From: L' Ermit (lhermit@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Feb 06 2002 - 04:11:26 MST
[Richard Ridge] I'm left wondering about the merits of this discussion (i.e.
the Nigeria component). I cannot think of a single conflict with an
identifiable religious dimension (I think it is fair to say that that is
true of modern Nigeria - much of the recent violence appears to have been
prompted by the introduction of sharia law which would appear to indicate
that religion is playing some role in the present conflict, if only by
serving as a marker of extent tribal differences) that did not also have
ethnic, cultural, national/ tribal and political dimensions (my suspicion is
that we could as easily be debating any number of conflicts - the word
'nigeria' in this discussion is looking rather interchangeable).
[Hermit] Largely agreed. Note my comment that Islam was adopted (or forced
on and then adopted) in Nigeria only "late in the nineteenth century". As
such, it is a modern veneer, which conveniently identifies some of the
parties to a much more ancient battle, to those unprepared or ill-equipped
to research the matter more deeply. I would also argue that converting to a
particular religious groupings offers benefits to those who perceive
themselves as standing to gain allies through such a conversion. I speak
more to this below.
[Richard Ridge] As such, it seems to me that this debate has been
incorrectly phrased. The question is not whether religion happens to be the
greatest causal factor is surely not the important issue. The important
issue is whether or not religion is exacerbating UTism or dissolving it. I
would hope that it should be self evident that the presence of both
christianity and islam in nigeria has exacerbated the problem. Unless there
is disagreement over that proposition (and I'm willing to bet money that
there isn't) I would have to contend that this is a straw debate.
[Hermit ] I am in heated agreement.
[Richard Ridge] Quotes R Dawkins, The Observer
<snip>
[Hermit] I liked it the first time - and did not need convincing of its
merits or applicability. My trouble with the proposition is that we are
dealing with a much deeper issue, I would strongly suggest a genetically
programmed problem, and one which is closer to the surface (and possibly
still useful to the holders) in most of Africa. The issue of the tribe or
pack. These wars are, to my mind, much more like those of Attica than those
of even feudal Europe. It is an issue of my pack right-or-wrong, and any
attempt to resolve the issue without recognizing this is doomed to failure
just as soon as the next generation of warriors is ready to take up the
fight. In a culture where even the concept of individual land-ownership is
absent, any loss to your tribe is your loss. In an environment which
regularly attenuates an improvident population, being the underdog can be
fatal. On a planet where having others identify with your cause (e.g. via
religion) can yield "programmed support" this rapidly triggers extreme UTism
and a drive to become "adoptable" in the shortest possible time. This would
naturally take the form of political or religious memeplexii.
Regards
Hermit
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:42 MDT