The next day Hafid called to invite me to dinner at a Northern Virginia Arab cafe.
We met at a Starbucks near my parents' house, and then he drove us to a local cafe. I attempted to speak in Arabic, but he continuously brought the conversation back to English again and again, which was understandable. He spoke better English than I spoke Arabic.
He drove with confidence through the intricate patchwork of roads through Northern Virginia's suburban sprawl, so I asked how he knew the area so well. "I work as a courier. All over Maryland, DC, and Northern Virginia. Seven years now. So I know the area very well."
After parking, we entered the cafe. Hafid remarked, "Not like a Starbucks, right?"
It was not. It could have been a cafe in Morocco except that there was a huge parking lot surrounding the building and everyone had come in car. Inside almost everyone was smoking shisha. In the corner a small, older television was running Al-jazeera Sports. Most everyone was drinking mint tea.
As we sipped our tea, he asked about my experience in Morocco and then he spoke about his life in the United States. Hafid works two jobs: he delivers documents and pizzas. He only has Monday evenings off. All other days, he goes straight from his full-job as a courier to work at Papa John's.
A few years ago, through a contact of his uncle, he met a Moroccan woman living in Florida who happened to be from his hometown of Taza. They married soon after and she works similarly long hours. But they're happy with the situation. They will continue working hard and save up for a few more years before starting a family.
I asked him how he liked Northern Virginia, expressing a bit of my own disdain for the suburban sprawl and the necessity to drive everywhere. He disagreed. "It's not dangerous like the black neighborhoods in northeastern DC. Crime is low. And there are people from all over the world here. So everyone is a little bit like you. You can find Indian restaurants, Thai, Vietnamese, Lebanese, Egyptian, Moroccan..."
As the conversation drifted towards my experience, we talked about Islam. I told him about the Moroccans who had been very pushy in their conversations with me. He indicated his distaste for what I was describing. We both agreed that any real conversation has to be based on actual knowledge of the other side, and that knowledge is often impeded by government, society, and religion. I turned the conversation back to him, "How is it being a Muslim here in the United States?"
"Honestly, I don't talk about it very much. I couldn't have the conversation we're having with most people here. So I just stay quiet."
Later I asked him what had been key for him to adjust to life in the U.S.
"Learning English was very important. A lot of immigrants never really learn English...like most Hispanics. It took a few years, but now I can speak it pretty well."
At one point I asked Hafid, "So, do you believe in the American Dream?"
"What's that?" he replied.
I tried to define it, "Well, it means different things to different people, but historically it means that if you work hard and follow the rules then, no matter who you are or what you believe or where you came from, you can succeed in America."
Without even a pause for reflection he answered, "Oh, of course that's true."
Monday, August 30, 2010
Saturday, August 28, 2010
The Glass Half-Full With Sediment
Bending down until level with the counter, I compare the two glasses of water. It is not difficult to determine which contains tap water and which bottled water. A thin layer of brown sediment coats the bottom of one. A hazy mist of other particles, not yet content to join their brethren, continue moving Brownian-style throughout the glass. I am reminded of one of my co-workers: she was treated for kidney stones earlier this summer and now drinks exclusively bottled water. Based on the growing stockpiles of bottled water in the corner stores, I assume she is not alone.
The problem is more than just the sediment. Every day since I returned to Morocco last week the water runs only a few hours a day. In the morning around 9 AM, I hear the telltale splash of our hot water heater beginning to refill. By noon the water is off. To shower or wash dishes or wash my hands, I must use 5-liter bottles I have filled. In the evening the water returns for a few more hours, usually off again by the time the canon goes off to announce the evening prayer. A practicing Muslim in Meknes has no running water during the only hours he or she is actually allowed to drink water.
This is not a Morocco-wide phenomenon. To the best of my knowledge, Meknes is alone among Moroccan cities facing this problem. Nor is it a new phenomenon, a 30-year old Moroccan friend tells me. When he was growing up there were no public water cut-offs in Meknes. This is just another case of bureaucratic mismanagement, he says. The cut-offs appear to be related to rain. The infrastructure has not been kept up, and so the system cannot handle an influx of water after the rains. During the three months of winter rains, the water was consistently off. But this is the summer, and it has been over a week since the last rains.
The problem is more than just the sediment. Every day since I returned to Morocco last week the water runs only a few hours a day. In the morning around 9 AM, I hear the telltale splash of our hot water heater beginning to refill. By noon the water is off. To shower or wash dishes or wash my hands, I must use 5-liter bottles I have filled. In the evening the water returns for a few more hours, usually off again by the time the canon goes off to announce the evening prayer. A practicing Muslim in Meknes has no running water during the only hours he or she is actually allowed to drink water.
This is not a Morocco-wide phenomenon. To the best of my knowledge, Meknes is alone among Moroccan cities facing this problem. Nor is it a new phenomenon, a 30-year old Moroccan friend tells me. When he was growing up there were no public water cut-offs in Meknes. This is just another case of bureaucratic mismanagement, he says. The cut-offs appear to be related to rain. The infrastructure has not been kept up, and so the system cannot handle an influx of water after the rains. During the three months of winter rains, the water was consistently off. But this is the summer, and it has been over a week since the last rains.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Scenes From Morocco: No Morning Coffee in Ramadan
This cafe usually has two or three rows of tables and chairs the length of its property. During Ramadan no food or drink may be consumed until after sunset.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Burning Korans = Not A Good Idea
One of my readers recently asked me how Moroccans were reacting to the controversy over the proposed mosque/Islamic cultural center near Ground Zero. Honestly, no one has mentioned it since I've been back in Morocco, and I haven't brought the subject up. But I have been following the ruckus online and have been disappointed with the way the debate (shouting match?) has developed.
Since my audience is generally Western, let me start with something unfamiliar: a video making the rounds in the Francophone Muslim world that a number of my Moroccan Facebook friends have posted on Facebook.
The video begins with footage of Muslims dressed in Western style, cheering Western sports, and playing Western-inspired game shows like "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?" while these words appear (in French):
It then flashes to a CNN interview with Pastor Terry Jones, whose church has decided to burn Korans in commemoration of 9/11 and protest against Islam. As the Facebook posts testify, this is far from helpful to relations between Islam and the West. The American interviewer is obviously hostile to such a stupid idea, and Pastor Jones cannot respond satisfactorily to his line of questioning. More text appears:
The video then cuts to footage of Khalid Arrachid, an Islamic scholar who was apparently jailed for "defending the prophet in the Muhammed cartoon controversy". I can't find anything online to confirm he was jailed, but in this video he describes the Danish cartoons of Muhammed and then cites a Koranic passage about being "severe with the disbelievers" to demand violence against those who mock the prophet. He decries the shame and disgrace Muslims suffer, calls Muslims to show their manhood and defend the prophet, mocks the "effeminacy" of Europeans and their "freedom of expression", and laments the lack of visible leadership of Muslim nations.
After lamenting the imprisonment of this Islamic scholars for "doing his duty", the above video ends with seemingly threatening footage of a man with a gun trained on someone off screen. The last words to appear are:
It's no viral sensation, but the video does have over 11,000 views now.
A Facebook group entitled "tous contre l'acte de bruler le coran le 11 septembre 2010" ("Everyone Against Burning the Koran on September 11, 2010") was started in opposition to this proposed Koran burning. Currently it has 13, 799 members. The comments on the group's page range from exhortations to defend Islam's honor a la Khalid Arrachid to quotes of Koranic ayas (verses) to prophecies that Pastor Jones and company will burn in hell to pleas for non-violence because violence would only confirm American stereotypes about Islam. It's a mixed bag, but at least some of it is quite troubling.
I draw a few observations from this Facebook activity:
1) Moroccan Teenagers Have a Liberalized, Western Outlook
Moroccan teenagers' desire to defend their religious tradition is only one of their many interests and concerns, and a good number of them actually conflict with the message of the video. The majority of items they post on their Facebook walls represent the Westernizing tendency the video decries: Western sports stars and celebrities, American music videos, and quizzes about love and sexiness. They may strongly and defensively identify as Muslim, but the way their interests and concerns are unconstrained ideologically or legally is not that different from the situation of Westerner teenagers. As time goes on, these tendencies will only strengthen. The Arab world is westernizing faster than many realize.
2) Islam Currently Has Illiberal, Violent Tendencies
The maker of the YouTube video obviously does realize how quickly this westernization is happening, and he is opposed to it. Khalid Arrachid is not alone when he opines on the victimized state of Muslims, the effeminate nature of Western culture, the manly necessity of defending Islam and its prophet, and the possible violence such a defense will require. Now his cries may fall on deaf ears among middle and upper class Moroccan youth because they are financially and politically secure, but they still are deeply angered by insults to Islam and to Mohammed. Moreover, immigrants in Europe (and to a lesser extent the United States), citizens of less developed Muslim countries, and lower class Moroccan citizens often do not share that security, and so their anger is more likely to express itself violently.
3) There Are Legitimate Questions About Islam In Pluralist Societies
These phenomena raise serious questions about how such an Islam can fit into pluralist, secular societies. Those on the right tend to ignore the nuances of these questions as they raise voices and money in crude and xenophobic populism. They gloss over cherished American values like religious freedom, freedom of association, and property rights. But those on the left similarly ignore the illiberal, violent tendencies of Islam as they work themselves into an indignantly righteous rage against the other side's crude, xenophobic populism. They fail to understand how religion works, the historical development of Western political-religious involvement, and, in their intense emotional obsession with this moment in time, the broader sweep of the complicated process of assimilation into the American mainstream.
If Catholics in America are any indication, the prognosis for a future assimilation of Muslims into an American consensus is good. Pre-Vatican II and pre-JFK, there were some very serious questions about whether Catholics, with their illiberal tendencies, could function well in a pluralist democracy. But after theological recognition of pluralist democracy and after a charismatic leader who made necessary concessions to an already existent American consensus on religion and politics, Catholics gradually became a surprisingly normal and uncontroversial part of our nation's political and religious mosaic.
Protesting an Islamic cultural center directed by a Muslim leader who goes on speaking tours for the U.S. government and burning Korans are most definitely not intelligent, serious ways to engage these questions, but even if the overly mediatized, populist right cannot address them as they should, they remain important questions. And until they are resolved as they were with Catholicism half a century ago, they will continue to inspire inarticulate and emotional resistance to Muslims.
4) There Is A Denial About The Islamic Inspiration For Terrorism
Partially as a reaction to the hateful and xenophobic reaction against Muslims as a whole, both secular Westerners and Muslims comfortable in liberal, secular society tend to ignore that attacks such as 9/11 are in fact inspired by a certain interpretation of Islam. Instead, there is a tendency among the secular elite to attribute terrorism's motivation solely to economic and political considerations.
While European colonialism of the Arab world (including Zionism), cozy relationships between the United States and Arab governments, and continuing difficult economic circumstances play important roles in Islamic terrorism, the religious motivation cannot just be swept aside. This form of terrorism is inspired, justified and praised by Muslims with a certain historical and religious hermeneutic...a hermeneutic that will not just go away with a wave of the magic wand of secular liberalism.
Of course, neither can Islam be treated as a monolithic entity, as too many conservative commentators tend to do. Only a small minority of Muslims share Al-Qaeda's ideology, although a good many may sympathize at least in part. But that doesn't detach Al-Qaeda's hermeneutic and actions from the Islamic tradition. "Islam is a religion of peace but not of humiliation", a mantra shared by most Muslims, necessarily implies violence and resistance towards liberal, pluralist Western governments at some point in time.
Since the Enlightenment, for better or for worse, religion in the Western world has been viewed more or less as an internalized set of personal convictions and beliefs. This necessarily conflicts with a religion like Islam that is less focused around orthodoxy (correct belief) than around orthopraxis (correct action). European Islamic scholar Tariq Ramadan has proposed an interesting solution to the conflict. Time will tell if his or some other synthesis will prevail in the Muslim community. In the meantime, non-Muslim Westerners are unlikely to have any positive influence in those debates, but, at the very least, we can recognize that they are happening.
Since my audience is generally Western, let me start with something unfamiliar: a video making the rounds in the Francophone Muslim world that a number of my Moroccan Facebook friends have posted on Facebook.
The video begins with footage of Muslims dressed in Western style, cheering Western sports, and playing Western-inspired game shows like "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?" while these words appear (in French):
While we sing, dance, eat, and imitate their civilization...
...look what's happening in their civilization.
It then flashes to a CNN interview with Pastor Terry Jones, whose church has decided to burn Korans in commemoration of 9/11 and protest against Islam. As the Facebook posts testify, this is far from helpful to relations between Islam and the West. The American interviewer is obviously hostile to such a stupid idea, and Pastor Jones cannot respond satisfactorily to his line of questioning. More text appears:
While a Muslim scholar does his duty...
The video then cuts to footage of Khalid Arrachid, an Islamic scholar who was apparently jailed for "defending the prophet in the Muhammed cartoon controversy". I can't find anything online to confirm he was jailed, but in this video he describes the Danish cartoons of Muhammed and then cites a Koranic passage about being "severe with the disbelievers" to demand violence against those who mock the prophet. He decries the shame and disgrace Muslims suffer, calls Muslims to show their manhood and defend the prophet, mocks the "effeminacy" of Europeans and their "freedom of expression", and laments the lack of visible leadership of Muslim nations.
After lamenting the imprisonment of this Islamic scholars for "doing his duty", the above video ends with seemingly threatening footage of a man with a gun trained on someone off screen. The last words to appear are:
Islam is a religion of peace but not of humiliation.
It's no viral sensation, but the video does have over 11,000 views now.
A Facebook group entitled "tous contre l'acte de bruler le coran le 11 septembre 2010" ("Everyone Against Burning the Koran on September 11, 2010") was started in opposition to this proposed Koran burning. Currently it has 13, 799 members. The comments on the group's page range from exhortations to defend Islam's honor a la Khalid Arrachid to quotes of Koranic ayas (verses) to prophecies that Pastor Jones and company will burn in hell to pleas for non-violence because violence would only confirm American stereotypes about Islam. It's a mixed bag, but at least some of it is quite troubling.
I draw a few observations from this Facebook activity:
1) Moroccan Teenagers Have a Liberalized, Western Outlook
Moroccan teenagers' desire to defend their religious tradition is only one of their many interests and concerns, and a good number of them actually conflict with the message of the video. The majority of items they post on their Facebook walls represent the Westernizing tendency the video decries: Western sports stars and celebrities, American music videos, and quizzes about love and sexiness. They may strongly and defensively identify as Muslim, but the way their interests and concerns are unconstrained ideologically or legally is not that different from the situation of Westerner teenagers. As time goes on, these tendencies will only strengthen. The Arab world is westernizing faster than many realize.
2) Islam Currently Has Illiberal, Violent Tendencies
The maker of the YouTube video obviously does realize how quickly this westernization is happening, and he is opposed to it. Khalid Arrachid is not alone when he opines on the victimized state of Muslims, the effeminate nature of Western culture, the manly necessity of defending Islam and its prophet, and the possible violence such a defense will require. Now his cries may fall on deaf ears among middle and upper class Moroccan youth because they are financially and politically secure, but they still are deeply angered by insults to Islam and to Mohammed. Moreover, immigrants in Europe (and to a lesser extent the United States), citizens of less developed Muslim countries, and lower class Moroccan citizens often do not share that security, and so their anger is more likely to express itself violently.
3) There Are Legitimate Questions About Islam In Pluralist Societies
These phenomena raise serious questions about how such an Islam can fit into pluralist, secular societies. Those on the right tend to ignore the nuances of these questions as they raise voices and money in crude and xenophobic populism. They gloss over cherished American values like religious freedom, freedom of association, and property rights. But those on the left similarly ignore the illiberal, violent tendencies of Islam as they work themselves into an indignantly righteous rage against the other side's crude, xenophobic populism. They fail to understand how religion works, the historical development of Western political-religious involvement, and, in their intense emotional obsession with this moment in time, the broader sweep of the complicated process of assimilation into the American mainstream.
If Catholics in America are any indication, the prognosis for a future assimilation of Muslims into an American consensus is good. Pre-Vatican II and pre-JFK, there were some very serious questions about whether Catholics, with their illiberal tendencies, could function well in a pluralist democracy. But after theological recognition of pluralist democracy and after a charismatic leader who made necessary concessions to an already existent American consensus on religion and politics, Catholics gradually became a surprisingly normal and uncontroversial part of our nation's political and religious mosaic.
Protesting an Islamic cultural center directed by a Muslim leader who goes on speaking tours for the U.S. government and burning Korans are most definitely not intelligent, serious ways to engage these questions, but even if the overly mediatized, populist right cannot address them as they should, they remain important questions. And until they are resolved as they were with Catholicism half a century ago, they will continue to inspire inarticulate and emotional resistance to Muslims.
4) There Is A Denial About The Islamic Inspiration For Terrorism
Partially as a reaction to the hateful and xenophobic reaction against Muslims as a whole, both secular Westerners and Muslims comfortable in liberal, secular society tend to ignore that attacks such as 9/11 are in fact inspired by a certain interpretation of Islam. Instead, there is a tendency among the secular elite to attribute terrorism's motivation solely to economic and political considerations.
While European colonialism of the Arab world (including Zionism), cozy relationships between the United States and Arab governments, and continuing difficult economic circumstances play important roles in Islamic terrorism, the religious motivation cannot just be swept aside. This form of terrorism is inspired, justified and praised by Muslims with a certain historical and religious hermeneutic...a hermeneutic that will not just go away with a wave of the magic wand of secular liberalism.
Of course, neither can Islam be treated as a monolithic entity, as too many conservative commentators tend to do. Only a small minority of Muslims share Al-Qaeda's ideology, although a good many may sympathize at least in part. But that doesn't detach Al-Qaeda's hermeneutic and actions from the Islamic tradition. "Islam is a religion of peace but not of humiliation", a mantra shared by most Muslims, necessarily implies violence and resistance towards liberal, pluralist Western governments at some point in time.
Since the Enlightenment, for better or for worse, religion in the Western world has been viewed more or less as an internalized set of personal convictions and beliefs. This necessarily conflicts with a religion like Islam that is less focused around orthodoxy (correct belief) than around orthopraxis (correct action). European Islamic scholar Tariq Ramadan has proposed an interesting solution to the conflict. Time will tell if his or some other synthesis will prevail in the Muslim community. In the meantime, non-Muslim Westerners are unlikely to have any positive influence in those debates, but, at the very least, we can recognize that they are happening.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Persecution and Freedom: My Position On The Expulsions
These past few months, I've posted a great deal on the waves of expulsions of foreign Christians from Morocco. So I thought I had articulated my own view pretty well. But a conversation I had while back in the United States made me realize that perhaps I hadn't.
Morocco is it's own country and can make it's own laws. We shouldn't expect them to be a Western country because they're not. And Americans who come here should be prepared to face the consequences for breaking those laws. If they proselytize, then they must be prepared to be fined, imprisoned, or expelled.
What's more, I think the evangelical Christian missionaries who were here were aware of that tradeoff. They believed that any eternal award would trump whatever punishment in this life they might receive. So they thought it was worth it, and they willingly paid the price.
In my coverage here, I commented very little on those run-of-the-mill evangelical missionaries. I focused instead on the Village of Hope, on the expelled Arab Catholic priest, and on anti-Christian vandalism.
The Village of Hope had existed openly and legally for over a decade without any problems. Closing them down and closing them down so suddenly had a humanitarian cost. Children who had been with loving foster parents for a decade were stripped from their erstwhile parents forever without even a semblance of due process.
The Catholic priest was also taken, held, and expelled under suspicious circumstances despite Catholics' longstanding and explicit foreswearing of proselytization. The Vatican, unlike any evangelical church, is technically also its own state, and so it has to deal with diplomatic damage if its representatives get in trouble with another state. As a result, they must tread very carefully, knowing that missteps can result in Christians being persecuted or killed in the Muslim world. The fact that the only Catholic priest expelled was of Egyptian descent was also suspect because his existence challenges a commonly shared view of Arab as Muslim. In both cases, lies and misleading statements were given by Moroccan authorities, and the accused had no opportunity to challenge the rulings. A clear explanation and justification of the actions was NEVER given. More bothersome to me, there was little to no investigative coverage of the events by the Moroccan or foreign press, with certain notable exceptions. Injustices will happen; the public should at least have a chance to know about them.
So I focused on these issues because I found them most unfair and underreported GIVEN current Moroccan law and practice.
Morocco is free to determine its own laws and enforce them as it sees fit. But I think we can demand a consistent, honest enforcement of those laws. And that's what I was trying to do.
That being said, I think there is more we can say about traditionally Muslim countries entering a globalized modernity.
On a philosophical note, humans fare very poorly when given freedom. We tend to make poor choices unless we have a strong moral core (for a literary exploration of this topic, see Jonathan Franzen's new novel "Freedom" or just read this week's Time's article on Franzen). As a result, many Moroccans have no problem with censorship and restricted rights that would bother Westerners. They say, "Does more freedom make us better people or a better society?" I'm not sure the answer is clear-cut.
I'm a Westerner, but I'm also a Christian. So I understand what they're getting at. I appreciate our freedoms, but at the same time, I realize that we can't agree on any real set of shared values anymore. That polarizes our political debates and forces us to default to freedom as our utmost value--we don't agree but we're free to disagree and do what we want. In more traditional cultures, there was a more agreed upon view of what human flourishing was and a view of what the state's role was in punishing divergence from that norm. In Morocco, following Islam is part of that norm and divergence from it is not protected. I may not agree with Islam, but I understand the principle. And I also understand the consequences. Despite all its changes, Morocco is still a more homogeneous society than pretty much any Western country. There is a common set of beliefs, allusions, references and norms that everyone knows and follows (or that everyone knows they should follow). And there's value in that sort of homogenization, I think: a shared identity, a sense of belonging, a common moral core.
At the same time, Moroccans are now living in a post-colonial, globalized, technologically-connected world. These days, viewpoints, beliefs, and practices pass very fluidly from culture to culture. And it's impossible to stop. So a Moroccan kid can listen to Jay-Z, dress hip-hop, and use whatever mix of English, French, Darija, and Berber he or she wants. A Moroccan can chose his hairstyle (unlike, say, in Iran) and his marriage partner (unlike in many traditional areas). There is a lot of freedom, but societal unity in Morocco is in the process of breaking down. The upper classes live out European (particularly French) norms. Preferences in movies, music, style, and dating correspond to a consumerist ethic that sees little value in tradition. The days of universal recognition of Um Khalthun, mandatory jelabas, and Islamic courting are over. And so, partially in reaction, many in the lower and middle classes now subscribe to a more stringent, imported brand of Islam that their great-grandparents would not have recognized.
In essence there are two movements: one towards a Western view of freedom as the consummate value and another in resistance of that freedom and a movement towards a supposedly more purified form of Islam that assiduously avoids the pitfalls as well as the benefits of modernity.
So, as someone who sees benefit in societal unity and yet who also views freedom as a least bad sort of option given already existing diversity, I have mixed personal feelings on what would be best for Morocco. I think that Islam (along with other religious systems) serves as a bulwark against the alienating individualism and moral relativism of free Western societies. It provides transcendentally-grounded, ritually-supported moral guidelines on things such as finance and poverty that we in the individualistic, capitalist West would do well to listen to.
On the other hand, I find frustrating the hypocrisy of openly allowing illegal, un-Islamic activities while still repressing a religious minority that would be a natural ally in creating a society that more closely followed those Islamic principles. That's the American in me speaking: the different Christian denominations in early America shared common values while disagreeing on religious doctrine, paving the way for a secular republic that still had a certain sense of societal unity grounded in a European mix of Christianity and Enlightenment rationalism. I tend to think it's a good model, and I don't see why religious liberty and freedom of conscience can't be added to the already expansive list of freedoms Moroccans enjoy.
Of course, that's my personal opinion. I'm not going to argue it with the Moroccan government or with most Moroccans for that matter. I will, however, raise a fuss when they don't consistently and honestly enforce their own laws.
Morocco is it's own country and can make it's own laws. We shouldn't expect them to be a Western country because they're not. And Americans who come here should be prepared to face the consequences for breaking those laws. If they proselytize, then they must be prepared to be fined, imprisoned, or expelled.
What's more, I think the evangelical Christian missionaries who were here were aware of that tradeoff. They believed that any eternal award would trump whatever punishment in this life they might receive. So they thought it was worth it, and they willingly paid the price.
In my coverage here, I commented very little on those run-of-the-mill evangelical missionaries. I focused instead on the Village of Hope, on the expelled Arab Catholic priest, and on anti-Christian vandalism.
The Village of Hope had existed openly and legally for over a decade without any problems. Closing them down and closing them down so suddenly had a humanitarian cost. Children who had been with loving foster parents for a decade were stripped from their erstwhile parents forever without even a semblance of due process.
The Catholic priest was also taken, held, and expelled under suspicious circumstances despite Catholics' longstanding and explicit foreswearing of proselytization. The Vatican, unlike any evangelical church, is technically also its own state, and so it has to deal with diplomatic damage if its representatives get in trouble with another state. As a result, they must tread very carefully, knowing that missteps can result in Christians being persecuted or killed in the Muslim world. The fact that the only Catholic priest expelled was of Egyptian descent was also suspect because his existence challenges a commonly shared view of Arab as Muslim. In both cases, lies and misleading statements were given by Moroccan authorities, and the accused had no opportunity to challenge the rulings. A clear explanation and justification of the actions was NEVER given. More bothersome to me, there was little to no investigative coverage of the events by the Moroccan or foreign press, with certain notable exceptions. Injustices will happen; the public should at least have a chance to know about them.
So I focused on these issues because I found them most unfair and underreported GIVEN current Moroccan law and practice.
Morocco is free to determine its own laws and enforce them as it sees fit. But I think we can demand a consistent, honest enforcement of those laws. And that's what I was trying to do.
That being said, I think there is more we can say about traditionally Muslim countries entering a globalized modernity.
On a philosophical note, humans fare very poorly when given freedom. We tend to make poor choices unless we have a strong moral core (for a literary exploration of this topic, see Jonathan Franzen's new novel "Freedom" or just read this week's Time's article on Franzen). As a result, many Moroccans have no problem with censorship and restricted rights that would bother Westerners. They say, "Does more freedom make us better people or a better society?" I'm not sure the answer is clear-cut.
I'm a Westerner, but I'm also a Christian. So I understand what they're getting at. I appreciate our freedoms, but at the same time, I realize that we can't agree on any real set of shared values anymore. That polarizes our political debates and forces us to default to freedom as our utmost value--we don't agree but we're free to disagree and do what we want. In more traditional cultures, there was a more agreed upon view of what human flourishing was and a view of what the state's role was in punishing divergence from that norm. In Morocco, following Islam is part of that norm and divergence from it is not protected. I may not agree with Islam, but I understand the principle. And I also understand the consequences. Despite all its changes, Morocco is still a more homogeneous society than pretty much any Western country. There is a common set of beliefs, allusions, references and norms that everyone knows and follows (or that everyone knows they should follow). And there's value in that sort of homogenization, I think: a shared identity, a sense of belonging, a common moral core.
At the same time, Moroccans are now living in a post-colonial, globalized, technologically-connected world. These days, viewpoints, beliefs, and practices pass very fluidly from culture to culture. And it's impossible to stop. So a Moroccan kid can listen to Jay-Z, dress hip-hop, and use whatever mix of English, French, Darija, and Berber he or she wants. A Moroccan can chose his hairstyle (unlike, say, in Iran) and his marriage partner (unlike in many traditional areas). There is a lot of freedom, but societal unity in Morocco is in the process of breaking down. The upper classes live out European (particularly French) norms. Preferences in movies, music, style, and dating correspond to a consumerist ethic that sees little value in tradition. The days of universal recognition of Um Khalthun, mandatory jelabas, and Islamic courting are over. And so, partially in reaction, many in the lower and middle classes now subscribe to a more stringent, imported brand of Islam that their great-grandparents would not have recognized.
In essence there are two movements: one towards a Western view of freedom as the consummate value and another in resistance of that freedom and a movement towards a supposedly more purified form of Islam that assiduously avoids the pitfalls as well as the benefits of modernity.
So, as someone who sees benefit in societal unity and yet who also views freedom as a least bad sort of option given already existing diversity, I have mixed personal feelings on what would be best for Morocco. I think that Islam (along with other religious systems) serves as a bulwark against the alienating individualism and moral relativism of free Western societies. It provides transcendentally-grounded, ritually-supported moral guidelines on things such as finance and poverty that we in the individualistic, capitalist West would do well to listen to.
On the other hand, I find frustrating the hypocrisy of openly allowing illegal, un-Islamic activities while still repressing a religious minority that would be a natural ally in creating a society that more closely followed those Islamic principles. That's the American in me speaking: the different Christian denominations in early America shared common values while disagreeing on religious doctrine, paving the way for a secular republic that still had a certain sense of societal unity grounded in a European mix of Christianity and Enlightenment rationalism. I tend to think it's a good model, and I don't see why religious liberty and freedom of conscience can't be added to the already expansive list of freedoms Moroccans enjoy.
Of course, that's my personal opinion. I'm not going to argue it with the Moroccan government or with most Moroccans for that matter. I will, however, raise a fuss when they don't consistently and honestly enforce their own laws.
Monday, August 16, 2010
The Fading of European Colonists
We're living in the dying days of European colonialism.
Yes, the mass majority of European colonialism ended in the decades after World War II, and yes most developing countries have been independent for some time now, but those Europeans who were born in their countries' colonies are still around, living in independent countries and now fast approaching death.
This NYTimes article on Anglo-Indians (those of English descent born in India) reminded me of Morocco. The French generation born in or relocated to Morocco before its 1956 independence range from 64 on up (the oldest French man in Morocco I know is 87), and they're still around if you know where to look. They have little say in government or politics anymore. But some still own important businesses or at least they used to.
They were born in a different world with different struggles and different ideals and different ethics. And they're still around.
But not for much longer.
Yes, the mass majority of European colonialism ended in the decades after World War II, and yes most developing countries have been independent for some time now, but those Europeans who were born in their countries' colonies are still around, living in independent countries and now fast approaching death.
This NYTimes article on Anglo-Indians (those of English descent born in India) reminded me of Morocco. The French generation born in or relocated to Morocco before its 1956 independence range from 64 on up (the oldest French man in Morocco I know is 87), and they're still around if you know where to look. They have little say in government or politics anymore. But some still own important businesses or at least they used to.
They were born in a different world with different struggles and different ideals and different ethics. And they're still around.
But not for much longer.
Friday, August 13, 2010
The Pizza Delivery Man, Part 1
When I do a unit on ethnic foods in my classroom, I reel off a list of restaurants that most medium-sized American cities have: Chinese, Thai, Italian, Mexican, Indian, etc. Most students are unfamiliar with them. So I ask: "What are some ethnic foods available here in Meknes?" The students scratch their heads for a while. They're often unsure. Eventually, one of the students ventures an answer, "Pizza Hut and McDonald's".
Then it is my turn for an uncertain pause. Yes, I think. Both are foreign. Yes, both are restaurants in Meknes. The student is correct.
And yet there is something different between the immigrant-run ethnic restaurants that populate America and transnational corporate franchises entering a new market. But my English class is not the place to explain the difference.
There is a Pizza Hut in Meknes, and I have never been to it. Since my Book-it days, I have been much more likely to eat American pizza from Papa John's if I'm going to eat from an American pizza chain at all.
Last week, when I arrived back at my parents' house, was no exception. There was little in the fridge, and I was tired after a long flight. So I called up Papa John's and ordered one of their specials. Forty minutes later my stomach was getting a little concerned it might not reunite with its favorite American ethnic food. So I called the store back up and asked what was going on. I was told to call back in five or ten minutes if the pizza still wasn't there. Sure enough, before I could pass the news on to my impatiently eager gut, the doorbell rang.
I scampered down the stairs and opened the door to find a dark-complexioned man in his 30's holding my beloved pizza pie. As I reached for the pizza and gave him the cash, he spoke to me. And he spoke to me in an eerily familiar accent, as though I had heard his voice before. The accent itself is no surprise in Northern Virginia, where my parents live. Walking through WalMart is a bit like visiting a poor man's UN with more children.
In my dazed and giddy state, I felt little of my typical inhibitions with strangers. So I spoke to him directly in Arabic, "Are you Arab?"
Taking a step back, he replied in English, "Uh yes."
Pressing on in the Moroccan dialect, I inquired, "Where are you from?"
"I think you know," came the reply again in English. He took another step back towards his car. Foliage hid the large neighboring suburban homes from view.
I continued, "So where are you from?"
"Taza."
"I live in Meknes normally."
"Oh, that's only a few hours away."
Besides a word here or there, he still insisted on speaking English. His shock gave way to a form of amazement. We continued to exchange pleasantries.
A bit idiotically, I asked, "What are you doing right now? Would you like to come inside and share my pizza with me?"
"No. I have to work," came the reply.
Unsure what else to do, I asked him to wait a moment, dashed inside, set the pizza on the kitchen counter, and bounded up the stairs to get a piece of paper to write my number on.
Coming outside I presented him the paper and asked, "Are there any good Moroccan cafes around here?"
"There are some, but more towards DC."
"Well, call me and we can meet to drink a coffee, if God wills."
"If God wills."
"Bye."
"Bye."
Still looking a slight bit startled, he got back into his car and drove away.
Then it is my turn for an uncertain pause. Yes, I think. Both are foreign. Yes, both are restaurants in Meknes. The student is correct.
And yet there is something different between the immigrant-run ethnic restaurants that populate America and transnational corporate franchises entering a new market. But my English class is not the place to explain the difference.
There is a Pizza Hut in Meknes, and I have never been to it. Since my Book-it days, I have been much more likely to eat American pizza from Papa John's if I'm going to eat from an American pizza chain at all.
Last week, when I arrived back at my parents' house, was no exception. There was little in the fridge, and I was tired after a long flight. So I called up Papa John's and ordered one of their specials. Forty minutes later my stomach was getting a little concerned it might not reunite with its favorite American ethnic food. So I called the store back up and asked what was going on. I was told to call back in five or ten minutes if the pizza still wasn't there. Sure enough, before I could pass the news on to my impatiently eager gut, the doorbell rang.
I scampered down the stairs and opened the door to find a dark-complexioned man in his 30's holding my beloved pizza pie. As I reached for the pizza and gave him the cash, he spoke to me. And he spoke to me in an eerily familiar accent, as though I had heard his voice before. The accent itself is no surprise in Northern Virginia, where my parents live. Walking through WalMart is a bit like visiting a poor man's UN with more children.
In my dazed and giddy state, I felt little of my typical inhibitions with strangers. So I spoke to him directly in Arabic, "Are you Arab?"
Taking a step back, he replied in English, "Uh yes."
Pressing on in the Moroccan dialect, I inquired, "Where are you from?"
"I think you know," came the reply again in English. He took another step back towards his car. Foliage hid the large neighboring suburban homes from view.
I continued, "So where are you from?"
"Taza."
"I live in Meknes normally."
"Oh, that's only a few hours away."
Besides a word here or there, he still insisted on speaking English. His shock gave way to a form of amazement. We continued to exchange pleasantries.
A bit idiotically, I asked, "What are you doing right now? Would you like to come inside and share my pizza with me?"
"No. I have to work," came the reply.
Unsure what else to do, I asked him to wait a moment, dashed inside, set the pizza on the kitchen counter, and bounded up the stairs to get a piece of paper to write my number on.
Coming outside I presented him the paper and asked, "Are there any good Moroccan cafes around here?"
"There are some, but more towards DC."
"Well, call me and we can meet to drink a coffee, if God wills."
"If God wills."
"Bye."
"Bye."
Still looking a slight bit startled, he got back into his car and drove away.
Scenes From Morocco: Balcony View of Hassan II
The Hassan II Mosque as seen from a Casablanca balcony.
Sunday, August 8, 2010
American Study Abroad Ctd
The New York Times piece I commented on yesterday provides more fodder for the "other great ways not to understand a culture" file. Jilian York analyzes the journalist's framing of the story:
Sassa, one of Jilian's commenters, sees careerism at work:
The problem, then, is not Americans, but the Times itself. Its journalists are not the average American; they can afford to, or are sent to, places like Cairo from where they report on stories like this. They experience it firsthand, and yet every time, come back in shock at how “strange” and “different” the Arab world is.
One need also ask: If this is how the Times reports on a subject like studying abroad, how can we possibly expect them to be relevant in their news coverage of the Middle East? How can we expect these journalists, who can’t seem to move beyond how “exotic” the Middle East is, to be fair and balanced in their reporting of it?
In my opinion, we can’t. The New York Times has a massive budget (at least in comparison to other media outlets) and has reporters in numerous places across the region. It can, and does, cover stories that other outlets can’t or don’t. And it has a few good journalists who seem to “get” the region.
At the same time, its MidEast bureau shows consistent bias toward Israel and the United States’ occupation of Iraq.
Sassa, one of Jilian's commenters, sees careerism at work:
But the students – I hope most of them *don’t* end up as journalists. From the handful I’ve come across in recent years, many of them seem to be war tourists travelling to the exotic Arab World to confirm their stereotypes, who return to the EU/US to write about the region as ‘experts’.
It all seemed to change in 2003. Before the Iraq war, many of the students I talked to were genuinely interested in immersing themselves and learning about Syrian/Jordanian/Lebanese culture. They had passion for the region, they didn’t just see a career opportunity.
Saturday, August 7, 2010
American Study Abroad and Real Cultural Engagement
The New York Times had an interesting article yesterday on American students doing Arabic programs abroad.
Since 9/11 American students have chosen to study Arabic more and more, and so their time abroad is increasingly in Muslim countries. This is an excellent phenomenon, because the Middle East, and the Arab world in general, is profoundly misunderstood in the United States. Getting to know real people who are different allows Arabs and Muslims to be humanized.
They realize Arabs are people too. This is great! And yet, I can't help but think there is something wrong here, though. None of them confronted anti-American sentiment. Really? None of them?!
Perhaps that merely reflects the extent of Arab hospitality as they distinguish between the people of a country and the government of a country. Perhaps...
I can't speak for the American University in Cairo, but I do know what happens at the University of Meknes in Morocco. Dozens of American students are bundled through a few month program together. Some live with Moroccan families, but most live in apartments and associate pretty exclusively among themselves. Almost none of them speak Arabic or French well. So their access to Moroccans is limited pretty exclusively to university professors, students who speak English well, families who have housed dozens of Americans before, and tour operators. In short, people who all have extensive experience with Americans. Those Moroccans have already undergone the difficult process of cultural engagement with the West or they have a profit motive in minimizing disagreement and disaccord.
But that also means that those students do not have to go through that process of cultural engagement themselves.
Instead, the foreign exchange students at the University of Meknes receive only a superficial encounter with Moroccan culture. Certainly, it's better than nothing, but one can't help but wonder if they are merely taking back a different, more positive stereotype back to the United States.
Americans who stay for longer, learn Darija better, and venture out of American cliques quickly discover that not everyone is singing Kumbaya and prancing around the meadow holding hands. There are fundamental disagreements over religion and politics, and if you encounter a Moroccan a few levels removed from the tourism or study abroad economy (and perhaps a social class lower), he is likely to tell you what he thinks about your country and your faith in no uncertain terms: You have a chance to embrace Islam before you burn in hellfire. American support of Israel is downright shameful. The American military is criminal. Jews are evil, always act en masse, and give money to create and cover up Arab suffering.
Most Moroccans continue to be hospitable in such conversations. They tell you about Islam because they want to help you after all. They let you know about Jewish-financed media conspiracy hiding the truth from Americans so that you will finally know the truth. But such conversations nevertheless make Americans uncomfortable. And perhaps uncomfortable for good reason. It is a discomfort born out of the realization that there is drastic difference--a difference the students interviewed in the New York Times article seem to have escaped.
True understanding between cultures involves a recognition of the underlying humanity that unites us as well as an honest recognition of differences. As long as US study abroad programs get only the first of the two right, we will still continue to misunderstand the Muslim world.
Since 9/11 American students have chosen to study Arabic more and more, and so their time abroad is increasingly in Muslim countries. This is an excellent phenomenon, because the Middle East, and the Arab world in general, is profoundly misunderstood in the United States. Getting to know real people who are different allows Arabs and Muslims to be humanized.
Yet none of them said they had confronted anti-American sentiment, other than occasional disagreements over foreign policy. “I found that whether I was in Cairo, Aswan, Amman or Damascus, people with whom I interacted wanted to talk about common interests — family, sports, music and economics — rather than our struggles and disagreements,” said Richard Frohlichstein, 21, a senior at Georgetown University who spent last autumn at American University in Cairo.
They realize Arabs are people too. This is great! And yet, I can't help but think there is something wrong here, though. None of them confronted anti-American sentiment. Really? None of them?!
Perhaps that merely reflects the extent of Arab hospitality as they distinguish between the people of a country and the government of a country. Perhaps...
I can't speak for the American University in Cairo, but I do know what happens at the University of Meknes in Morocco. Dozens of American students are bundled through a few month program together. Some live with Moroccan families, but most live in apartments and associate pretty exclusively among themselves. Almost none of them speak Arabic or French well. So their access to Moroccans is limited pretty exclusively to university professors, students who speak English well, families who have housed dozens of Americans before, and tour operators. In short, people who all have extensive experience with Americans. Those Moroccans have already undergone the difficult process of cultural engagement with the West or they have a profit motive in minimizing disagreement and disaccord.
But that also means that those students do not have to go through that process of cultural engagement themselves.
Instead, the foreign exchange students at the University of Meknes receive only a superficial encounter with Moroccan culture. Certainly, it's better than nothing, but one can't help but wonder if they are merely taking back a different, more positive stereotype back to the United States.
Americans who stay for longer, learn Darija better, and venture out of American cliques quickly discover that not everyone is singing Kumbaya and prancing around the meadow holding hands. There are fundamental disagreements over religion and politics, and if you encounter a Moroccan a few levels removed from the tourism or study abroad economy (and perhaps a social class lower), he is likely to tell you what he thinks about your country and your faith in no uncertain terms: You have a chance to embrace Islam before you burn in hellfire. American support of Israel is downright shameful. The American military is criminal. Jews are evil, always act en masse, and give money to create and cover up Arab suffering.
Most Moroccans continue to be hospitable in such conversations. They tell you about Islam because they want to help you after all. They let you know about Jewish-financed media conspiracy hiding the truth from Americans so that you will finally know the truth. But such conversations nevertheless make Americans uncomfortable. And perhaps uncomfortable for good reason. It is a discomfort born out of the realization that there is drastic difference--a difference the students interviewed in the New York Times article seem to have escaped.
True understanding between cultures involves a recognition of the underlying humanity that unites us as well as an honest recognition of differences. As long as US study abroad programs get only the first of the two right, we will still continue to misunderstand the Muslim world.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
The Economist on Christians in Morocco
In rather belated coverage of the event, The Economist finally got around to writing an article about the expulsion of evangelicals from Morocco. Nothing new is reported, but because of the far reach of The Economist perhaps now more of the world's citizenry is informed.
The Economist opines on the motivation behind the expulsions:
The whole article is pretty short. So I'll post it in its entirety because it provides an excellent summary of the events:
The Economist opines on the motivation behind the expulsions:
But the motivation for the crackdowns is probably political more than religious. Morocco’s constitution is based on the hereditary position of the king as “commander of the faithful”. Any drift of Muhammad VI’s subjects away from the dominant stream of moderate Sunni Islam might, his advisers fear, diminish his authority.
The whole article is pretty short. So I'll post it in its entirety because it provides an excellent summary of the events:
Morocco's evangelical Christians
Stop preaching or get out
The king is unamused by Christians who proselytise
Jul 29th 2010 | FEZ
EVANGELICAL Christians in the poor world are rarely accused of undermining public order. All the more surprising, then, that in recent months around a hundred have been deported from Morocco for just that. The Christians, mostly from the United States and Europe, have been accused of trying to convert Muslims to Christianity, a crime punishable by imprisonment under Moroccan law, which protects the freedom to practise one’s faith but forbids any attempt to convert others.
Rules against proselytising are quite common in Muslim countries but Morocco has long enjoyed a reputation as a bastion of religious tolerance in the region. Almost all the country’s 32m citizens are Sunni Muslims but churches and synagogues exist, alongside mosques, to cater for the 1% of the people who are Christian or Jewish.
Such open-mindedness presumably appealed to the Christian missionaries who ran the “Village of Hope” home for children 80km (50 miles) south of Fez, a former capital known for religion and scholarship. The 16 aid-workers had cared for abandoned children for over a decade when, in March, the Moroccan authorities sent inspectors to the orphanage, then gave the workers a few days’ notice to leave the country. Witnesses reported distraught farewells between the Moroccan children and the foreigners who had acted as foster parents.
Morocco’s communications minister, Khaled Naciri, said the missionaries “took advantage of the poverty of some families and targeted their young children”. The aid-workers deny pumping the children with Christianity. But sympathisers say that even if they did, a few hours of preaching was a small price to pay for education and pastoral care. There have been further expulsions since then, most recently of an evangelical Spanish teacher.
Local residents are quick to point out that it is not only Christians who have been targets; last year a similar campaign was waged against Morocco’s even smaller population of Shia Muslims. But the motivation for the crackdowns is probably political more than religious. Morocco’s constitution is based on the hereditary position of the king as “commander of the faithful”. Any drift of Muhammad VI’s subjects away from the dominant stream of moderate Sunni Islam might, his advisers fear, diminish his authority.
The American branch of an evangelical organisation, Open Doors, which speaks up for persecuted Christians across the world, is backing a campaign by a Republican congressman, Frank Wolf, to press the Moroccans to be kinder to the evangelicals. Seeing that Morocco is one of America’s closest Arab allies, the American administration has been notably silent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
