between two worlds...

I found this an insightful piece.

"And there are layers of complexity that add to the confusion. Many young Muslims were born in Australia. Their country demands their loyalty and yet it is involved in a war that, for many, offends their families' religion and culture. International politics, Islam and injustice are regularly discussed in the privacy of their family homes."

"but how can they totally relate to, warmly embrace, or thoroughly respect Western ways when they have grown up being warned, directly or indirectly, against the decadence, the follies and the wantonness of the West?"

I can't imagine it would be easy growing up as a Muslim in Australia. But there was more I took from here. As Christian's perhaps we too should have a similar "identity" crisis as the look at this world - a world that clearly grieves God.

We too should look at the decadance of the west and grieve. (And I think our churches perhaps too often embrace the decadence of the west, rather than flee).

To quote part of an email discussion I was having relating to this –

“I do think, however, that, as Christians, it is something that we need to be aware of and monitor in ourselves. We need to remind ourselves that the way to live and the path to happiness is not through the material but belief in Jesus- a thought that can sometimes be hard to hold onto in today's material world of brands, debt, and the fashionable suburbs etc.” (F)

Which I thought summed it up quite nicely. We can't just let this world and its values wash over us. We need to be shaped by God, (Romans 12:1-2) and stand out from the world within which we are visiting (1 Peter 1-2, Php 2:12ff).

Multiculturalism … (a ramble)

I have been quite struck by the number of articles appearing in print over the last few weeks speaking about what appears to be the dark side of multiculturalism. What I have noticed from these is simply why have we assumed that multiculturalism is a good thing? Sure I’m quite take by the option I have to met with people from different backgrounds, or to go and have dinner at one of the many South East Asian restaurants in Kingsford / Maroubra, or be exposed to music and literature from another world.

Is this really multicultural? As I look at Australia, I wonder if we are more like a melting point within which we have elements of different cultures. Have we moved far from an intolerance of anything different? How do we handle the growing numbers of those from a different culture? (the traditional picture that comes to my mind, is not having a BBQ and invite my South East Asian friends, it’s the Australian on the train telling a group of “Australians” to speak English).

Is multiculturalism, an acceptance of all cultures as of equal value? Does that then mean we are to be tolerant of all viewpoints – perhaps this is were multiculturalism breaks down. To what point are we willing to extend our tolerance, is there a final line of tolerance. Do we, or should we, condemn practices of different cultures. Would a truly multicultural society allow dual legal systems – that is, should we try Muslims under Islamic law.

I do value all that people bring to Australia – I love the fact that I am able to watch a German, French, Iranian or Indian film. It adds to the rich fabric of life in Australia. I perhaps am concerned though, and this is as much a criticism of Australians as of those who seek to live here, in Australia we seem to have ethnic enclaves within our society. Our coldness towards other nationalities, perhaps leads them to be isolationist, and their isolationism, leads us to be cold. I’m not really sure how to deal with this. I mean within Christian circles we might foster this by having mono-cultural bibles studies, mono-cultural church congregations, surely we can learn from each other? In a sense, God has brought the mission field to us.

I wonder if this analogy works – to an extent the world is like our classroom, or perhaps my university lecture room. Its filled with about 200 people who have 200 different stories, 200 frameworks from which to look at the world. And we better understand the subject if we spend time seeking to understand these frameworks. Our world is our neighbourhood and an “us” and “them” mentality is not going to help here.

Hmm. I’ve wondered quite far from the articles, and perhaps like a yatch – all of which seem to be saying that our tolerance of others intolerance is getting us into trouble. I guess my comment here is we probably have more in common than we realise. And the differences between a group of anglo-australians 'would' potentially be greater than between say an Australian, and an Iraqi.

Another thougt I had was that perhaps we need to train ourselves not to think in categories, we have archival footage in our brain with which we associate Muslims etc, to speed up thinking. However all it really does is accentuates our error. And we need to train the media to stop doing that – to stop using archival footage, and make us think critically again.

Thinking back to 2001 - after 11 September there was a great silence – dissent was not allowed, criticism of the government was framed as disloyalty, or worse – treason.

Another thing I've read was Muslim's loyalty being to Allah, not the state, but not a word about the Christian, whose loyalty is to God above the state too.

Usual caveats apply: This opinion was posted by Duncan at 9.49pm, there is no guarantee that Duncan will think the same things at 9.50pm, or tomorrow. And I look forward to other thoughts or comments.

The Catch-up post..

The calender has brought it to my attention I've not posted here, or anywhere really for a while. Apologies for this.

In summary since the last rumminations on this blog.

:: I've been spending a bit of time at my work's biennial conference. Despite feeling slightly busy, I was relieved that the conference went well. Only regret as always that I didn't get to more of it. There was an interesting forum on God and State (Which I intend to blog about soonish).

:: I've been intrigued by the number of articles about multiculturalism since the London bombing, expect a ramble on that shortly too.

:: I have just got back from Byron Bay (sans functional glasses), after attending Splendour in the Grass, with Joe, and G. Brief review: Of the lineup, the bands I saw the most of were, Athlete, Sarah Blasko, Decoder Ring, Beautiful Girls, Bloc Party, Interpol, Finn Brothers, and Moby. My favourite act was Interpol (brilliant tight set), followed closely by the Finn Brothers (crowd particpation was great) and Sarah Blasko (of which I hadn't heard much - but she was great to listen too).

The surprise of the weekend was Moby - I've not really heard much, but his set was great. (by that point we'd pretty much made it to about the third, fourth row, dead centre).

And while the music was great, spending a weekend with Joe, and G was especially great.

Anyway - I will also try to post more regularly here...

Links

Labour Party, Of the True Believer[via The Age]
Its about balance in life not payment [via SMH]
Religion used to justify anything[via The Heckler]

The Cost of Supporting the Swans or Why I'll go Gray Before my Time ...

Found an article in Saturday's Herald which basically explains while I'll end up with gray hairs sooner rather than later.

It appears my beloved Swans are the league leaders in matches decided by one point. The Swans and their opponents have been seperated by one point on 62 occasions. Of these 62 games, none is more famous than the 1996 Preliminary Final against Essendon. With scores level, all Tony Lockett needed to do was score and the Swans would be into their first Grand Final since 1945. Lockett scored what probably remains the clubs most significant point.

The Swans have won 31 of their games decided by 1 point and lost the other 31. I would be interested in having a look at how many Swans games have been decided by a margin of less than twelve.

Postscript: After beating Collingwood by 1 point, then losing to Richmond by 1, the Sydney Swans beat Geelong on Saturday night by 54 points.

... a dangerous idea, that almost makes sense ...

Thursday night, our netball game was halted with the news of multiple bombings in London, news which has dominated the newspapers and television since. Time to reflect on the issue I suspect. I have been reading a number of the editorial pieces and speeches following the bombing.

I was really struck by this piece spoken by the Mayor of London (Ken Livingstone).

This was not a terrorist attack against the mighty and the powerful. It was not aimed at Presidents or Prime Ministers. It was aimed at ordinary, working-class Londoners, black and white, Muslim and Christian, Hindu and Jew, young and old. It was an indiscriminate attempt to slaughter, irrespective of any considerations for age, for class, for religion, or whatever …

[And to the terrorists]:

I know that you personally do not fear giving up your own life in order to take others - that is why you are so dangerous. But I know you fear that you may fail in your long-term objective to destroy our free society and I can show you why you will fail.

In the days that follow look at our airports, look at our sea ports and look at our railway stations and, even after your cowardly attack, you will see that people from the rest of Britain, people from around the world will arrive in London to become Londoners and to fulfill their dreams and achieve their potential.

They choose to come to London, as so many have come before because they come to be free, they come to live the life they choose, they come to be able to be themselves. They flee you because you tell them how they should live. They don't want that and nothing you do, however many of us you kill, will stop that flight to our city where freedom is strong and where people can live in harmony with one another. Whatever you do, however many you kill, you will fail."

The War against Terror is not a conventional war. The combatants are not nations, the victims are not solely the powerful; the desired outcome is the creation of fear amongst the public. Terrorism is a battle of hearts and minds, causalities increasing not decreasing resolve. It is not a war that can be won. It’s a blind love, and faith in their ideology that wills the combatants to fight, even to the point of giving their lives; a blind resolve compelling Westerners to return to work using the tube the following day.

But we do need to seek to understand the mind and motivation of the terrorist, what is causing them to pursue this course of action (not ever condoning their action).

The war on terrorism will be won when our ideology overcomes theirs. It’s a trifle ironic that the day the bombs went off in London the G8 were discussing plans to increase aid to Africa. This is the ideology that we would seek to prevail.

Perhaps another thing that I’ve noticed this time is the number of Islamic voices condemning the terrorist bombings, and saying the ideology of hate has no place in either their religion or society. I hear too many Christian voices now saying that this is part of their religion (as it should be practiced). We need to understand each other, maintain a dialogue between the West, and the ideology. I find it a trifle ironic, that a nation that prides itself on being a democracy would seek to force other nations to be democratic.

I think there is a complex interplay of factors in the production of terrorists. I think it is clear that the War on Terror is producing terrorists, poverty, and also ‘lack of liberties’ have also been talked about as causes. I don’t think liberty and democracy are necessarily ‘inoculations’ against terrorism. But I would be interesting to read information speaking on the link between economic development, democratic ideology, and religion.

A New Day

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”

And he who was seated on the throne said, “Behold, I am making all things new.” Also he said, “Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.”

Revelation 21:1-5

More on Zimbabwe's tour of NZ

"The [NZ] Government also said it would refuse to issue visas to the governor of Zimbabwe's central bank, and the national cricket team, which had planned to tour in December. But the Prime Minister, Helen Clark, said it remained an open question whether New Zealand's national side would play a series of games in Zimbabwe in August as it is contracted to do." [SMH]

Views of the NZ public, published by the New Zealand Herald on the New Zealand's team tour of Zimbabwe. Rather than refusing to let the Zimbabwean team tour, the NZ team should inspite of the fine, refuse to tour Zimbabwe.

Music and Social Action

Following on from yesterday's post, what role does Music play? Should musicians speak about political issues from the stage, or actors speaking from the screen – do they have the right to speak. What value is there in artists running partisan concerts? I wonder what provokes people to go – I guess perhaps its in part is because they like bands who are socially and politically aware.

Bono, since the Vertigo tour began in March this year has been spending a few moments from the stage, during the introduction to the bands hit One talking about “Making Poverty History”, asking the audience to text their support to their nations leader, concluding by saying ‘We are more powerful when we work together’.

Which I guess prompted Nana Mouskouri comments in Thursday’s [SM] Herald that; "I think that you cannot force the G8 to decide by having thousands of people in front of them”. And I want to say that there is a degree of truth here, but it does say to the government that this is an issue the people feel strongly about, and that’s not a bad thing.

U2 though are no stranger to controversy here, having recorded Sunday Bloody Sunday, and during the Joshua Tree Tour, making comment about the bombing of Einskillen in 1987, including satellite links to Sarajevo on their Zoo TV tour, and more recently during the bands 1998 PopMart tour on stage in Santiago, Chile, Bono spoke to Pinochet calling him to account for the actions of his regime, and in Assayas's book Bono comments that while some booed, others cheered. At the end of the concert, they crowd were all cheering, suggesting that U2's fans may be politcal they don't necessarily share the bands politics.

I think, it is great to see bands with a political conscience – yes, in the end they may not be listened to, but its valuable that they air their views. Celebrity’s have a currency, and I would like to see them use it.

+++

And on the concerts: the highlights were Pink Floyd's set (Wish You Were Here, and Comfortably Numb stood out), R.E.M., Coldplay, Madonna and U2 were great (especially One).

Musings from the Long White Cloud

One of the things that struck me while I was in New Zealand last week was comments by New Zealand’s Foreign Minister on New Zealand’s tour of Zimbabwe, and Zimbabwe’s return tour later this year – from my recollections he is seeking to cancel both NZ’s tour, and finding a manner in which to prevent Zimbabwe from touring New Zealand (which I suspect would be refusing to grant the players Visa’s allowing entry to NZ – which would be against the spirit of law), and these measures taken because of the actions of Mugabe’s government in Zimbabwe.

The questions begged by this is should sport become involved in politics. Sports players and fans are not politicians, but both are able to take political action, the players, by not playing, and the spectators by not showing up – both of these are political statements, and send a message. But both actions leave innocent victims, in the case of the NZ cricket tour, the Zimbabwe Cricket team who are not responsible for the government of this action, the fans robbed of seeing cricket. Though, indifference does not really sit well either, and to my conscience is perhaps the greater crime, and it would state clearly where NZ stands. [And even if they were to incur a fine for not touring, would it be worth making the point?]

But to remove idealism – what affect does sport have – that is what did the ban on Springbok tours have on the South African government, and New Zealand given the division the policy caused in 1981 in New Zealand, when NZ became two nations, one inside the stadium hoping to enjoy rugby, and the other outside the stadium, protesting a nations policies.

Thinking over it some more, it seems hypocritical for a nation on one hand to be courting a trade agreement with China, whose human rights record is not the best, and on the other lecturing Zimbabwe about its human rights record, consistency is perhaps important.

Though, let me say, I would think that a foreign minister would better serve his time if he spent more energy lobbying for political action rather than preventing a sports tour.

Turn over the page..

Before I left for NZ I bought Michka Assayas work Bono on Bono. This is the type of book I love. It is essentially a series of interviews of Bono conducted by Michka. In my words, it is the dinner conversation that I always wanted to have with Bono. Bono speaks of his childhood, his family, the band and their music, but more significantly to me he speaks of Africa, the Drop the Debt campaign, Live Aid, Ireland and his views on Christianity. I will post a few excerpts as I read through this book. Seriously, forget U2’s music, Bono is worth listening to, as he speaks about Africa. He’s not partisan; he is passionate, and promoting an issue that has hardly had a drop of ink spilt in anger. Can Bono save the world, no. Will we "make poverty history", no. Should we try? Because we can, we must.

A quote from the Chapter ‘Add eternity to that’:

I look around at the twentieth century; it’s not a great advertisement for unbelief. Where did communism bring Russia? Look what more openness is bringing China. I will say this for the Judeo-Christian tradition: we have at least written into the DNA the idea that God created man equal, and love is at the heart of the universe. I mean its slow. The Greeks may have come up with democracy, but they had no intention of everyone having it. We have to conclude that the most access to equality in the world has come out of ancient religious ideas.

[page 209]