Only Connect

E.M. Forster, Howards End, 1910.

...Only connect! That was the whole of her sermon. Only connect the prose and the passion, and both will be exalted, and human love will be seen at its height. Live in fragments no longer. Only connect, and the beast and the monk, robbed of the isolation that is life to either, will die.

This is a plea to Kiwis and to people the world over. Make connections. Make personal connections. Get to know your neighbours, colleagues, workmates, classmates, inmates and especially those from other cultures. So often there is beauty and treasure right in front of us, yet we frequently make no effort to discover it. Perhaps you know someone who seems a bit withdrawn or doesn’t engage with the crowd; an 'outsider'? Don't just make assumptions based on what you see or what you've heard; don’t simply talk about them; talk to them. Break the ice. Ask questions, respond. Discover what makes them tick. Discover their background. We are all haunted by our past to a greater or lesser extent. Take a little time to get to know them. Their history, their aspirations. They will have much to share. New Zealand has a great diversity of cultures - we need to break down the barriers between them. It is sometimes difficult for us, but try to put our prejudices, assumptions, guesswork and fears aside and engage directly. 

As NZ begrudgingly takes in a small number of Syrian refugees, it becomes increasingly important to ensure that our Muslim community here does not become isolated from the rest of the population. In my experience, Muslims as yet have no serious political aspirations in NZ beyond a genuine willingness to engage across communities and see improvements for all. There is little or no Muslim-specific political agenda, militancy, wish for separatism or special treatment. The vast majority of Muslims in NZ follow what you might call the 'fluffy personal version' of Islam. This provides them with a set of rules and regulations about how they should behave, and by-and-large they don't want to control the behaviour of others.

In my view this is because, at the moment, the Muslims here (like most migrants of any race or creed here) are consciously or unconsciously trying to get away from something. People don't choose to come to this tiny set of islands in the middle of nowhere unless you're escaping from something - whether that be the restrictions of your culture, society, family, your past life, yourself. They are mavericks. So it is unlikely that the current set of Muslims would want to impose strict Sharia (law) on themselves or anyone else.

This escapism or maverick nature of the current set of Muslims here is partly a function of the tiny percentage (1%) of the NZ population that they represent. However, as that percentage grows over time, the dynamics are likely to change. It would no longer be possible for incoming Muslims to seek refuge from the world here. The community would start 'policing' itself and the new Muslim migrants would be those who want to join a Muslim community, not those who are prepared to go-it-alone. It would become increasingly difficult for members of that community to express their own opinions; they would have to toe the line.

Toeing the line, Islamic style. (Grand Mosque of Nishapur 27/9/2013)

Slavery, Terrorism and Islam (Hammond P, 2010) provides examples of the typical behaviour of Muslim communities as they grow and the percentage increases relative to non-Muslims. This is summarised in a blog here, which obviously has a very negative bias, but that doesn’t necessarily make it incorrect.

Islam indoctrinates its followers with a sense of supremacy: Islam is the only true faith and will eventually conquer the whole world. Muslims don't do humility very well. 

I'm asking Kiwis to build close relationships, bridges, with their Muslim community to help them integrate, build understanding and trust, help them to see that there is value in other cultures and that the 'infidels' are not all bad. Act as ambassadors. You will be representing your country, your culture, your kin.

This wont be any easy battle. Muslims are extraordinarily prone to  conspiracy theories and have a very deep distrust of the West (esp. the US, Britain and Israel). This mistrust at a very general level is based on decades of official foreign policy, implementation of that policy on the ground and activities of global corporations. There is a real sense of victimisation (IMHO based on the aforementioned indoctrinated self-esteem deficit). The recent opinion poll conducted within Iraq and Syria by ORB shows that over 80% believe that ISIL is an US/foreign made group. There is actually much evidence to support that view. It didn't appear to be a planned outcome, and it wasn't directly controlled, but the outcome was ISIL. Muslims I have spoken to in NZ and globally believe that the outcome was planned - to create an an ongoing state of war in the MENA region; providing wealth for the Western arms and oil industries and keeping the Muslim world in subjugation to the West. Opinions are not the same as facts, but perceptions control our thoughts and actions.

At an interpersonal level things are better. Muslims are unlikely to reject an honest friendly approach. An issue however. is that while individuals can develop good working relationships across cultural divides, these will be seen by Muslims as a 'special case'. This belief would allow Muslims to reconcile their prejudices about the great Satan (the US and Western civilisation) with their own experience. Nevertheless it is a small but necessary step along the road to integration.

The Expendables relinquish their rights to self-expression and thought

The Arabic word 'Islam' literally translates to English as 'submission' - to surrender or resign oneself – and in the context of the religion specifically; submission to the will of Allah.

I would suggest that this in itself is at the root of all the problems faced by the Muslim world today.

Let me explain myself a little. We see a number of significant issues. Political instability – frequently under the rule of a dictator who himself is part of a dynasty that has been in place for decades. Where public feeling has eventually managed to organise itself and overthrow the dictator, he has simply been replaced with another authoritarian regime, or general chaos has ensued.

The political instability feeds, and is fuelled by, a cycle of corruption at all levels of society with personal and organisational ethics driven by the lowest common denominator; with few prepared to suffer the economic disadvantage of unilaterally playing fairly. The ubiquitous corruption makes these societies open to abuse by individuals or organisations (e.g. petrochemical or weapons companies) who see opportunities for personal gain, with little or no regulation. Deep mistrust going back centuries is enshrined in every transaction of all kinds, even marriage proposals, leading to an unhealthy rate of consanguineous marriage with its consequent genetic disorders.

Education and literacy in the Islamic world is woefully inadequate, and an oft-quoted insularity indicator is that “the whole Arab world translates about 300 books annually, one fifth of the number that Greece translates. The cumulative total of translated books since the Caliph Mamoun [d. 833 AD], is about 100,000 - just about the number that Spain translates in one year” (UNAHDR).

Following on from my recent post (below), the World Values Survey maps traditional / religious values against secular / rational values and self-expression. Some aspects of why self-expression should be antithetical to religious values, and the deeper significance of this were not immediately apparent to me.

In the western world since the 20th century there have been philosophers and psychotherapists such as Sigmund Freud, Nathaniel Branden and more lately Steven C Hayes, Russ Harris, who have developed the earlier work of others (including Buddhism, Hinduism) and make it accessible to the West. One of the key elements of their message, is that self-esteem is dependent on high levels of personal integrity, and sources of approval being internal, not external to oneself.

In other words, a key underlying issue in the Muslim world is the subjugation of one's reason to external validation and approval. Society determines what is acceptable behaviour; how you dress, where you go and with who, what you eat and drink, what one can say or even feel or think. The will of Allah is all pervasive, with the phrase “insha'Allah” (God willing) as a caveat tacked onto every planned action. But who interprets the will of Allah? Given that Allah is supposed to control everything – weather, wars, traffic jams, intestinal movements, chemical reactions and the movement of electrons – Allah's will is a self-fulfilling prophesy revealed moment by moment, and nobody can gainsay it. Humans are powerless to predict or change the outcome of anything at all. Anything that happens is God's will and everything and everyone inevitably has to submit to it.

This leaves the Muslim individual with a deep sense of powerlessness. Of being expendable, helpless and adrift in a world that is totally outside their control – even down to their own behaviours and life. Everything is predestined.

In my view, it is that loss of self, that submission to some essentially arbitrary set of rules interpreted via a social hierarchy, that undermines all attempts at rational thought and provides the basis for a strong predisposition towards acceptance of tyrannical leadership. External sources of validation and approval ... always external. Islam literally means submission to external authority.

However, human nature being what it is, there is always a certain amount of double-think going on. And that 'predestination' can be subverted to ones own ends. You can justify your tyrannical control of your citizens, staff, family, wife, children by appealing to the relevant external authorities (Qur'an, Hadith, Shariah, clerics) and choosing a suitable interpretation favourable to yourself. And of course there are masses of suitably oppressive and tyrannical Islamic sources to quote from.

Combine that suppression of rational thought with indoctrination that your religion, holy book, beliefs are God-given and superior to all others, and you have a poisonous situation that can spill over into all manner of evil activity at any moment. That deficit of self-esteem leads to suspicion, paranoia, and conspiracy theories  ... and we see this in the Muslim world all the time.

This really is a recipe for a hellish nightmare with reason, rationality and the right to self-expression lost. Abandon all hope ye who enter here. (Dante)

What do I stand for?

New Zealand is considering a potential redesign of our flag. The official government website (standfor.co.nz) allows the public to contribute their views, values and flag designs. The idea being that the new flag, if we have one, should represent what the people of NZ stand for.

My values fall into two categories I think: 

• Social: Those that affect others directly (the way I behave towards others) and the way I hope they will behave toward each other. 

• diversity, dialogue, freedom of thought and speech, honesty, tolerance, compassion, generosity, education, justice and impartiality. These are the basis of human rights.

• Personal: Internal values that affect the way I think, or aim to think (which of course influences the external values). 

• all of the social elements, plus intellectual honesty (self), intellectual integrity (self), moral integrity (self).

All of these values - but especially the personal values require me to constantly review my thoughts and behaviour and question whether I am being honest and fair in all my dealings. Have I looked at all sides of an argument? Do I need more information? Am I being biased in some way?

The World Values Survey regularly examines cultural and personal values of people around the world. The graph below, maps average value for countries in terms of secularisation and self-expression. New Zealand falls into the top right of the English speaking group, ahead of Great Britain but behind some other European countries.

Given what we know, it is not really a surprise that the Islamic countries are at the bottom left, in traditional / survival mode.

Values are associated closely with ethics and morals. Lawrence Kohlberg proposed six stages of moral development. It is worth reviewing this to see how these relate to yourself. Individuals tend to progress through the stages as they discover incongruities in their current understanding; when they come across a situation that cannot be handled well by their current set of principles. Coming to this realisation however depends on a review process - which not everyone does.
 

Level	Stage	Description
1	Obedience, punishment	No difference between doing the right thing and avoiding punishment.
2	Self-Interest	Interest shifts to rewards rather than punishment. Effort is made to secure greatest benefit for oneself.
3	Conformity and interpersonal accord	Effort is made to secure approval and maintain friendly relations with others.
4	Authority and social order	Orientation towards fixed rules. The purpose of morality is maintaining the social order. Interpersonal accord is expanded to include the entire society.
5	Social contract	Mutual benefit, reciprocity. Morally right and legally right are not always the same. Utilitarian rules that make life better for everyone.
6	Universal principals	Morality is based on principals that transcend mutual benefit.

Societies too, move through these stages over time. Legislation is slowly reformulated over time as society advances, although there is usually a significant time lag between the common view of the general populace and the enshrinement of that in law. It is the role of the judiciary to interpret that law in the context of historic and current events, which allows for legal rulings that push the boundaries further. There are many examples of this in recent times: rights for women, rights for black people, rights for LGBT people. Slowly, we are making progress in the West. The Islamic world varies considerably, but as societies they are still very much in stage four. The imprisonment, flogging, or execution of political dissidents or freethinkers such as Raif Badawi in Saudi Arabia shows this. But hundreds of examples occur daily around the world.

Rattling the cages

During the month of April I was able to temporarily remove my nose from the grindstone in NZ and take time out to visit family and friends back in the UK. Having not been there for almost ten years, there had obviously been some changes there in my absence - and my own perspective has changed.

My friends and family are a mixed bunch; millionaires and paupers. I visited families whose kids had grown up and either graduated from or were still studying at Oxbridge, those in private schools, those across the full spectrum of state schools. Families of stock market traders, those who had small businesses, those who worked as shop assistants, or secretaries, and those unable to work because of serious health issues and retirees.

Though an atheist myself, I also thought it important to remember and visit graves of friends and family who have passed on; and Banaz Mahmod who I never knew personally, but she lived close by and is buried in the Muslim section of the graveyard in SW London adjacent to my own family members.

Banaz Mahmod. 16.12.1985 - 24.01.2006. Verily we belong to Allah and unto him is our return. Q. 2:156

Muslim family members remain in thrall to the ideology when it suits them. Inheritances set according to Sharia principles are inherently unjust, and some women members of the family short-changed by the process are understandably unhappy with their lot. In one case a Muslim community leader died without leaving a written will, but apparently had a conversation with his son expressing his (not unexpected) wish to follow the Sharia. This has resulted in an acrimonious situation between the daughters and sons which escalated to a legal battle lasting years and is currently in stalemate. Yet, these same male family members seem to be flexible on the rules when it suits them. 

Other friends families have married off sons to their first cousins - with the consequent genetic risks.

In the same interval, another family friend died from what may be substance abuse or an overdose. The truth is hard to extract from the remaining relatives. What is clear is that he was a mixed up kid who had gone off the rails and was unable to talk about his situation openly with his family. Why? Generational differences; cultural issues; an inability of the older generation to comprehend new situations or move away from the simplistic absolutes they see as enshrined in the Quran, Hadith and Sharia.

Several family and friends (young and old) are dependent on external electronic devices for life support. These physical 'cages' allow them to continue living, but restrict their ability to move around as they would wish.

Others are suffering the evident ill effects of deep childhood religious indoctrination and/or abuse (emotional/physical). This has a had a deep effect on their ability to live normal lives; working and having normal relationships.

Some Christian family members are wracked by guilt over their 'original sin' and seek absolution daily while refusing to acknowledge their mental health issues and continuing to damage those around them. 

Moderate Muslims (even the children) are feeling that they have become classified as extremists, under suspicion and under surveillance. And in a sense they are extremists - all of them; the Muslims and the Christians. They both have firm beliefs in things that are quite irrational, with little or no evidence. They are emotionally bound up in this so that reason becomes an anathema; a tool to be co-opted and twisted to ends that must be served.

The tragic thing is that none of them can see it; their cage; their symbolic universe (as per Berger and Luckmann). None of them is willing to push the boundaries or study any document that might not align with their world view.

On top of all this, the London area now seems to have every inch observed by security cameras, speed cameras, traffic light cameras, bus lane cameras, road toll cameras, supermarket car park cameras; plus congestion zones and low emission zones. So traffic volumes, speed cameras, speed bumps and potholes conspire to make every journey by car a fairly unpleasant experience. The feeling engendered is one of an oppressive big-brother.

Speed camera

Overall I came away from the UK with very mixed feelings; a thankfulness for my own health and (self) education and the ability to work and to think; and a sorrow that so many of my friends and relations are imprisoned by mental or physical restrictions or cages.
 
So in many ways, despite its shortcomings, I'm glad to return and escape to Aotearoa and its relative freedoms again.

I've got the Paua (power)

New Zealand, led by the 'honourable John Key' finally managed to get elected to the United Nations Security Council back in October 2014 (6 months ago now) ahead of Spain and Turkey. Key marketed our bid at the UN and around the Pacific as one that would provide representation for the small states, giving them a voice. A friendly big brother who would look after their interests.

It seemed to me that this was all really something of an ego-trip for Mr Key; simply giving him the chance to play with the big boys and feel good about himself. 

So how has this played out ... this representation of the smaller states? Have they seen any benefits? 

In early March 2015 it was revealed that the NZ GCSB has been spying on our Pacific Islands for some time and conducting 'mass collection', effectively collecting all electronic data available. There was then some debate about the legality of this, because NZ law makes it illegal for our Government to spy on NZ citizens without a warrant. We then had a series of debates about the rather fine distinction between 'mass data collection' and 'mass surveillance'. GCSB might be collecting data from New Zealand citizens in the Pacific, but they (apparently) filter this out somehow, so it is not 'surveillance' and remains legal according to NZ law. So we're all OK with that then ...(?)

The question still remains - how do our Pacific neighbours feel about being spied on? Now the fact that this is going on is public knowledge, does that allow them to feel more secure? There has been no real public debate about that in NZ. Yet again, its all about our own interests.

Frankly my dear ...

I recently had the privilege of reading a book written by a British author, Mathew Hopkins, entitled Unholy Islamic Mess (available on Amazon). This provides a humorous yet intelligent, and thought-provoking look at many facets of Muslim integration (or the lack of it) into Western nations. Hopkins is not an academic, nor a politician, and is not bound by conventional thinking. Yet he evidently knows his topic well and provides some radical and obviously tongue-in-cheek solutions to the issues. Obviously some of these ideas will never fly, but it is good to put them on the table and at least consider them. Hopkins reveals his religious views to be Deist, or as he terms it, 'a non-aligned believer'. There are occasionally weaknesses or logical flaws in his arguments but they are minor. However, the real strength of his book is also its greatest weakness - Hopkins presents logical options and hopes that logic and rationality will prevail; but religion is not based on logic and people do not make decisions based on logic - we are all ultimately driven by emotion.

Despite my misgivings about the title and initial expectations about the book, Hopkins is not bigoted, racist or patronising. Among many other issues, he appreciates the serious challenges that face apostates from Islam and goes as far as to suggest that the (Western/secular) State provides taxpayer funds to assist them with quite extensive support and rehabilitation programmes.

As an apostate myself, while I don't see this as ever likely to happen, it does highlight (again) the problem of the attitude of Western Kiwis to ex-Muslims. At its very best, when the topic is raised we just get a blank look, no questions, no helpful comments, no direct comments at all; just total indifference... *crickets chirping*... However, the more normal reaction, seems to be hostility and childish ridicule behind your back, yet within earshot. Most sadly this was true even of those I had previously considered to be friends. Personally, to date, I have received absolutely zero moral support. Quite the reverse in fact.

I can only describe this as odd. Kiwis totally failed to live up to my prior, perhaps naive, hopes and expectations of basic decency. Is this ignorance or arrogance on their part? If it is ignorance, it is wilful, since they have had endless opportunities to ask and discuss. Yet it was as if a switch was flicked and like the Borg Collective they simultaneously froze me out and I was treated as some kind of leper. All eye contact was avoided by them and an exclusion zone was imposed. Frankly they just don't give a damn about anyone or anything else outside their own comfortable little world. Given that an apostate cannot talk to Muslim community members or their own family about the topic either, this can be a little unsettling, shall we say. Trying to put an optimistic spin on it, perhaps this may be attributed to a misguided attempt at political correctness - a wish to avoid saying anything that could potentially offend. 

However, in the case of my previous Borg 'friends' I don't think an optimistic view is justified. Friendship carries responsibilities with it. They had a choice, they chose poorly.  

'Friends' ... who were incapable of responding in any useful manner to a request for help to talk through apostasy issues and impacts. Taking a charitable view perhaps their lack of a recipe response was a problem. But honestly, how hard is it to simply ask questions and have a chat about things? It's just normal civilised behaviour. My expectations were not terribly high, yet they could not even grasp the most elementary level of what is colloquially known as 'common' decency. 

This is something where I was so appalled by their behaviour which can only be described as bullying that even years after the events, it stilI has an impact; I still mull it over almost daily and ask myself what could I have done differently? As I see it, there was absolutely no excuse for their behaviour.

Perhaps I just happen to know an unusually high number of zombies. In response, the natural reaction on my part is to say to those people (you know who you are) - well just f**k off then, I'll manage on my own thanks.

So, returning to Mathew Hopkins' Unholy Islamic Mess, I would recommend that all Western Muslims should read it. It will provide valuable insights into how non-Muslims and Westerners see you. It will perhaps help you to see yourselves. 

Also a good read for your average Pakeha Kiwi, Zombie or Borg. Definitely food for thought all round.

The Borg - incapable of independent thought

So ... you're all OK with this then?

So, DAESH (al-Dawla al-Islamiya al-Iraq al-Sham or the so-called 'Islamic State') have surpassed themselves yet again. Demonstrating their arrogance, ignorance, stupidity and cruelty by burning Moaz al-Kasasbeh alive, recording and publishing the act. It really defies belief that these people can think that this is justifiable in any way. Yes, this pilot was on a bombing mission, but this was itself a very late response to the months of hellish tyranny that DAESH have imposed on civilians in Iraq and Syria. Every day brings news of further tragedies.

IS generated a fatwa (religious ruling) that supports them - and actually this wasn't too difficult to do. There are many verses of the Quran and hadith that support acts of horrendous violence in retribution for relatively trivial things. 

On the other hand we have moderate Muslims decrying this, saying 'not in my name, ours is a religion of peace'. Even this reaction has been very subdued in New Zealand. In our little cloud-cuckoo-land Muslims seem to be quite oblivious to what is going on. At a weekend gathering of Muslims, conversation was about local trivialities and terrorism in Pakistan (supposedly instigated and supported by the US of course). Despite prodding the conversation in the direction of ISIL, every prompt was side-stepped.

Public reaction by the New Zealand Muslim community to Daesh atrocities pretty much amounts to Zero. Nada. Null. Silence. Don't know, don't care. Nothing to do with me.

In private, if you can get any reaction at all, the usual ridiculous conspiracy theories are dragged up - its those American Jews that are behind it all obviously, in league with Israel somehow. 

From a public perspective, silence is interpreted as consent. So you're all OK with this then?

Maybe we're living in some kind of lunatic asylum, where the patients have taken over.

At the tail-end of this week, Iraqi Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari made a brief visit to NZ and, treading carefully, invited (not requested) assistance from us. The form of that asistance (if anything) is likely to be humanitarian and training of Iraqi troops rather than anything else. But it seems there is a real lack of willingness to get involved in any way whatsoever, in many quarters. Opponents point to the massive investment that the US previously put into training the Iraqi military, which seems to have amounted to nothing when faced with a real situation. So agreed; NZ involvement needs careful consideration, but to do nothing (or delaying) also raises all kinds of ethical difficulties. 

NZ policy to date, seems to have been ignore them, wait as long as possible and maybe they'll just go away. This is simply wishful thinking - but in keeping with the parochial attitudes prevalent here.