Likelihood of Success

8 Responses to “Princeton’s selective progressivism”

1. Yasir H Says:
   
   November 12th, 2008 at 12:02 pm

   This is silly. You quote Tilghman as saying “I decided that I should join with the other members of this board in encouraging the development of such opportunities in a region of the world where historically they have not been available.”

   So according to her “historically” her stretches back only 100 years because leaving aside the last century or so, women under Muslim rule have “historically” been very empowered, unlike in the west where they were considered property. I’m tired of ignorant rabble, wearing a fake mantle knowledge, spouting rubbish.

   And if there is any apartheid state in existence now, it is Israel or maybe Desmond Tutu isn’t really qualified to say what really constitutes apartheid, right? After all, who is he…

   Saudi Arabia has its problems but not allowing Israelis to enter the country or non Muslims into the holy cities are NOT amongst them.

   
   
2. Ron Coleman Says:
   
   November 12th, 2008 at 12:38 pm

   Yasir:

   What cities are non-Jews not allowed to enter in Israel?

   In what country in the West are women entitled to fewer civil rights than in Saudi Arabia now?

   In what country in the West did women have fewer civil rights 100 years ago than Saudi Arabian women do now?

   
   
3. Ara Rubyan Says:
   
   November 12th, 2008 at 12:46 pm

   Ron:

   You dignify the argument by engaging in it — not the wisest thing to do, under the circumstances. Fact is, sensible people know the answers to your questions. Don’t waste time posing them.

   
   
4. mary Says:
   
   November 12th, 2008 at 2:47 pm

   “Saudi Arabia has its problems..”

   Like the fact that Saudis still support al Qaeda, Hamas and terrorism worldwide through charities like Al Haramain?

   ..or the fact that Saudi Arabia is loathed throughout the Muslim world for desecrating holy relics and graves in Mecca and Medina?

   ..or the fact that the majority of terrorist worldwide are Saudi?

   Even Saudis are willing to admit that their nation is “the world headquarters of religious oppression and xenophobia”

   In the early 20’s, when Winston Churchill and T.E. Lawrence were attempting to prevent Saudis from taking over the Muslim holy places (a takeover that was the equivalent of letting Nazis take over the Vatican), Churchill said:

   In the vast deserts of Arabia, which stretch eastward and north-eastward from the neighbourhood of Mecca to the Persian Gulf and to the boundaries of Mesopotamia, there dwell the people of Nejd, powerful nomadic tribes, at the head of whom the remarkable chief Bin Saud maintains himself. This Arab chief has long been in a state of warfare, raid, and reprisal with King Hussein and with his neighbours generally. A large number of Bin Saud’s followers belong to the Wahabi sect, a form of Mohammedanism which bears, roughly speaking, the same relation to orthodox Islam as the most militant form of Calvinism would have borne to Rome in the fiercest times of the religious wars. The Wahabis profess a life of exceeding austerity, and what they practise themselves they rigorously enforce on others. They hold it as an article of duty, as well as of faith, to kill all who do not share their opinions and to make slaves of their wives and children. Women have been put to death in Wahabi villages for simply appearing in the streets. It is a penal offence to wear a silk garment. Men have been killed for smoking a cigarette, and as for the crime of alcohol, the most energetic supporter of the temperance cause in this country falls far behind them. Austere, intolerant, well-armed, and bloodthirsty, in their own regions the Wahabis are a distinct factor which must be taken into account, and they have been, and still are, very dangerous to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, and to the whole institution of the pilgrimage, in which our Indian fellow-subjects are so deeply concerned.

   The situation has gotten a lot worse since then…

   
   
5. Jack Says:
   
   November 13th, 2008 at 10:45 am

   I just like the term “selective progressivism” as a way to underscore modern political and social formulations of the way things have never been, but then again maybe ought not to be ever thought of in that way as an exercise in what’s all wrong about intending to do the right thing.

   It reminds me of other double entendres, like; cordial disintegration, fashionable disaster, progressive taxation, or controlled chaos.

   I also think there is something uniquely pleasing that the Lions of the Sixties have become the alley-cats of the 21st century. There’s a little bit of progressivism in all of us I reckon. You just need to have the right attitude at the right time for it to really show clearly the mythos of the future.

   There’s also something that kinda makes me kinda smile about the idea of the “King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, a new international, coeducational, graduate-level research university that is being created near Saudi Arabia

   
   
6. marypmadigan Says:
   
   November 13th, 2008 at 2:18 pm

   Suppose I wanna create a research study on how women are different from men in their styles of driving an automobile? What will be the process of review when the project is presented to the Mutawas? ..

   That’s exactly how Islamic “science” works. Islamic scientists start with a conclusion and then work toward proving that conclusion.

   
   
7. Jack Says:
   
   November 13th, 2008 at 3:59 pm

   “That

   
   
8. a nonny mouse Says:
   
   November 16th, 2008 at 10:31 pm

   This process ain’t happening in a vacuum. I remember my alma mater, Carnegie Mellon, and the big meetings and protests and so forths about don’t ask don’t tell and the eeeevil ROTC on campus that was so horrible to the Values, apparently. Wanted to throw us off campus in the middle of Gulf War I, they did.

   They musta solved that issue in their minds since then–big ol’ CMU campus in Qatar. I wonder how many pride rallies they do out in town in Doha.