www.talkcyprus.org

[cypezokyli]

i read this in an article in TDN. the quote is out of context, and has nothing to do with the topic that it is discussed on the article as a whole. nevertheless i found this part interesting :

Quote: Mr. Erdogan should be able to understand that Islam is a religion, but Islamism is a political doctrine, an ideology. There is nothing wrong if anyone practices Islam as a faith. But it is wrong to practice Islam as an ideology (just as it is equally wrong to practice any other religion, monotheistic or otherwise, as an ideology). Reasonable men respect the Prophet Mohammed. Reasonable men can only despise the nihilist Mohammad Atta. Reasonable men respect Islam. Reasonable men can only avoid Islamism as an ideology .

IRRESPECTIVE of erdogan and his party and turkey and ..etc , do you think that such a dichotomy as he defines it (islam vs islamism) is a sensible one ?

is there such ideology as islamism (or any monotheistic religion) , and what does it stants for ?
and if there is should people avoid it?

[zan]

I have a great fear of living in either a islamism state or a Christianism state or any other ism state for that matter if that is what you are referring to of course. Ideal religion is at peace with the world, what ever its leaning. Religious idealism is trying to promote only your doctrine imo. That is what is worrying about bush. To me he just seems like another version of a bearded terrorist that the west is afraid of. is Christianism seems to be an overriding factor in rallying the troops.

What does a non believer like me do in a country where these isms exist. My biggest fear is what will they do with me. In my mind I see it as maybe the Jews saw it in Germany when they were being persecuted but before the clearing of the cities and the exterminations. My wife is non religious as well but born a into a Christian family. If religion is forced upon us which way do we go with out doing our selves and our sons an injustice.

Did you know that in Indonesia most of the religions are present but you cannot marry a person of a different religion. One of you has to convert. Mick Jagger found this out the hard way and so did I.

[Birkibrisli]

cypezokyli wrote: i read this in an article in TDN. the quote is out of context, and has nothing to do with the topic that it is discussed on the article as a whole. nevertheless i found this part interesting :

Quote: Mr. Erdogan should be able to understand that Islam is a religion, but Islamism is a political doctrine, an ideology. There is nothing wrong if anyone practices Islam as a faith. But it is wrong to practice Islam as an ideology (just as it is equally wrong to practice any other religion, monotheistic or otherwise, as an ideology). Reasonable men respect the Prophet Mohammed. Reasonable men can only despise the nihilist Mohammad Atta. Reasonable men respect Islam. Reasonable men can only avoid Islamism as an ideology .

IRRESPECTIVE of erdogan and his party and turkey and ..etc , do you think that such a dichotomy as he defines it (islam vs islamism) is a sensible one ?

is there such ideology as islamism (or any monotheistic religion) , and what does it stants for ?
and if there is should people avoid it?

Cypez...I think Islamism is another way of saying Political Islam.
This is the West inventing new terms all the time to better understand (or better prejudge and discriminate) the rest of the world.(Remember the orientalism thread?)

Islamism can also be called the Sharia Law.That is,basing one's political system on Islam.The opposite of secularism,if you like.Fancy wanting to live your life according to a book written some 1300 years ago...They of course take it as word of God,but this one God seems to preach different things to different people!Should people avoid it?I'd say,yes...like the plague.

[Kifeas]

zan wrote: I have a great fear of living in either a islamism state or a Christianism state or any other ism state for that matter if that is what you are referring to of course. Ideal religion is at peace with the world, what ever its leaning. Religious idealism is trying to promote only your doctrine imo. That is what is worrying about bush. To me he just seems like another version of a bearded terrorist that the west is afraid of. is Christianism seems to be an overriding factor in rallying the troops.

What does a non believer like me do in a country where these isms exist. My biggest fear is what will they do with me. In my mind I see it as maybe the Jews saw it in Germany when they were being persecuted but before the clearing of the cities and the exterminations. My wife is non religious as well but born a into a Christian family. If religion is forced upon us which way do we go with out doing our selves and our sons an injustice.

Did you know that in Indonesia most of the religions are present but you cannot marry a person of a different religion. One of you has to convert. Mick Jagger found this out the hard way and so did I.

I suppose then you should also be afraid of living in the Kemalism's land!

As for Indonesia and the prohibition to marry someone from another religion, unless you convert, I remind you this was more or less also the case in Cyprus, under the 1960 constitution.

[zan]

Kifeas wrote: zan wrote: I have a great fear of living in either a islamism state or a Christianism state or any other ism state for that matter if that is what you are referring to of course. Ideal religion is at peace with the world, what ever its leaning. Religious idealism is trying to promote only your doctrine imo. That is what is worrying about bush. To me he just seems like another version of a bearded terrorist that the west is afraid of. is Christianism seems to be an overriding factor in rallying the troops.

What does a non believer like me do in a country where these isms exist. My biggest fear is what will they do with me. In my mind I see it as maybe the Jews saw it in Germany when they were being persecuted but before the clearing of the cities and the exterminations. My wife is non religious as well but born a into a Christian family. If religion is forced upon us which way do we go with out doing our selves and our sons an injustice.

Did you know that in Indonesia most of the religions are present but you cannot marry a person of a different religion. One of you has to convert. Mick Jagger found this out the hard way and so did I.

I suppose then you should also be afraid of living in the Kemalism's land!

As for Indonesia and the prohibition to marry someone from another religion, unless you convert, I remind you this was more or less also the case in Cyprus, under the 1960 constitution.

I will answer you only once on this thread because you have no respect for keeping any thread sterile of the Cyprus problem and you have no shame in promoting your propaganda also.

The answer to your question is; Certain aspects yes but no more than Helenism. What did you think I would say. You think your self too clever by far.

[Kifeas]

zan wrote: Kifeas wrote:
I suppose then you should also be afraid of living in the Kemalism's land!

As for Indonesia and the prohibition to marry someone from another religion, unless you convert, I remind you this was more or less also the case in Cyprus, under the 1960 constitution.

I will answer you only once on this thread because you have no respect for keeping any thread sterile of the Cyprus problem and you have no shame in promoting your propaganda also.

The answer to your question is; Certain aspects yes but no more than Helenism. What did you think I would say. You think your self too clever by far.

But Hellenism doesn't represent or constitute a political or a religious movement or dogma. It is an abstract notion, like Turkishness for example.

As for me thinking of my self being too clever, what do you think? Am I not?

[cypezokyli]

just for the record bir, the writer of the article appears to have a turkish name: Burak Bekdil
http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=57008

so created or not, it is not from the west. :wink:
now i have different things in mind, mooving in different directions... cannot see how this can become a coherent post . but well...

- would you say that erdogans final aim is the sharia law ?!!! what happened to the euro-islam thing (whatever that means) ?

........
i dont know much about sharia law. i guess i have the "west" stereotype of it. but i assume that it is a number of social laws. irrespective if these social laws are /or can be oppresive , i cannot see how it can make economic decisions . (you see ..."a western" understanding of society is very materialistic.. :wink: )
but how can a state based on sharia law make a decision on whether it will privatise the national airlines or not ? based on what ? the materialistic western ideologies (left and right) can argue in favor or against such a choise based on sound theoretical foundations.

if we take germany for example , the ruling party might be called Christian democrats , but the way they try to deal with unemployment, reforming the health system , education etc, is not based on the bible, but on capitalism.

still being not able to change my materialistic way of llooking at things (perhaps i should) i am wondering how a turk voter makes a choise in elections. (assuming a weak left in turkey) , then a turkish voter is faced with a dilemma between an islamist party (which follows "right" economic policies) , and the secularist (which follows "right" economic policies). where right here meaning - capitalism :wink: .
now, if that is not a created dilemma !! people vote for a flag (secularism vs islamism) , and their choise in economy is between a "right" and a "right". unless the debate between islamism and secularism can significantantly affect turkish society in ways that i obviously cannot comprehend!

man...the more i try to understand these turks , the more they confuse me :? :? :?

[zan]

OK Cyp, you have ignored me long enough for me to get the message. I thought you were intelligent enough to understand differing views but I can see that you have adopted an attitude that most have, which is a closed mind. You just seek things that bolster what you have already decided is true. Good luck pal, the wall you are building is getting so high you will soon not be able to see anything but what you have written on it your self.

No hard feelings.

[cypezokyli]

:?:

[Birkibrisli]

zan wrote: OK Cyp, you have ignored me long enough for me to get the message. I thought you were intelligent enough to understand differing views but I can see that you have adopted an attitude that most have, which is a closed mind. You just seek things that bolster what you have already decided is true. Good luck pal, the wall you are building is getting so high you will soon not be able to see anything but what you have written on it your self.

No hard feelings.

Zan...You are being very unfair on Cypezokyli.He is one of the most openminded and truly knowledge curious posters on this site.He is trying hard to understand the Turkish reality...something almost impossible for even the most knowlegeable Turkish watchers.Give him a break will you?

[Birkibrisli]

Cypez...I am not an expert on the Sharia Law myself.But from what I gather (looking at states like Iran who practise a version of it),most of their lives are ruled by codes of conduct and specified practices taken from the Kuran. In extreme cases these are rules like if you steal they cut of your hand,if you sleep with other people's wives you get stoned to death etc etc...Nobody really practices these rules any more but they are there on the books in Sharia law,and largely work as a deterent.And there are safeguards that the west never talks about.For example to prove adultery...you need five (from memory) independent eyewitnesses.
You'd have to be very stupid to get caught practising adultery!!!

Now with the economy...Muhammed himself was a trader,travelling with his caravan of camels buying and selling things (ironically he was only the manager,his wife Hatice owned the business!). The biggest obstacle in Islamic business practises is that charging or receiving interest is forbidden. Given that capitalism largely revolves around interest,it looks at first glance that this would be a problem,But they have come up with various ways to get around it.One way is profit sharing.Another is putting money in an Islamic bank and receiving no interest but interest free loans when you need them. Islam and capitalism go hand in hand in all other aspects,and hard wok is most highly valued...One of the most famous islamic sayings is "Work as if you will never die,but be prepard as if you will die tomorrow!"...

As to how people chose to vote in Turkey.That is easier explained.
They vote according to their interests and convictions,whichever are more important to them at the time. Don't forget that most of rural Turkey are strongly influenced by tribal leaders who tell their peeople which way to vote. Some are influenced by "tarikats",the religious sects and their leaders usually called Sheiks...The secular prefessional classes vote accoding to their financial interests,and hence the dominance of right wing capitalist parties which get votes from all the sections above.
There is a hard core left wing vote which totals about 20% but split amongst many parties making them totally ineffective,except the main opposition party the CHP (the party founded by Ataturk!) which not really leftist anymore but Kemalist,which manages about %10-12 core votes.

The AKP (Erdogan's party) is a mishmash of voters from all sectors,dominated by the mildly Islamic voters and the disaffected right wing voters.Erdogan is a master of manipulating religion to suit his political ambitions,but less effective in delivering results to his followers,as he comes up against the Army,the Deep state,and at present, the President who has significant veto powers. Erdogan's next ambition is to capture the presidency for himself or one of his men,to make it easier for him to deliver promises to please his islamic (not islamist!) supporters.
Next 12 months will be fascinating to watch in Turkish politics...Both presidential and general elections will take place.
Hope all this help mate.I will do my best to answer any further questions on this matter,but please remember that I am away from my computer at the moment (till next Wednesday) and have limited time on the net...

[zan]

Birkibrisli wrote: zan wrote: OK Cyp, you have ignored me long enough for me to get the message. I thought you were intelligent enough to understand differing views but I can see that you have adopted an attitude that most have, which is a closed mind. You just seek things that bolster what you have already decided is true. Good luck pal, the wall you are building is getting so high you will soon not be able to see anything but what you have written on it your self.

No hard feelings.

Zan...You are being very unfair on Cypezokyli.He is one of the most openminded and truly knowledge curious posters on this site.He is trying hard to understand the Turkish reality...something almost impossible for even the most knowlegeable Turkish watchers.Give him a break will you?

As I said Bir, no hard feelings. Perhaps I should take my own advice when I said, on the subject of heroes, he should not expect his heroes to be all things to all men.

I too have some respect for his positive attitude but do not respect his growing "Holier than thou" one. When he writes things like "man...the more i try to understand these Turks , the more they confuse me "., what do we surmise from that. He is well educated and perhaps he is trying too hard to find a simple formula to explain the complexities of life. Coming down a notch or two will not do him any harm.


No hard feelings.

[cypezokyli]

zan wrote: Birkibrisli wrote: zan wrote: OK Cyp, you have ignored me long enough for me to get the message. I thought you were intelligent enough to understand differing views but I can see that you have adopted an attitude that most have, which is a closed mind. You just seek things that bolster what you have already decided is true. Good luck pal, the wall you are building is getting so high you will soon not be able to see anything but what you have written on it your self.

No hard feelings.

Zan...You are being very unfair on Cypezokyli.He is one of the most openminded and truly knowledge curious posters on this site.He is trying hard to understand the Turkish reality...something almost impossible for even the most knowlegeable Turkish watchers.Give him a break will you?

As I said Bir, no hard feelings. Perhaps I should take my own advice when I said, on the subject of heroes, he should not expect his heroes to be all things to all men.

I too have some respect for his positive attitude but do not respect his growing "Holier than thou" one. When he writes things like "man...the more i try to understand these Turks , the more they confuse me "., what do we surmise from that. He is well educated and perhaps he is trying too hard to find a simple formula to explain the complexities of life. Coming down a notch or two will not do him any harm.


No hard feelings.

i tried to avoid, making this personal , but since it continues, i guess i have to give some explanations. perhaps now i understood where the problem lies (i hope :? )

i never thought that the sentence :

Quote: "man...the more i try to understand these Turks , the more they confuse me ".
could be in any way insulting.
perhaps it is simply a direct translation from greek, that doesnot satisfy the politically correct criteria of the english language.
if you think that i insulted you or the turks , then i apologise.


what i wanted to say, is that i am trying to understand the turks ( i also started turkish classes this semester). and my point was that the more i read (in my effort to understand) , i would say i do not really receive answers for my original question, but in the process new ones are born. actually most of the times, in the process of reading i realise that the original question was in fact irrelevant!

and now if i am allowed a question :
zan wrote: OK Cyp, you have ignored me long enough for me to get the message.

how did i manage to give you that impression ?!!!!
i dont have a problem apologising if i did something wrong, but in order to avoid repeating the same mistake in the future, could you be a little bit more precise ?

No hard feelings either :wink:

[cypezokyli]

thank you for the answer bir..

Birkibrisli wrote:
Now with the economy...Muhammed himself was a trader,travelling with his caravan of camels buying and selling things (ironically he was only the manager,his wife Hatice owned the business!). The biggest obstacle in Islamic business practises is that charging or receiving interest is forbidden. Given that capitalism largely revolves around interest,it looks at first glance that this would be a problem,But they have come up with various ways to get around it.One way is profit sharing.Another is putting money in an Islamic bank and receiving no interest but interest free loans when you need them. Islam and capitalism go hand in hand in all other aspects,and hard wok is most highly valued...One of the most famous islamic sayings is "Work as if you will never die,but be prepard as if you will die tomorrow!"...



that sounds really fascinating !
assuming that this is really practised, it gives birth to a whole lot of questions on how the economy runs!

how do islamik banks make profit at all, or even how do they cover their operational costs ?
how do they deal with inflation (as a company) ?
or even more, how would the Cental Bank deal with inflation (in the country itself) ? !!!

the most amazing it is though, is that it questions the fundamental assumptions of capitalism - i.e. that people are driven purely by selfinterest.
things that are accepted in the west as "facts" can be seriously challanged i.e. there is no incentive for a person to give a loan if he will receive no interest. (unless ofcource loans are strictly given within the family circle) .

Quote: As to how people chose to vote in Turkey.That is easier explained.
They vote according to their interests and convictions,whichever are more important to them at the time.
now doubt about that bir :wink:

my main question here was :
between erdogan and his opponent (who i assume he is a "secularist" righwink) , are there any differences on the how they view the economy ? are there any differences on how the two would attempt to deal with unemplyoment, for example ?

i can accept that they might have all kind of other differences in all other social matters. i can accept that that the economic policies are not the prime reason why someone votes for a specific party. but if we were to concentrate only on the economy, is there really a difference between erdogan and his (prime) opponent ?

PS. no need to hurry for an answer. i have all the time in the world :P

[thebrix]

cypezokyli wrote:

that sounds really fascinating !
assuming that this is really practised, it gives birth to a whole lot of questions on how the economy runs!

how do islamik banks make profit at all, or even how do they cover their operational costs ?
how do they deal with inflation (as a company) ?
or even more, how would the Cental Bank deal with inflation (in the country itself) ? !!!

the most amazing it is though, is that it questions the fundamental assumptions of capitalism - i.e. that people are driven purely by selfinterest.
things that are accepted in the west as "facts" can be seriously challanged i.e. there is no incentive for a person to give a loan if he will receive no interest. (unless ofcource loans are strictly given within the family circle) .

This is all indeed counter-intuitive (to a capitalist like me!) and you are correct in assuming that Islamic finance is fundamentally different from capitalism. The best account I have found of how Islamic finance works is:

http://www.darululoomkhi.edu.pk/fiqh/islamicfinance/islamicfinance.html