March 27, 2009 at 2:07 pm (Uncategorized)
Racism of whatever kind is unacceptable. It doesn’t mean that racism which was historically practised by the whites; mainly in the USA and South Africa, should be practised against them. White people shouldn’t be made a scapegoat to deal with a crisis. There should be reforms based on tangible policies without fuelling racism by targeting a particular race.
The statement by Brazil’s President attributing Brazil’s crisis to the irrational behaviour of white people with blue eyes shows that Latin America as a whole is still dominated by white people while the indigenous and black people are still seen as second class citizens. He should have been more diplomatic by attacking a set of ideas rather than a race. After all, isn’t he a white person probably lacking just blue eyes?
As far as I know many outstanding personalities, particularly in UK, had to resign because of their racist remarks. Shouldn’t Lula resign over his apparently racist remark or make a public apology?
Race isn’t the real problem when it comes to a crisis. The current economic crisis is affecting almost every country in the world, mainly the Asians and the Europeans. Should the Japanese blame Europeans for their current economic downturn? What about countries that are mono-racial and yet they are facing many problems?
It’s better to say that there are types of people that are behind a particular crisis than to pinpoint a race. Singling out a race is more likely to cause more crises than solve them.
March 20, 2009 at 2:12 pm (Uncategorized)
Leaders in countries where religion is still the rule of conduct are considered as representatives of God and should act according to his teachings.
Conceding that politicians should do God, it remains which God teachings they should follow, especially in multi-faith societies.
Politicians aren’t perfect people. They are prone to mistakes and weaknesses and thus they can’t do God. This conflicts with democratic values as politicians should do what people , not what God, ask them to do.
Turning politicians into God-figures means they can be above reproach and anyone opposing them will be punished.
There are enough God-figures around the world in dictatorial regimes as in North Korea. Currently the world needs much less of them, not more.
Religion if incorporated into politics can be used as a tool to repress different views. There are theocratic regimes which stifle all sorts of freedoms in the name of religion whose teachings they interpret according to their scheme to hold to power.
The excess of incorporating religion in politics will turn Christian countries to the Puritan era as it can turn Muslim countries to Taliban rule.
Religion should remain an individual matter; especially, in multi-faith societies. Imposing a unique brand of religion is likely to cause a clash among sections of society with different religious views and beliefs.
Any country should have a constitution that guarantees democratic values. Empowering religious institutions over the democratically elected ones will turn societies into theocratic where religious dissent can lead to persecution. As such, multi-faith societies should be governed by secular laws and religion should remain a personal matter.