, etc. One should speak in the best of terms.
But if someone is going to use a racial slur against me, for example, I think I would much rather to have the right to call them out as a racist prick than have the legal authority to punish them for their words.
The other response I would have to Rosenberg's list would be to make the part about "Indians" (dispossessed refugees, pro-independence, pro-autonomy forces) much more central. Whether you are talking about Puerto Rican nationalists, Kurds, Kashmiris, Chechens, Palestinians, etc. I think government should depend on the consent of the governed and there are certain places around the world where some groups have clearly withheld their consent. At the same time, there are clear advantages to international organizations like the UN or NATO or OAS etc.
I guess if I were Emperor of the Planet, I would cut up countries into smaller pieces according to national/ethnic/linguistic/religious boundaries but then at the same time I would like to encourage cooperation within voluntary international organizations of nations.
young lords
So once at a performance of Slave Ships South, somebody had asked me about the last line:
Ahora que estamos en el Norte, que traemos?
Now that we are in the North, what do we bring?
Part of an answer has to lie in the Young Lords Party, the Puerto Rican answer to the Black Panthers. (Some of these websites were already included in an earlier blog entry about the Last Poets mainly because Felipe Luciano was an early member of both organizations)
Young Lords Internet Resource, comprehensive collection of links for further research and documents for download
Latino/a Education Network Service, excellent history and explanation of the Young Lords with lots of links and access to a book and documentary about the Young Lords
¡Palante, Siempre Palante!, an extensive site about the Young Lords
Young Lords Party 13-Point Program and Platform (original version)
E-text has numerous articles related to the Young Lords
"The Young Lords and Early Chicago Puerto Rican Gangs" attempts to place the Young Lords in the context of ethnic Puerto Rican history and youth-gang history.
Ahora que estamos en el Norte, que traemos?
Now that we are in the North, what do we bring?
Part of an answer has to lie in the Young Lords Party, the Puerto Rican answer to the Black Panthers. (Some of these websites were already included in an earlier blog entry about the Last Poets mainly because Felipe Luciano was an early member of both organizations)
Young Lords Internet Resource, comprehensive collection of links for further research and documents for download
Latino/a Education Network Service, excellent history and explanation of the Young Lords with lots of links and access to a book and documentary about the Young Lords
¡Palante, Siempre Palante!, an extensive site about the Young Lords
Young Lords Party 13-Point Program and Platform (original version)
E-text has numerous articles related to the Young Lords
"The Young Lords and Early Chicago Puerto Rican Gangs" attempts to place the Young Lords in the context of ethnic Puerto Rican history and youth-gang history.
Wednesday, July 06, 2005
the da vinci code
So I finally got on the bandwagon and have started to read The Da Vinci Code. It really interesting so far but the concepts don't seem terribly original. In fact, alot of its ideas have been appearing in the culture lately
For example, there is Stigmata a film which is, in a visual sense, very well done. There are many shots of the movie which are set up like powerfully beautiful photographs. Aspects of the movie are inspired by the Gospel of Thomas and (like the Da Vinci code) part of the plot involves a group within the Catholic Church who is apparently willing to go to great lengths in order to gain control of a powerful secret.
Dogma is a Kevin Smith comedy. It certainly isn't for the easily offended. I won't say very much about the plot except that like The Prophecy and Constantine (two movies which are in other respects also VERY similar to one another... but The Prophecy came first) it features angels as the "villians". And like the Da Vinci code it also plays with the idea that Jesus has living relatives in the modern-day.
My favorite thing to mention about Dogma is the fact that Chris Rock's character, Rufus the black disciple, is *actually in the Bible*. He's possibly mentioned twice:
Right before Mark's description of the crucifixion we can read:
Cyrene is in Northern Africa. And then as a part of the introduction to one of Paul's letters he writes:
Millenium is a tv series by the makers of the X-Files. Except where the typical X-files episodes might have to do with aliens and psychic phenomena, the typical episode of Millenium has to do with serial killers and apocalyptic/satanic cults. And like the Da Vinci code, a big part of the series had to do with the idea that Jesus has relatives who are alive in modern-times.
Actually, I understated it when I said that the Da Vinci is based on ideas which have already been floating around in the culture. In fact the authors of another work Holy Blood, Holy Grail (which claims to be a non-fictional work about secret societies, the Holy Grail and the descendents of Jesus) are trying to sue the author of The Da Vinci code for plagarism.
Even so, the Da Vinci Code seems like an engaging book so far and I'm eager to see how it ends.
For example, there is Stigmata a film which is, in a visual sense, very well done. There are many shots of the movie which are set up like powerfully beautiful photographs. Aspects of the movie are inspired by the Gospel of Thomas and (like the Da Vinci code) part of the plot involves a group within the Catholic Church who is apparently willing to go to great lengths in order to gain control of a powerful secret.
Dogma is a Kevin Smith comedy. It certainly isn't for the easily offended. I won't say very much about the plot except that like The Prophecy and Constantine (two movies which are in other respects also VERY similar to one another... but The Prophecy came first) it features angels as the "villians". And like the Da Vinci code it also plays with the idea that Jesus has living relatives in the modern-day.
My favorite thing to mention about Dogma is the fact that Chris Rock's character, Rufus the black disciple, is *actually in the Bible*. He's possibly mentioned twice:
Right before Mark's description of the crucifixion we can read:
And they compelled a passer-by, Simon of Cyre'ne, who was coming in from the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, to carry his cross. And they brought him to the place called Gol'gotha (which means the place of a skull). (Mark 15:21-22)
Cyrene is in Northern Africa. And then as a part of the introduction to one of Paul's letters he writes:
Greet Rufus, eminent in the Lord, also his mother and mine. (Romans 1:13)
Millenium is a tv series by the makers of the X-Files. Except where the typical X-files episodes might have to do with aliens and psychic phenomena, the typical episode of Millenium has to do with serial killers and apocalyptic/satanic cults. And like the Da Vinci code, a big part of the series had to do with the idea that Jesus has relatives who are alive in modern-times.
Actually, I understated it when I said that the Da Vinci is based on ideas which have already been floating around in the culture. In fact the authors of another work Holy Blood, Holy Grail (which claims to be a non-fictional work about secret societies, the Holy Grail and the descendents of Jesus) are trying to sue the author of The Da Vinci code for plagarism.
Even so, the Da Vinci Code seems like an engaging book so far and I'm eager to see how it ends.
poetry slam
Last night I was one of four featured poets at the local poetry spot. The evening mostly went well. I started off with Slave Ships South and then did two other poems afterwards (Ok it was a short set). It is an interesting process getting ready for Nationals. But especially since there is an enforced 3-minute time limit on poems I actually have a couple of pieces which I'm really fond of but in order to perform them I have to amputate whole sections so its a bit painful. (How do I hate clocks.... let me count the ways...).
chess films
So this past week I recently saw Searching For Bobby Fischer and Fresh (Which I often call "Searching for Bobby Fischer in tha Hood". They are both good movies, they are both about chess, and they are both screaming to be compared to one another.
Searching for Bobby Fischer is the story of real-life chess prodigy Josh Waitzkin, a young middle-class white kid who enters the world of competitive chess. (Certain aspects of the movie are fictional even though many of the characters correspond to real people). For me, one of the most interesting aspects of the film is the fact that so much of it is actually set up like a chessboard, in the sense of being composed of adjacent black and white squares. For most characters, there are several other characters who are their "opposite" according to some point of view.
In Fresh, the action of the plot also mirrors the game of chess but in a different way; several of the characters are clearly meant to correspond to chess pieces. And so even though the main character Michael (nicknamed Fresh) is a chess prodigy who learned how to play the game from his father (played by Samuel Jackson), the most important "game" in the movie the very real struggle of Fresh to against himself and the forces which conspire to overwhelm him. So where Josh is a real person watching an unreal game, Fresh is a fictional character but he is "playing" in the real world. But like watching a chess game, we never see Fresh explaining to us the ultimate plan behind his actions. All we see are a series of moves. Drugs are swapped. A lie is told. Pieces sacrificed. And in the end, one side or another ends up checkmated (or is it a draw?)
Either way, I would highly recommend both movies. (And it is interesting to see them together). They both have excellent casts, excellent dialogue (Chess definitely needs more trash-talking) and excellent stories.
Searching for Bobby Fischer is the story of real-life chess prodigy Josh Waitzkin, a young middle-class white kid who enters the world of competitive chess. (Certain aspects of the movie are fictional even though many of the characters correspond to real people). For me, one of the most interesting aspects of the film is the fact that so much of it is actually set up like a chessboard, in the sense of being composed of adjacent black and white squares. For most characters, there are several other characters who are their "opposite" according to some point of view.
In Fresh, the action of the plot also mirrors the game of chess but in a different way; several of the characters are clearly meant to correspond to chess pieces. And so even though the main character Michael (nicknamed Fresh) is a chess prodigy who learned how to play the game from his father (played by Samuel Jackson), the most important "game" in the movie the very real struggle of Fresh to against himself and the forces which conspire to overwhelm him. So where Josh is a real person watching an unreal game, Fresh is a fictional character but he is "playing" in the real world. But like watching a chess game, we never see Fresh explaining to us the ultimate plan behind his actions. All we see are a series of moves. Drugs are swapped. A lie is told. Pieces sacrificed. And in the end, one side or another ends up checkmated (or is it a draw?)
Either way, I would highly recommend both movies. (And it is interesting to see them together). They both have excellent casts, excellent dialogue (Chess definitely needs more trash-talking) and excellent stories.
Monday, July 04, 2005
who is muqtedar khan?
If you haven't heard of him before, here are some links which give a little background:
Muqtedar Khan's IJTIHAD website
His blog, GLOBALOG
His column on global affairs, GlobalEye
And also, here is a highly critical piece on Khan from ZNET called Memo to Muqtedar by Abu Dharr
Muqtedar Khan's IJTIHAD website
His blog, GLOBALOG
His column on global affairs, GlobalEye
And also, here is a highly critical piece on Khan from ZNET called Memo to Muqtedar by Abu Dharr
muqtedar khan's resignation
In another kind of "declaration of independence", Muqtedar Khan recently resigned from the board of the PMUNA (Progressive Muslim Union of North America). Hopefully it will stimulate the growth and development of a Progressive Muslim movement which is both, genuinely progressive and genuinely Islamic. Here is his letter of resignation:
Dear Omid (Safi)
Assalamu Alaykum,
Lately I have found the environment with Progressive Muslims Union extremely oppressive, abusive and hateful. I have found both PMU and MWU extremely intolerant of difference and disagreement. This is the only Muslim group where people who believe in the teachings of the Quran are ridiculed and those who express ambivalence about it even about the existence of God are celebrated.
But lately the culture of takfir and the absolutely lack of basic adab and simple etiquette that is becoming a defining characteristic of PMU has become suffocating.I have been extremely critical of many Muslim organizations, specially ISNA, AMSS and CAIR organizations that are routinely ridiculed by PMU members who feel that they are morally superior to all Muslims -- both in private and in writing but have never, ever been abused by any of them and most importantly never ever been made to feel that I do not belong.
It should not be a great loss to PMU. Even though I was member of the advisory board for a year, I was never consulted even once on any of its decisions. The advisory board never met even once and we never even had a single meeting with the executive committee. It is a sham anyway.
My close interaction with PMU has taught me three things, (1) that clearly I am not sufficiently indifferent to the teachings of Quran and the traditions of the Islamic heritage to be a "good Progressive Muslim"; (2) I was too gullible to believe in its empty claims of openness and tolerance for different perspectives. And (3) I have also learned that I am completely opposite in nature to most of the members of PMU. For example I believe that a rational argument precedes the moral judgment.
PMU is operating with a set of moral principles randomly acquired from Marxism and/or postmodern cultural trends and is treating them as absolutely moral truths, and are now looking for arguments [hopefully with some Islamic content] to justify them. PMU members unleash fanatical rage when this is questioned and resort to abuse, distortion, false accusations as a substitute to argument.
I can understand, sympathize and participate in exercises of Ijtihad that seek to reassess "human understanding" of Islam. I have been advocating this for over a decade. My website Ijtihad was launched in 1999. But not to observe Islamic values after recognizing them as such to me is a sin. I cannot for example in good conscience approve of alcohol consumption by those who acknowledge it as forbidden. To demand that I do so in order to remain a member of the community is exactly the kind of oppression that I though we had come together to fight.
I have been very prolific in presenting my views and opinions on myriad things Islamic or otherwise and hence there is very little about my politics that can be claimed to remain unknown. So when PMU invited me to join the advisory board, it was with full knowledge of my positions, so why the uproar now over my refusal to toe the party line. I have never, ever, hesitated from expressing my views and dissenting with any majority in every organization that I have worked with. But, the extent of intolerance that I have experienced from members of PMU has been shockingly unexpected and unprecedented. I have come to this sad realization that PMU's moral claims on social justice and tolerance and the "big tent approach" are shallow and indeed false. PMU is just another organization as intolerant and closed as any in our society.
Please liberate me from the oppressive and intolerant culture of PMU and accept my resignation from the advisory board with immediate effect.
Your Brother in IslamMuqtedar KhanM. A. Muqtedar Khan, Ph.D.
Director of International StudiesChair, Political Science Department, Adrian CollegeNon-Resident Fellow, Brookings InstitutionTel: 517-264-3949URL: http://www.glocaleye.orgURL: http://www.ijtihad.org
"patriotism" is a way of saying "women and children first"
More food for thought on the Fourth of July: This isn't critical in the same way as my other "holiday" entries. This is from a speech called "The Pragmatics of Patriotism" by Robert Heinlein (yes the science fiction author) and he actually gives a really thoughtful way to think about these moral questions. :
I first read this speech many many years ago but his way of grounding even very altruistic acts of sacrifice on survival of the fittest is rather compelling and its something that I've found myself thinking about over and over again. An interesting consequence is that even sacrifices made for Pan-Latino, Pan-African, Islamic causes would be considered "patriotism" under Heinlein's definition. The important thing is to make efforts for a cause larger than yourself.
I now define "moral behavior" as "behavior that tends toward survival." I won't argue with philosophers or theologians who choose to use the word "moral" to mean something else, but I do not think anyone can define "behavior that tends toward extinction" as being "moral" without stretching the word "moral" all out of shape.
Selfishness is the bedrock on which all moral behavior starts and it can be immoral only when it conflicts with a higher moral imperative. An animal so poor in spirit that he won't even fight on his own behalf is already an evolutionary dead end; the best he can do for his breed is to crawl off and die, and not pass on his defective genes.
The next higher level is to work, fight, and sometimes die for your own immediate family. This is the level at which six pounds of mother cat can be so fierce that she'll drive off a police dog. It is the level at which a father takes a moonlighting job to keep his kids in college —and the level at which a mother or father dives into a flood to save a drowning child… and it is still moral behavior even when it fails.
Evolution is a process that never stops. Baboons who fail to exhibit moral behavior do not survive; they wind up as meat for leopards.
The next level in moral behavior higher than that exhibited by the baboon is that in which duty and loyalty are shown toward a group of your own kind too large for an individual to know all of them. We have a name for that. It is called "patriotism."
Behaving on a still higher moral level were the astronauts who went to the Moon, for their actions tend toward the survival of the entire race of mankind.
[...]
Men are expendable; women and children are not. A tribe or a nation can lose a high percentage of its men and still pick up the pieces and go on… as long as the women and children are saved. But if you fail to save the women and children, you've had it, you're done, you're through! You join Tyrannosaurus Rex, one more breed that bilged its final test.
I first read this speech many many years ago but his way of grounding even very altruistic acts of sacrifice on survival of the fittest is rather compelling and its something that I've found myself thinking about over and over again. An interesting consequence is that even sacrifices made for Pan-Latino, Pan-African, Islamic causes would be considered "patriotism" under Heinlein's definition. The important thing is to make efforts for a cause larger than yourself.
Sunday, July 03, 2005
what to the slave is the fourth of july?
This is a talk delivered by Frederick Douglass on July 5, 1852.
To check out the whole speech read the above link, but here is an exerpt (which is oddly modern for being over 150 years old):
To check out the whole speech read the above link, but here is an exerpt (which is oddly modern for being over 150 years old):
Allow me to say, in conclusion, notwithstanding the dark picture I have this day presented of the state of the nation, I do not despair of this country. There are forces in operation, which must inevitably work The downfall of slavery. "The arm of the Lord is not shortened," and the doom of slavery is certain. I, therefore, leave off where I began, with hope. While drawing encouragement from the Declaration of Independence, the great principles it contains, and the genius of American Institutions, my spirit is also cheered by the obvious tendencies of the age. Nations do not now stand in the same relation to each other that they did ages ago. No nation can now shut itself up from the surrounding world, and trot round in the same old path of its fathers without interference. The time was when such could be done. Long established customs of hurtful character could formerly fence themselves in, and do their evil work with social impunity. Knowledge was then confined and enjoyed by the privileged few, and the multitude walked on in mental darkness. But a change has now come over the affairs of mankind. Walled cities and empires have become unfashionable. The arm of commerce has borne away the gates of the strong city. Intelligence is penetrating the darkest corners of the globe. It makes its pathway over and under the sea, as well as on the earth. Wind, steam, and lightning are its chartered agents. Oceans no longer divide, but link nations together. From Boston to London is now a holiday excursion. Space is comparatively annihilated. Thoughts expressed on one side of the Atlantic are, distinctly heard on the other. The far off and almost fabulous Pacific rolls in grandeur at our feet. The Celestial Empire, the mystery of ages, is being solved. The fiat of the Almighty, "Let there be Light," has not yet spent its force. No abuse, no outrage whether in taste, sport or avarice, can now hide itself from the all-pervading light. The iron shoe, and crippled foot of China must be seen, in contrast with nature. Africa must rise and put on her yet unwoven garment. "Ethiopia shall stretch out her hand unto God."
"asalam-alaikum , akhi. could you get me a lottery ticket?"
i just had a weird experience. I was at a gas station tonight to put gas in my car. But the person in front of me in line (African-American) goes up to the guy at the register (probably Arab) and says:
"Asalam-alaikum, akhi. Could you get me a lottery ticket?"
He then haggles a little about the price of the ticket pointing out that the tickets are cheaper across the street. Then when the man receives his lottery ticket, he makes a point of saying "Shukran". But then when the Arab man says "your welcome" or something else in English, the first guy makes a point of saying that he should say afwan. Then he gives his salams and quickly leaves with his lottery ticket.
I don't mean to be judgemental and I wouldn't even claim that my own life is necessarily free from equally dramatic inconsistencies. But I'm not interested in turning this blog into a confessional where I tell on myself, at least not for the moment. All I'm saying is that the above exchange was really striking and I thought I'd share.
"Asalam-alaikum, akhi. Could you get me a lottery ticket?"
He then haggles a little about the price of the ticket pointing out that the tickets are cheaper across the street. Then when the man receives his lottery ticket, he makes a point of saying "Shukran". But then when the Arab man says "your welcome" or something else in English, the first guy makes a point of saying that he should say afwan. Then he gives his salams and quickly leaves with his lottery ticket.
I don't mean to be judgemental and I wouldn't even claim that my own life is necessarily free from equally dramatic inconsistencies. But I'm not interested in turning this blog into a confessional where I tell on myself, at least not for the moment. All I'm saying is that the above exchange was really striking and I thought I'd share.
Saturday, July 02, 2005
black loyalists
Here is another early "fourth of July" entry.
Just recently a good Black friend of mine told me that his family had cottage in Canada. And that every year they had a tradition of going there for the fourth of July. Go figure.
Anyway, it seems like a couple hundred years ago there were thousands of Black folks who had the same idea. I need to double-check to make sure that I'm remembering this correctly but I seem to recall seeing a historical special on tv which actually made the claim that MOST Blacks in the American colonies were Loyalists (pro-British) during the American revolution. They realized that the American revolution wasn't being fought for their freedom, and the British were offering land, freedom and security to Blacks who joined them... and according to some sources, hundreds of thousands took them up on it. Many of them ultimately settled in Canada. Check it out.
The Black Loyalist Heritage Society webpage
Another Black Loyalist Homepage
A page on Black Loyalists from the The On-Line Institute for Advanced Loyalist Studies
Just recently a good Black friend of mine told me that his family had cottage in Canada. And that every year they had a tradition of going there for the fourth of July. Go figure.
Anyway, it seems like a couple hundred years ago there were thousands of Black folks who had the same idea. I need to double-check to make sure that I'm remembering this correctly but I seem to recall seeing a historical special on tv which actually made the claim that MOST Blacks in the American colonies were Loyalists (pro-British) during the American revolution. They realized that the American revolution wasn't being fought for their freedom, and the British were offering land, freedom and security to Blacks who joined them... and according to some sources, hundreds of thousands took them up on it. Many of them ultimately settled in Canada. Check it out.
The Black Loyalist Heritage Society webpage
Another Black Loyalist Homepage
A page on Black Loyalists from the The On-Line Institute for Advanced Loyalist Studies
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)