| Submit your comments on this article |
| Arabia |
| Are the Saudis fanatics? |
| 2004-08-22 |
| Terrorist attacks in Saudi Arabia have led many to question not only the ruling House of Saud's prospects for survival, but also whether the kingdom is fundamentally dysfunctional and destructive. Somehow, it seems, Saudi society has produced a stream of violent fanaticism that draws its inspiration from extreme religious orthodoxy. The fact that 15 of the 19 hijackers in the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States were Saudis crystallised a long-held view of the kingdom as a bastion of authoritarianism and intolerance. In some respects, this perception is accurate, but it cannot be applied to the broad Saudi public. On the contrary, it would be a grave mistake to assume that fanatical Islamism fully defines Saudi attitudes toward religion. Between 2001 and 2003, I was part of a team that undertook an extensive survey of values in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, and Jordan. Our results provide a surprisingly nuanced picture of Saudi attitudes. Compared to respondents in the other Middle Eastern countries, Saudis were less religious overall, and their attitudes toward democracy and arranged marriage indicated a moderate undercurrent. To be sure, in all four countries, religiosity is widespread, with more than 90 per cent of respondents collectively reporting that they believe in God, in life after death, and in heaven and hell. But the Saudis appear to be less religious than their fellow Muslims. Sixty-two percent of Saudis described themselves as religious, compared with 82 per cent of Iranians, 85 per cent of Jordanians, and 98 per cent of Egyptians. Americans also appear to be far more religious than Saudis, with 81 per cent describing themselves that way. Some of this variation may be explained by cross-national differences regarding what it means to be religious. For example, Americans may define religiosity differently than Middle Easterners, with perhaps a weaker attachment to religious beliefs than is true in Islamic countries. This might also account in part for the differences between Muslim countries. But the gap in self-defined religiosity between Saudis, on the one hand, and Iranians, Jordanians, and Egyptians, on the other, is so great that it challenges the prevalent perception of Saudi Arabia as a highly conservative and religious society. Indeed, actions speak louder than words: only 28 per cent of Saudis said that they participate in weekly religious services, compared to 27 per cent of Iranians, 44 per cent of Jordanians, 42 per cent of Egyptians, and 45 per cent of Americans. These findings, while running contrary to popular perceptions of Saudi culture, are less startling than they appear. Sociologists of religion have long argued that in a monolithic religious environment, or when religious institutions are closely tied to the state, the overall religiosity of the public declines. It makes sense to think that when state authorities enforce strict codes of behaviour, people tend to rebel and move away from officially sanctioned religious institutions. Little wonder, then, that Egyptians and Jordanians, who live in countries where the state does not enforce piety, are more religious than Iranians or Saudis, who must cope with local "virtue" police backed by the state. Even on marriage, many Saudis expressed surprisingly liberal views. Respondents were nearly evenly split on the question of arranged marriages, with half supporting the idea that marriage should be based on parental consent, while 48 per cent preferred love as the basis of matrimony. Given entrenched gender segregation and paternal dominance, this finding appears to reveal a strong desire for greater individual choice in what has traditionally been a family-driven decision. Finally, the Saudis turn out to be strong supporters of democracy, once again contradicting a popular image of Saudi conservatism. Of the Saudis polled, 58 per cent considered democracy the best form of government, 23 per cent disagreed, and 18 per cent did not express an opinion. Majority support for democracy in a country with no prior secular and nationalist history seems counter-intuitive. In fact, support for democracy corresponds with a number of other liberal attitudes that we found in Saudi Arabia. Supporters of democracy tend to be less religious, more secular, more tolerant of others, more critical of public-sector performance, and more concerned with Western cultural invasion. Beyond the survey data, history has shown that liberal ideas become more popular when a despotic monarch governs people in alliance with a religious establishment. A strong current of liberalism appeared in the late nineteenth century in Ottoman Syria in response to the religious despotism of Sultan Abdulhamid. At the same time, an anti-clerical, secular movement on behalf of constitutionalism appeared in Iran — a reaction to the absolutist alliance between the Quajar Shahs and the religious establishment. In view of the similarities between those historical precedents and current conditions in Saudi Arabia, we ought not to rule out the possibility of reform. Now survey data, too, suggest that Saudis may well begin demanding a more transparent politics and a less interventionist religion. —DT-PS Mansoor Moaddel, a Professor of Sociology at Eastern Michigan University, is the author of the forthcoming book Islamic Modernism, Nationalism, and Fundamentalism: Episode and Discourse |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #12 poor dave in goin have em heart attak .com |
| Posted by: muck4doo 2004-08-22 11:21:37 PM |
| #11 Oh, dear... |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2004-08-22 9:36:20 PM |
| #10 Lol - why not! Now I don't have any locusts, but I do have this... (NSFW) |
| Posted by: .com 2004-08-22 9:19:05 PM |
| #9 .com, let's see if we can't chocolate dip all these locusts and sell them online. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2004-08-22 9:06:51 PM |
| #8 Zen - Lol! Total agreement with you - two days in a row - Frank was right: The Apocalypse is upon us! |
| Posted by: .com 2004-08-22 6:51:55 PM |
| #7 Are the Saudis fanatics? Yes. Does my answer require further simplification for anyone who remains unclear? |
| Posted by: Zenster 2004-08-22 6:49:01 PM |
| #6 Guys, Antiwar put on a Malibu Barbie Burka. Gentle is just another nom de guerre... (pardon my French). |
| Posted by: whitecollar redneck 2004-08-22 2:24:48 PM |
| #5 Gentle, here's a brief explanation of Wahhabism from my ARAMCO handbook. You should take note that every phrase in this book regarding customs and religion was approved by the House of Saud. This new religious revival was carried forward with the same conviction which had governed the Prophet Muhmmad and his followers: all coverts were to be welcomed, but those who offered opposition were to be subdued. Websters on line dictionary defines Subdue: to conquer and bring into subjection : VANQUISH And defines Vanquish, a synonym of conquer, thusly: 1 : to overcome in battle : subdue completely 2 : to defeat in a conflict or contest 3 : to gain mastery over A basic tenet of the Wahhabis is their claim of going back to the true teachings of Muhammed. Teaching and requiring the vanquishing of those who oppose conversion doesn't seem to be the Religion of Peace that you would have us believe, Gentle. |
| Posted by: GK 2004-08-22 12:38:57 PM |
| #4 They need to go back to the true teachings of Islam. They have to stop interpreting Islam by what they think is right, and realize that it is a religion of peace... Bullshit. Islam is founded on the concept of military expansionism. http://www.angelfire.com/moon/yoelnatan/koranwarpassages.htm |
| Posted by: Parabellum 2004-08-22 11:57:29 AM |
| #3 I'm just so not in the mood for your bullshit this morning, "Gentle." The Muslim men have you completely brainwashed and so crazy as to welcome the subjugation and chains of your secondary status as their property. Islam MUST reform and quit waging jihad...OR ELSE. |
| Posted by: GreatestJeneration 2004-08-22 11:19:58 AM |
| #2 They don't need to modernize Islam. They need to go back to the true teachings of Islam. They have to stop interpreting Islam by what they think is right, and realize that it is a religion of peace, and a way of life. |
| Posted by: Gentle 2004-08-22 11:15:00 AM |
| #1 Bin Laden used Saudi's as highjackers to drive a wedge between Saudi an U.S relations.My view. |
| Posted by: crazyhorse 2004-08-22 11:08:24 AM |
