Re: Islam, Political Islam and Women in the Middle East

In my opinion, this ranting tirade was a real piece of rubbish.

There is nothing "Marxist" about this character's analysis of female 
oppression in Islamic countries; all that is employed is a most 
cursory and biased slander of Islam itself.

It is no surprise that Christian and Islamic texts both contain 
verses that appear in opposition to women's equality. But in reality, 
the Christian, ie Catholic, commands are far more severe and 
denegrating on women than the Islamic ones, which were progressive--
if not radical--at the birth of this religion.

Islam is not the main problem, the main problem is the economic 
conditions which engender extremism, foster backlash, and stagnates 
development in many areas of the Third World. Many African nations 
with no Islamic ties also have quite starkly anti-female stances.

In the scheme of things, Iran is not as horrible as the 
aforementioned rant pretends it to be. The author sounds like an 
American imperialist who just lost her investment in the Shah. Iran 
has more female MPs than America has in Congress, and also has a 
female minister, or vice president. The Islamic Revolution was 
radical and progressive, relative to the hegemony of CIA-installed 
Pahlavi.

Naturally, there is no satisfactory solution to Iran's problems 
without socialist revolution, but the castigation of Islam, blindly 
leading to the castigation of political Islam carte blanche, shows 
the hallmark flaws of zero class analysis. In Palestine, e.g., I do 
not support IJ/Hamas, but this does not mean I will sing my song to 
the tune of the colonizer, ranting about Islamism and moralizing 
about suicide-bombing: everything requires context.

I believe it is possible to win the rank and file of some Islamist 
movements to a socialist solution in many countries, Iran and 
Pakistan included. The Islamists offer much rhetoric, but they have 
no program, and are mere opportunists. Fundamentally, they cannot 
solve the question of Peace, Bread, or Land. Many of their followers 
are most likely disillusioned and poverty-stricken youth, and a layer 
of lumpen-proletariat. 

Castigating Islam is a pathetic and suicidal way of trying to win 
anyone of 1.2 billion people to a socialist program. This can only be 
done on the basis of patience and flexibility; through struggle many 
with their heads on straight will realize that for all the empty 
rhetoric, Islamism is just an overgrown prostitute of the CIA gone 
awry.  

Religion cannot be actively abolished, it must wither away; else 
anyone ranting in Islamic countries with anti-Islamic slogans will 
themselves wither away.

"No to fundamentalism, no to imperialism"
www.ptudc.org

--- In marxist@xxxx, "isci_komunizmi" <isci_komunizmi@xxxx> wrote:
> Hambastegi English Number 121, March 18, 2002 
> Paper of the International Federation of Iranian Refugees (IFIR) 
> Editor: Maryam Namazie; Assistant Editor: Javad Aslani 
> http://www.hambastegi.org 
> 
> In This Issue: 
> * Islam, Political Islam and Women in the Middle East, Maryam 
Namazie 
> *Another Asylum Seeker Commits Suicide 
> * Sign Petition against UNHCR's Violations of Refugees Rights in 
> Turkey 
> 
**********************************************************************
> ************ 
> * Islam, Political Islam and Women in the Middle East 
> Maryam Namazie 
> 
> The situation of women living in Islam-stricken societies and under 
> Islamic laws is the outrage of the 21st century.  Burqa-clad and 
> veiled women and girls, beheadings, stoning to death, floggings, 
> child sexual abuse in the name of marriage and sexual apartheid are 
> only the most brutal and visible aspects of women's rightlessness 
and 
> third class citizen status in the Middle East. 
> 
> This is Nothing but Islam 
> 
> Apologists for Islam state that the situation of women in Iran and 
in 
> Islam-stricken countries is human folly; they say that Islamic 
rules 
> and laws practised in the Middle East are not following the true 
> precepts of Islam.  They state that we must separate Islam from the 
> practice of Islamic governments and movements.  In fact, however, 
the 
> brutality and violence meted out against women and girls are 
nothing 
> other than Islam itself.  According to the Koran, for example, the 
> fornicator must be flogged a hundred stripes (The Light:  24.2).  
> Those who are guilty of an 'indecency' must be 'confined until 
death 
> takes them away or Allah opens some way for them.' (The Women, 
> 4.15).  'Men are the maintainers of women' and 'good' women are 
> obedient.  Those that men fear 'desertion', can be admonished, 
> confined and beaten' (The Women, 4.34).  Wives are a 'tilth' for 
men, 
> which they can go into their 'tilth' when they like (The Cow, 
> 2.223).  Veiling is promoted in the Koran: 'O Prophet! Say to your 
> wives and your daughters and the women of the believers that they 
let 
> down upon them their over-garments' (The Clans, 33.59). 
> Apologists for Islam say that these verses have been 
misinterpreted.  
> They go so far as to claim that there is gender equity in Islam and 
> Islam respects the rights of women.  Regarding the verse in the 
Koran 
> sanctioning violence against women, they say that Islam only 
permits 
> violence after admonishment and confinement and as a last resort. 
> They say, since men would beat their wives mercilessly at that 
time, 
> this is a restriction on men to beat women more mercifully (Women 
> Living Under Muslim Laws, For Ourselves Women Reading the Koran, 
> 1997). In a Gender Equity in Islam Web Site, this verse is 
explained 
> in this way: 'In extreme cases, and whenever greater harm, such as 
> divorce, is a likely option, it allows for a husband to administer 
a 
> gentle pat to his wife that causes no physical harm to the body nor 
> leaves any sort of mark. It may serve, in some cases, to bring to 
the 
> wife's attention the seriousness of her continued unreasonable 
> behaviour.' On the verse that says women are men's tilth, they say 
> the Koran is encouraging sexuality, even though women are killed 
for 
> expressing theirs (Women Living Under Muslim Laws, For Ourselves, 
> Women Reading the Koran, 1997). Regarding the fact that women are 
not 
> to judge or consult, one mullah from Qom using a female pseudonym 
> says: "Or, Let's suppose that in other planets, women are stronger 
> and more learned than men, do we accept their custom or do we 
reject 
> it totally?" (Zanan 4 and 5).  On the Gender Equity in Islam Web 
Site 
> it states that 'Islam regards women's role in society as a mother 
and 
> a wife as her most sacred and essential one. This may explain why a 
> married woman must secure her husband's consent if she wishes to 
> work.  However, there is no decree in Islam that forbids women from 
> seeking employment whenever there is a necessity for it, especially 
> in positions which fit her nature best and in which society needs 
her 
> most.' 
> These 'Islamic feminist' interpretations are an insult to our 
> intellect and cannot be taken seriously.  Islam has wreaked more 
> havoc, massacred more women, and committed more holocausts than can 
> be denied, excused, re-interpreted, or covered up with such feeble 
> defences.  Misogyny cannot be interpreted to be pro-woman even if 
it 
> is turned on its head just as fascism, Zionism and racial apartheid 
> cannot be interpreted to be pro-human.  These are mere 
justifications 
> for reactionary people who want to legitimise their beliefs and 
> religion or reactionary states and movements with a vested interest 
> in maintaining Islamic rules and laws.  They apologize because even 
> they don't want to associate with the outrages committed by Islam 
> throughout the world.  Nothing can hide the fact that Islam, like 
> other religions, is anti-woman and misogynist and antithetical to 
> women's rights and autonomy. 
> 
> Political Islam is a Contemporary Reactionary Movement 
> 
> There are always those who say that we can't blame Islam for the 
> status of women in Islam-stricken countries.  Apologists like 
Jackie 
> Ballard, an ex-MP from the UK who is now living in Iran says 
blaming 
> religion for the denial of women's rights in countries like 
> Iran 'disguised as concern for human rights' is tantamount 
> to 'blaming Protestantism in Britain or Catholicism in Mexico for 
> endemic domestic violence' and to seeing 'paedophilia as a symptom 
of 
> a Christian or western culture'. This is nonsense. Islam is in 
> political power in Iran and many countries of the Middle East and 
> North Africa and cannot be compared to Protestantism in Britain. 
The 
> Bible is not the law of the land in Britain, while the Koran is in 
> Iran; it is not in the constitution and penal code nor enforced in 
> the courts and by morality police in Britain, while it is in Iran. 
> 
> And that is exactly why Islam, and not Christianity for example, is 
> at the forefront of the debate on women's rights in the 21st 
> century.  Islam in political power, or as a movement targeting 
> political power (political Islam), is as much a political ideology 
as 
> it is a religion; it aims to establish Islamic states and rules and 
> needs political power to do so.  This political power has enabled 
it 
> to maim, gag and kill women on a mass scale.  Political Islam is a 
> reactionary contemporary movement that was the Right's alternative 
> during the Cold War and also the result of Arab nationalism's 
> failure.  In Iran, in particular, political Islam was brought to 
the 
> fore of the 1979 revolution vis-à-vis the Left and as a Cold war 
tool 
> and because of an anti 'westernisation' and Islam-ridden tradition 
> dominant in a majority of the intellectual and cultural sections of 
> society. It was in Iran that the Islamic movement became a notable 
> political force vying for power.  This meant that the misogyny in 
> Islam was given a state, laws, courts, the military and herds of 
> police, Pasdars, Baseej, sisters of Zeinab, and Hezbollahs at its 
> disposal to carry out its laws.  In Iran, women were slashed with 
> razors and had acid thrown in their faces, many were killed and 
> imprisoned until the Islamic regime in Iran was able to enforce 
> compulsory veiling and establish its rule. 
> 
> It is Racist not to Condemn Islam and Political Islam 
> 
> This vile political Islam - which has sentenced women who have been 
> raped to death for 'adultery', and has blamed mothers for not 
> satisfying husbands as the cause of child sexual abuse - also has 
its 
> defenders.  Some of them say that women in England, like in Iran 
and 
> Afghanistan, also face violence.  Of course women face violence 
> everywhere but surely the situation of women in Afghanistan and 
Iran 
> are incomparable to situation of women living in France and 
England.  
> And since when do we excuse violations because they happen 
> elsewhere?  When speaking of the status of women in Iran, they 
> compare it with Afghanistan and state it is better.  As if that's 
all 
> those born in the region can expect.  They even go so far as to 
state 
> that women in Iran have freedoms denied to many in the West.  
> According to these racist cultural relativists, it is as if women 
> living in Iran cannot expect more freedoms or don't want them.  
They 
> say Iran is an Islamic society and are incensed when we say it is 
not 
> Islamic but Islam-stricken.  They choose one of the many complex 
> characteristics of a number of people living in Iran and label the 
> entire society with it.  Did they call it Islamic during the Shah's 
> rule?  They go on to say it's the people's culture and religion.  
> They ignore the fact that Islam imposed its rule in Iran through 
> violence and terror.  They say Iran is Islamic so that they can 
more 
> easily ignore the violations committed against women by implying it 
> is people's choice to live the way they are forced to.  In fact, 
> there is an immense anti-Islamic backlash in Iran with people 
> resisting Islam and its state despite the repression.  They call 
Iran 
> Islamic so they can prevent us from condemning Islam and political 
> Islam by implying that any condemnation is an insult to people's 
> beliefs. In fact, they call it Islamic in order to make it so. 
Though 
> it's untrue, even if every person living in Iran had reactionary 
> beliefs, it still wouldn't be acceptable. If everyone believes in 
the 
> superiority of their race, must we respect and accept their 
beliefs? 
> Respecting people's freedom of expression, belief and religion or 
> atheism is one thing; that doesn't mean that we must respect any 
> belief, however heinous.  Of course human beings must be respected, 
> but that doesn't mean that all beliefs must also be respected.  
> Should we respect fascism, racism, nationalism, and ethnocentrism - 
> they are all beliefs after all.  And when we raise these realities, 
> condemn Islam and political Islam and defend women's rights, they 
say 
> we are racists and are promoting abuse against Muslims.  
Criticising 
> beliefs is not racism.  Is it racist to condemn fascism, 
nationalism, 
> capitalism, sexism, religion?  Does a critique of fascism, 
> nationalism or racism promote abuse against fascists, nationalists, 
> and racists?  If we criticise child labour, does it mean we are 
> promoting abuse against children who are forced to work? This is 
the 
> pathetic whining of reactionaries who want to silence defenders of 
> women's rights and frighten them into inactivity and submission.  
> Racism, rooted in capitalism, exists in society and has nothing to 
do 
> with a critique of Islam.  Don't non-Muslims also face racism?  
These 
> apologists go so far as to call it Islamophobia. This is nonsense.  
> Xenophobia and homophobia, for example, are the hatred of people: 
> foreigners and homosexuals.  You cannot have a phobia against an 
> idea.  If we are opposed to racial or sexual apartheid, does that 
> make us apartheid-phobic!  If we are opposed to racism and fascism 
> does that mean we are racist-phobic and fascism-phobic?  Come on.  
> Opposing violations of women's rights in Islam-stricken countries 
> does not serve racism - just like opposing Zionism does not make 
one 
> an anti-Semite.  In fact, it is racist to assume that all those 
> living or born in the Middle East are supporters of Islam and 
> political Islam and that these vile governments and the Islamic 
> movement represent women when in fact women are their first 
victims.  
> Labelling women's rights activists as racists is a dim-witted ploy 
to 
> justify and excuse women's status under Islam and political Islam, 
> and deny women and people living in the Middle East and Iran 
> universal rights and freedoms.  Those who say these things do so 
> because they want to maintain Islam.  They want to justify it.  
> Excuse it.  They have an interest in safeguarding religion and 
> political Islam.  Or at best, they believe women in Iran and the 
> Middle East are sub-humans who actually enjoy being segregated, 
> veiled, stoned, flogged and dehumanised.  Like Islam, political 
Islam 
> is antithetical to women's rights.  It is not just a matter of 
> consciousness-raising and creating a renaissance that pushes 
religion 
> out of the public sphere and eliminating its role in people's 
social 
> lives, but also completely eliminating political Islam and Islamic 
> states and its movement (as was done with Christianity).  Well-
> meaning people assert that we need to separate Islam from political 
> Islam in order to defend rights.  In fact, to defend universal 
> rights, we must have the courage to confront both. Any compromise 
> with Islam is a compromise on women's rights.  There can be no 
> compromise on people's rights and dignity. 
> 
> September 11: The True Face of Political Islam 
> 
> On September 11, the world came to know political Islam as never 
> before.  What happened in New York is happening everyday to women 
and 
> people living under the sword of Islam.  On September 11, the 
monster 
> created by Western governments moved beyond its control and the 
West 
> is now moving to contain it.  The USA and Western governments want 
to 
> contain only aspects of it - those aspects of it that are moving 
> outside of the region.  It has no problem leaving it contained in 
the 
> region to continue its reign of terror.  That is 
> where 'fundamentalism' comes into good use.  It distinguished 
between 
> the Islamists acceptable to the West and those which are not. 
> 
> This is an important moment for those of us who have struggled 
> against Islam and political Islam.  For us, though, none is 
> acceptable.  Just as it not acceptable for women, men and children 
to 
> be massacred in New York, it is unacceptable for them to be 
> slaughtered in Iran, Afghanistan and Northern Iraq.  Getting rid of 
> political Islam is a precondition to any improvements in the status 
> of women and people in the Middle East.  The establishment of a 
> Palestinian state and an end to sanctions against Iraq will get rid 
> of the primary grounds for political Islam's recruitment.  The 
> overthrow of the Islamic regime in Iran will also weaken political 
> Islam considerably.  The Islamic Republic of Iran is a pillar of 
> political Islam; its overthrow is being delayed by Western 
government 
> support.  Those who truly support women's rights must demand 
secular 
> societies in the Middle East.  The separation of religion from the 
> state, education, and a citizen's identity, relegating religion to 
> the private affair of people is not only realizable but a necessity 
> after the experience in Iran, Afghanistan and the Middle East. They 
> must also defend the right to asylum for all women fleeing Islam-
> stricken societies.  It is our task to move public opinion towards 
> people's movements in Iran and the Middle East for secularism, 
> freedom and equality and universal rights and away from both poles 
of 
> USA and Islamic terrorism. 
> 
> The 21st Century must be the century that rids itself of political 
> Islam.  This will begin in Iran. 
> 
> The above is Maryam Namazie's speech at a March 8 conference 
> entitled 'Islam, Secularism and Women in the Middle East', 
organised 
> by the Middle East Centre for Women's Studies and Medusa on 9 March 
> 2002 in London. 
> 
> *Another Asylum Seeker Commits Suicide 
> 
> On Tuesday 12 March 2002, 27 year old Iranian asylum seeker, Mohsen 
> Amri, committed suicide in his room in Handsworth, Birmingham.  
Amri 
> had come to the UK two years ago from Iran. Though he had made 
> several requests for employment authorisation, he had been refused 
> permission to work.  His asylum application had also been refused 
by 
> the UK Home Office on a technicality. 
> 
> This was the third such incident in less than a two-year period. It 
> remains no mystery as to why asylum seekers resort to such 
desperate 
> measures. Why is it that people prefer death to life in the Islamic 
> Republic of Iran?  Mohsen Amri fled a society where representatives 
> of the almighty have turned the lives of over sixty million people 
> into a living hell over the past 23 years. The Islamic regime in 
Iran 
> has denied the citizens of that society any glimpse of hope for a 
> near normal existence. People in Iran have the right to seek a way 
> out of this miserable life. The response of Western governments to 
> this human tragedy has been to close borders, deny asylum and 
instead 
> offer generous support to the brutal regime in Iran so that it may 
> maintain its grip over people's lives. 
> 
> Undoubtedly, the UK government bears the responsibility for Amri's 
> death. With every refusal, Immigration authorities sign another 
death 
> certificate for an asylum seeker. 
> 
> The International Federation of Iranian Refugees extends its 
sincere 
> condolences to the family and friends of Mohsen Amri and reaffirms 
> its pledge to defend the rights of asylum seekers. The UK 
government 
> must grant asylum to all those fleeing the Islamic regime.  Once 
> again we call on all asylum seekers to refrain from self-inflicting 
> harm and heed our plea for organised and positive action to attain 
> asylum rights. 
> 
> * Sign Petition against UNHCR's Violations of Refugees Rights in 
> Turkey 
> 
> UNHCR Ankara 
> Sancak Mah. 
> 12. Cadde 212 Sokak   No.3 
> 06550 Cankaya 
> Ankara, Turkey 
> Tel: +90 312-4411696 
> Fax: +90 312-4412173 
> E-mail: Turan@xxxx 
> 
> We, the undersigned, condemn the inhuman situation and 
rightlessness 
> of Iranian, Iraqi and Afghan refugees and refugee claimants in 
Turkey 
> and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees' (UNHCR) treatment and 
> performance vis-à-vis thousands of refugees and claimants in 
Turkey. 
> We demand that the UNHCR 1. Recognise the right to asylum for all 
> those fleeing Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan, especially women and 
> children; 2. Recognise Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan as unsafe 
> countries; 3. Immediately re-open and review all closed case files; 
> 4. Improve the determination procedures, including the disclosure 
of 
> the reasons for rejection, increasing the number of appeals and 
> interviews and expediting reviews; 5. Provide basic living and 
health 
> needs for refugees and refugee claimants and their residence in 
> cities away from the border areas and outside the reach of 
terrorist 
> agents; 6. Intervene resolutely against deportations.  The UNHCR is 
> responsible for the threats to the lives and safety of deportees; 
7. 
> Immediately resettle those recognised as refugees to a safe third 
> country, including those Iranians who have fled Iraqi Kurdistan for 
> fear of their lives and the inactivity of the UNHCR offices in 
> Northern Iraq; and 8. Recognise the rights of refugees and 
claimants 
> to protest. 
> 
> Name 
> Organisation 
> Country 
> 
> Copies of letters can be sent to: 
> UNHCR Geneva 
> UNHCR, HQPRO 2, Case Postale 2500 
> CH-1211 Geneva 2 Depot, Switzerland 
> Fax: 011-41-22-739-7353 
> Tel: 011-41-22-739-8643 
> E-mail: Hqpr00@xxxx 
> 
> International Federation of Iranian Refugees (IFIR) 
> P. O. Box 27236, London N11 27F 
> Tel: +44 (0) 7730 107 337 
> ifir@xxxx 
> http://www.hambastegi.org 
> 
> Next Issue: Monday 25 March 2002 
> 
> To unsubscribe, please reply to this e-mail and write unsubscribe 
in 
> the subject. 
> 
> 
> Maryam Namazie 
> Executive Director 
> International Federation of Iranian Refugees (IFIR) 
> P. O. Box 27236, London N11 27F 
> Tel: +44 (0) 7730 107 337 
> ifir@xxxx 
> http://www.hambastegi.org


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Stock for $4.
No Minimums.
FREE Money 2002.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/BgmYkB/VovDAA/ySSFAA/B140lB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

"[C]apital comes dripping from head to foot, from every pore, with blood and 
dirt."
--Marx, Capital, Vol. 1, Chapter 31

Community email addresses:
  Post message: marxist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  Subscribe:    marxist-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  Unsubscribe:  marxist-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  List owner:   jplst15+@xxxxxxxx

Shortcut URL to this page:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/marxist

Also take our one-question survey at
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/marxist/polls 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/