How to Overcome the Internal Contradictions in Arab Society: Advice from a Visiting Scholar

The Moroccan journalist Ahmed Benchemsi was the founder, editor and publisher of a French and an Arabic news magazine before becoming Visiting Scholar at Stanford University. He is currently writing a paper on “The Seeds of Secularism in the Post-Spring Arab World.” Last Thursday, he delivered the keynote address at the Couchiching Conference on “The Arab Spring: Implications and Opportunities for Canada.”

Across the Arab world, he said, despite laws prohibiting everything from premarital sex to alcohol consumption, a powerful sub-culture practices these activities while suffering from an overwhelming sense of guilt for not living up to the ideals encoded in their laws.

So, he wondered, how does a culture live with these contradictions? He answered that it is done through an intense “internal dialogue by which Islam is not the defining paradigm of Arab societies – hypocrisy is.”

From Benchemsi’s experience, the best way the Arab world could overcome this schizophrenic internal monologue was by authentically describing the present. He called this process “secularism from within.” That was the way to expunge the guilt felt for breaking and disobeying unrealistic rules. He advised young Arabs to adopt the label of secularism to cultivate the individual freedom that was inextricable from democracy.

“Secularism from within” was really honesty from within, he said. He believed that was what young people should begin practicing, for a society based on lying and cheating was not sustainable in the long term. “Honesty is a revolutionary force. If secularists can label and practice honesty, who knows? They might win.”

About these ads

2 Responses to How to Overcome the Internal Contradictions in Arab Society: Advice from a Visiting Scholar

  1. “Honesty is a revolutionary force” — I like this guy!

  2. In how many Islamic states would one be allowed to question in public the primacy, indeed the exclusivity, of Islam as a guiding principle for one’s life? Would a Secularist Society even be allowed to exist, by the state or by its neighbours? Was the learned professor at Couch an optimist about this? Or just working out a hypothetical that was logically pure?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s