Cetin Atlan Quotes

This quotation illustrated the extreme polarization between the current fundamentalist Muslims, and the Muslim modernists and the West. Kamal Ataturk, the great leader and stateman who is the father of modern Turkey, is castigated by the author for leading the new Turkish parliament to depose the Caliph – the civil and religious autocrat, one of whom reigned from after the death of Muhammad till his abolishment in 1924. Most of the rest of the world credits Ataturk with being one of the great leaders of all time—one who led a democratic revolution which transformed Turkey into the only Muslim secular democracy, requiring pubic secular European type education for all children, giving women the right to vote (before the U. S. even), adopting a European alphabet and dress, and outlook on life—creating most remarkably a total cultural revolution with virtually no loss of life. No revolutionary leader, before or since has led so extensive a political and cultural revolution, and it was a bloodless revolution. Turkey, into the 21st century, was by far the most powerful, industrialized, scientific and modern nation of Muslims in the world and others were far behind. Yet many Islamic theologian still castigate Atatork for his great achievements as being against the will of God.

The Muslim League was demanding that the Punjab become a part of Pakistan when independence was granted later. However, the Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, and Christians were all adamant that they would not live in a Muslim nation which would soon become a de facto theocracy if the British could not control them. The Punjab was divided between India and Pakistan, and hundreds of thousands died in Sikh-Muslim attacks and then Hindu-Muslim conflict in the Punjab.

At the time, Muslim clerics had a great deal of influence and in many cases legal control over all facets of Turkish society much as exists in other Islamic societies today. They even controlled what was taught in the schools. Remarkably, without bloodshed, Ataturk broke both the power and the influence of the clerics on all official and public activities. Many Turkish Muslims even developed a type of reformed Islam with the relationship between the individual and the clerics one of parity much like Protestant churches in the West. At the same time there was a more orthodox part of the population and while they sent their children to religious schools, they also attended public schools so even the orthodox Muslims in Turkey learned science and modern subjects which are still not taught in most Islamic schools and madrassas.

Bangladesh had fared very poorly as a part of Pakistan. When it revolted and became independent, it adopted a secular government whereas Pakistan had been, and is, a heavily Islamic state. However, the vast majority of Bengalis were Muslim and some were extreme fundamentalists. Rahman was under constant pressure to make the government more “Islamic” and while he did so somewhat, he tried to advocate for separation of church and state. Bangladesh is not as extreme as Pakistan which is not yet a theocracy but religious forces dominate every aspect of the society.

While Perez describes the situation accurately, he does not mention here that there is a minority of fundamentalist Jewish Israelis, and they too do not make compromises easily. Nor do the Christian fundamentalists in the United States. All say, “How do you compromise with the will of God.”

The Torah comprises the first 5 books of the Bible (Old Testament). The Arab countries of the Middle East are not alone in having to content with ultra-religious clerics who want to control the government and use it to impose religious law on the entire population. Israel also has the problem. In the Arab countries to deny being religion is to put yourself in danger including risking your life. So no one really knows what proportion of the population supports the religious imposition from the government. In Israel, however, this is easily determined by polls. The majority of Israelis are secular Jews. Of the religious Jews, the majority of them believe in extensive separation between the state and the religion. But there is a minority of ultra-orthodox which would have Israel to be a Theocracy. They are a minority but they are politically very strong. They receive large financial support from extremely wealthy Americans, have religious political parties, are extremely passionate advocates, and are willing to devote huge amounts of time to make Israel a more religious state and ideally a theocracy. Ironically, there is a great religious and philosophical similarity between the extremist Jews of Israel and the extremists Muslims in many of the Arab nations. They both want a theocracy. The only difference is which religion should the Theocracy represent.

In 2005 Rose published a number of cartoons some of which depicted the Muslim Prophet, Muhammad which offended many fundamentalist Muslims who had a tradition who had a tradition of never depicting the visage of the Prophet. A delegation of clerics demanded an apology from Rose and the country of Denmark, claiming that they and Islam, like other religions, were entitled to respect.