On Cyberspace and Human Communication Thanks Faraz for very important thoughts. I wanted to add in a few paisas of my own:

Regarding the effect of IT on traditional cultures, and on human sociology in general, I would like to present two things that affect the power of IT in different ways. One increases it, and the other renders it not very useful.

Before I get into those two points, let me say that I view I.T as a NEW TOOL that will be used and abused by HUMANS. The new tool, through its new capabilities will stretch humanity in certain aspects, and will also be limited by more permanent human concerns. Some good examples are the Industrial Revolution and the Nuclear Age.

(1) The first thing that we have to keep in mind, especially for the sustenance of traditional societies, is that in the rapidly changing world of IT, the biggest winners will be those who jump into the game early. This is an age of monopolies. In a fast growing system, there are many many inter-dependencies, which quickly become standards and lead to monopolies. Microsoft, Intel etc. are excellent examples of this. There will be definite effects on all societies, but those societies will win big who embrace this tool first. It is imperative that all ``traditional`` societies, instead of waiting too long to evaluate the effects of IT, embrace it fully and make it a functioning, and eventually, an influential part of themselves.

Again, I would look at the example of the Industrial Revolution: The monopolies created during the 18th and the 19th centuries persist until today, and define the border between developed and developing countries.

Therefore, developing countries will have to embrace IT fully, and to restructure their emphases so that this is available to their citizens at large. Otherwise, they will face an inevitable cultural extinction.

(2) Although my first point would emphasize the immense power of this new tool, my second point would be to say that the effect of this tool will be limited by one crucial factor: HUMAN BANDWIDTH. A person, even with flawless multi-Gbs optical networks, can only absorb as much information as his or her mind can handle. Therefore, instead of seeing a truly global virtual society in the near future, I see very well connected individual societies all over the world. Undoubtedly these societies will have the capability of intimately connecting individuals from different societies, but largely they will remain separate. Sure over long time periods, there will be a deep inter-mingling of different individual societies, but their mutual differences will not vanish.

For example, one can expect to see virtual businesses and markets. An overwhelming majority of them will be (and stay) local in a massively interconnected society. We may be able to buy eggs over the internet, but they will not be delivered from Wisconsin to Pakistan, but from somewhere within Pakistan. The same will apply to cultures, with internet taking the place of passive media like the television. TV for example, did not quite eradicate the differences across the world, but rather, proved to be a new tool in the hands of different cultures for their own projection. The same will happen with IT.

A Letter to the Prime Minister of Pakistan Anita, I could not agree with you more. You have said all sensible things, and I too, very much like yourself, would rather have not seen India detonate nuclear devices. But stealing your words, Pakistan has been left in ``an awkward position``.

And of course there is the inherent bias in the system too: The big five (historically 3 western plus 2 non-capitalist powers) and the lieutenent of the 3 western powers (Israel) are in a separate category from India and Pakistan. And then India, considered somehow inherently more ``reliable`` than an Islamic Pakistan.

I can see India`s underlying rationale: Why deny this power to one sixth of humanity? But I also see its logical extension: Then why should Africa also not have the capability, and South America, and the Pacific Rim, and the Islamic Countries? That logic leads to only one end: Global Armament, and to the scenario of Global Deterrance. Are we happy with that?

And I can see India`s courage too in standing up to the nuclear hegemony. It is just a natural effect that we have seen throughout history i.e. masses of people demanding a removal of artificial boundries.

But where does all of all of this leave Pakistan? The problem is that the nuclear weapons cannot be dis-invented, and the course of time cannot be reversed. The probability that the nuclear powers will voluntarily disarm is zero. They too are caught in a dynamic equilibrium of power, much more so than India and Pakistan are. And now this action has permanently changed the strategic landscape of this corner of the world, and of the world at large. And as such, Pakistan has no choice but to get swept into the scenario and then try to maximize its own interests.

No, in the best of all worlds, this is not what we would have wished for, but now it is here. And for Pakistan there is no choice but to play it to its own advantage.

A Letter to the Prime Minister of Pakistan Re: RT and MNI

In my last response I wrote that for now we should try to get this letter out asap. I think we can do both, send it individually, and collect signatures. The logic behind the first approach being to get it to the people concerned in case Paksitan is going to go ahead with the test in the near future.

RT you have an excellent suggestion. Could you suggest a re-wording that would make it more acceptable?

Re: Proud Pakistani, Karachiite, Rashid Iqbal, Ikbal Khan, Umair, RT

Hear, hear! Have you been able to get this letter across to people in Pakistan?

Re: Farhan ...
Salam Farhan, actually I was flying back and forth between Philly and Chicago when this happened ... I am currently in Chicago :( ... no, I think Chicago is pretty good during summers, now I just have to get out of my office to go see it! Hope all is well with you.

Re: PM is not the appropriate person...

You have a very good point ... I do not think many of us have access to Rawalpindi directories immediately, could you get that fax number, that would be very useful.

Re: Are you sure the device ...

Actually not sure at all. Let me be the first to say that the first suggestion is extremely far fetched in terms of realization, we knew that when we were writing the letter. There were a few reasons for not deleting it: (i) The contention that decision makers will get an idea of the range of possibilities, no matter how remote. (ii) In case it does pass through into the final list of demands then it emphasizes the position as seen by Pakistan and sets a scale for demands (from which one can then back off to others). ...

Anyway, about not holding me in high esteem, or at least my ideas: That would make it at least two people, yourself and myself! But I have learnt to move on past my occasional mistakes! It would actually be helpful if you could articulate your objections ... I am sure it can be done without incurring the wrath of chowk staff --it just depends on what words you choose!

A Letter to the Prime Minister of Pakistan Re: MNI

It would probably be best if instead of collecting signatures, we just send in this letter individually. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE, and it is helpful to be repetitive in this case. Just emphasizes the point. I suggested earlier that we can send this under a general rubric of ``Concerned Expatriate Pakistanis``, with the explicit goal of getting it to the Pakistani media and any people who can make a difference, in particular MILITARY officials. So if we know such people directly, (relatives etc.) we should contact them, otherwise contact people who know such people.

It is a grave concern for all of us, and again timing is very very important.

A Letter to the Prime Minister of Pakistan Re: All (India tests three nuclear devices)

You`re absolutely right: Time is of the essence.

I was talking to my friends in Pakistan, and it seems that there is intense pressure on the government to respond to India by detonating a nuclear device.

If the letter looks good then we should distribute it electronically to people immediately. Instead of adding a long list of people to it, we should aim to get this letter to Pakistani media as soon as possible from ``Concerned expatriate Pakistanis``. At this point it would be very useful to hunt contacts in Pakistan which can print and circulate this letter.

In addition, I am sure some of us know people who are either in the responsible positions in the government/military, or who know people who know government/military officials. We should zero in
on those people and get this letter off to them. If some end up getting multiple copies from different sources, it`s better.

So it`s best at this point that each and every person who is interested should try to get this letter to (i) Pakistani media and (ii) Pakistani government/military officials through any means
possible immediately. Again the letter is from ``Concerned Expatriate Pakistanis``

I am going to start making some phone calls, but I think that all of us should start flexing our networking muscles. This is the time to do it.

India tests three nuclear devices Dear all, here is a draft of a letter (produced by Farrukh Azfar and yours truly) for the PM. Please bombard us with your comments, and take the time to make revisions and suggestions.

Whether India signs CTBT or not, it will NOT sign NPT, and therefore the parameters of the scenario remain unchanged.

--W


DRAFT LETTER TO THE PM ...

Respected Prime Minister of Pakistan
Mian Muhammed Nawaz Sharif Sahib

Pakistan again stands at a critical juncture in its history. The recent nuclear detonations by India have jeopardized the stability of the entire region and has put Pakistan`s security at a severe
risk. As patriotic Pakistanis who are currently not resident in Pakistan, we stand by our leadership and our country in this sombre
hour of reflection and decision.

Respected Prime Minister, though the current situation is very tense in the sub-continent due to the rash actions of our belligerent
neighbour, we should not fail to recognize that history has granted us a golden opportunity that can be decidedly turned into Pakistan`s favor. By sheer lack of foresight, India has put Pakistan in a dominant position globally, evidenced by unanimous condemnation of India`s actions. This position can be translated into substantial
political and economic gains for Pakistan. In addition, we have also been granted the luxury of producing a deliberated response to India
which translates into a maximal benefit for Pakistan. It would be unfortunate if we do not benefit from this unique position.

It is our humble advice that Pakistan not follow India`s footsteps immediately to detonate a nuclear device of its own. Instead it should
demand a substantial price from all the concerned countries across the world for its restraint. We suggest some of the demands:

1) That Pakistan be provided a guaranteed nuclear umbrella by China or the West, with nuclear weapons on our soil, with the guarantee that they
will be used in case of a nuclear aggression against Pakistan.

2) That Pakistan be provided with a comprehensive anti-ballistic missile defense system, including early warning systems and anti-ballistic
missile weaponry.

3) That the inventory of Pakistan`s conventional forces be brought up to par with NATO standards. This will guarantee that any conventional
military misadventure by India will not be translated into a necessity for the use of nuclear weapons in a desparate situation. The cost of
re-equipment of Pakistani forces and our subsequent military budgets for the next decade be borne by nations not wishing a nuclear arms
race in South Asia.

4) That Pakistan be provided with substantial economic and developmental aid over the coming decades to stabilize the region.

5) The latest detonations by India clearly demonstrate the regional political circumstances which have placed severe demands on the Pakistani
economy over the last decade. Pakistan has repeatedly tried to bring this matter to the attention of the global community. However Pakistan`s efforts in this regard have sadly not been recognized. Therefore, Pakistan should be
compensated for the additional economic burden it has had to bear over the last decade in terms of relaxation of the conditionalities related to
Pakistan`s foreign debt.

Respected Prime Minister, we realize that there is intense pressure within our dear homeland to respond to the aggression of India. However, we must not let the heat of the moment drive us into a course of action that denies us any aspect of this golden opportunity. This is a moment for calm and deliberated decision, and we hope that you will show your characteristic foresight in this
matter.

We would like to re-iterate that this immediate course of action does not preclude the testing of a nuclear device of our own at any time in the
future. However, this course of action allows us to fully exploit the unique opportunity afforded to us at the moment.

India tests three nuclear devices Hi all,

Regarding India`s 5 nuclear explosions ...

I have a proposal that might be of some use at this point.

We can draft a letter to the PM etc. that re-iterates the point that we stand to win a lot politically and economically from this golden opportunity (as partly delineated by temporal and myself) as long as we keep a cool head about it. That we should not follow a rash path but use this golden opportunity to our advantage.

I am thinking of writing a letter, which I will post for comments etc. Then we can collect signatures from people (I guess people can just say ``count me in`` or something and give their names, occupations, addresses etc.) and send it off.

We really need to keep a cool head about this one and not let this opportunity go. Any ideas??

India tests three nuclear devices Pakistan stands to gain a lot from this development, if we keep a cool head about it.

What we can trust is:

1) Regional stability has been broken. Pakistan`s security is at stake. Same also holds for other countries in the region, in particular China.

2) India has faced unanimous condemnation from around the globe, in particular from U.S, Europe, China and Japan.

3) India depends on Japan and on the West for its economic aid.

4) China and India are adversaries. The West may also view India suspiciously because of its economic interests in Asia for the 21st century.

Here are some straight-forward things that come to my mind:

1) Pakistan can demand strong sanctions on India, and help in its defense (technology and pacts) for the next decade or so. Pakistan can demand this not only from the West, but also from China and Japan.

2) Economic sanctions on India would probably hamper the growth of India in the coming decade. They would probably not stifle it, but still by limiting the growth of its economy, can cause it a lot of hardship.

3) Or in view of the previous two possibilities, other countries and Pakistan can demand that India should disarm and sign NPT. In addition, this pressure can be used to leverage a peaceful solution to the Kashmir problem.

I think that if handled properly, Pakistan only stands to win from this rash move across the border.

India tests three nuclear devices Re: Suresh

Dear Suresh,
With all due respect, your message ended up contradicting itself.

(... there is absolutely nothing to fear from your friendly neighbour, India...)

(... Humse dosti karoge to phayday may rahoge, humse dushmani bahut bhari padegi ...)

It would be far more honest to state that India dreams of being a global player, at all costs, and other countries in the sub-continent have the option of either quietly obeying India`s dictates or being in open conflict with it. A statement (and a choice) has been made with these detonations, and it would be better if you honestly acknowledge them rather than being transparently diplomatic in your words. (Or maybe you yourself are not clear what you want to say).

I feel that these detonations are a sad day for the sub-continent. And the fault is dominantly India`s. It has started an arms race in the region. I do not know where it will lead us to. I do not think that Pakistan is all that far behind India, and certainly not far behind enough that it cannot catch up if it needed to. But one thing is clear that Pakistan with its impoverished masses, and India with its proportionately larger and even more impoverished masses will start spending much needed resources on useless ends. However, by doing something so overt, and not expecting a reaction from its neighbours, India is either being very naive or over-clever.


If indeed, as you say, India is fully aware of its dominance in the sub-continent, then it should have shown more maturity in its handling of this affair. It is certainly not true that this is the only way of solving the problems between India and Pakistan, and India and China. I would go on to suggest, that India, knowing its superiority, should have taken the first step in disarming itself, in order to defuse the tension in the sub-continent.

There are people on both sides of the Indo-Pak border who know very well that the odds have been upped in this game which will probably have no winners. After all this is not the first time in this century that people have followed this path.
Suppose there is a war, and both India and Pakistan end up losing a few million people each.
The immature and short-sighted antics of the political leadership of both countries will go on, maybe even the leadership will survive, but at what cost? How will it solve the problems of the poor masses of the sub-continent? Who really is the winner? Are we learning yet?

Defending Pakistan Thank you for a very informative article. I agree with you completely that the defense industry of Pakistan has be completely indigenous. Unfortunately that is about all that I agree with regarding the spirit of your article. Please allow me the liberty to express myself candidly.

I consider myself to be a Pakistani, and that means that I would readily contribute my services for the benefit of my country. (And this is true of all of my friends too). However, that does not mean that I should agree with the policies of the powers that be in Pakistan.

Case in point: Pakistan has a low middle-level per capita income, however, most of the statistics that measure the quality of life in Pakistan are equivalent to those of sub-Saharan countries with per capita incomes factor of three or more smaller. This is predominantly due to the huge and unregulated defense budget of Pakistan.

The question is why does this happen? Indian threat is real, and over the years the arms race in the region has escalated to a ridiculous level. India can afford a substantially higher defense budget than us because of its larger GDP, and it is even conceivable that Pakistan is being intentionally led along the same path that took the Soviet Union to its demise. But do we have to be stupid?

Realistically our needs are entirely defensive. A sane Pakistani should not entertain dreams of invading India, we need to ensure that any aggression against us is properly answered and very costly for the aggressor. That I think should be the basic philosophy of our armed forces.

But I think that some within the top echelons of our armed forces are unfortunately motivated by something else. Even at their most honest monetarily, they dream of a greater Pakistan, a revisitation of the marauding attacks of Mahmood Ghaznavi and Muhammed Ghauri. We are dealing with a phenomenon much akin to the dreams of Greater Serbia that led to the Balkan bloodbath. To compound this problem, our counterparts on the other side of the border also have such people. It would be an understatement to call this situation insane.

Yes, Pakistan occupies a potentially strategic place on the globe. However, it is entirely a lack of imagination on our part that we interpret that only militarily. One could for example also have used the geographical location to reap some economic advantage over the past decades. The reason that did not happen was because of the linear thinking of our leadership and also because of the turbulent start of Pakistan. However, there is no reason why we should extend that into the future. We can and should undergo a paradigm shift in our identification of where our strengths lie, and what our objectives should be. If a country like Switzerland can survive intact smack in the middle of the two bloodiest wars in human history, I am sure Pakistan can follow a similar example as well.

You quoted Iqbal, but you neglected to consider the masses of Pakistanis who live in utmost poverty. Why is it that realistically conceding the military superiority of others is not acceptable, but allowing a vast portion of our people to live like animals is? Do they not also ``bow before others`` each and every day of their lives? Does that not destroy our national pride?

I think the reason is that a lot of us live in the fool`s paradise of the military ``accomplishments`` of our ancestors. Iqbal too suffered from that delusion in his youth, India was under a colonial rule, and Muslims needed anything that would give them a semblance of pride. When the present and the future did not provide it, the only recourse was the past. I hope we grow out of this very quickly, Pakistan is a reality, which by the very process of its creation, has started a new chapter that should hopefully be unhindered by spectres of the past.

There are a lot of wars to be fought within Pakistan, the daily and continuous toll of these wars is far greater than any external wars we can even imagine. Hundreds of thousands of Pakistanis die or are affected every year because they do not have access to even the basic health and nutritional requirements of a human being. How many people is that in 50 years and how many more years should we continue to go on that way? And there is the rising storm of illiteracy, fanaticism, poverty and paranoia. Is this what we want to protect through our huge defense budget?

What is needed is balance, and a rational look at our priorities. The military is, and should be treated as the option of defense when all else fails. It is not the most important organ of the state and it should not be aggressive, period. All of our differences with our neighbours can (and should) be solved through diplomacy.

Some nights are long and dreary Amber, your poem is very beautiful and wonderfully sincere. Your can be sure that your brother is extremely proud of you and misses you as much!

Please spare the poor animals this Eid! Re: SR and Saad
...medical basis...

That`s a very interesting point. Can I ask the following question?

Suppose ALL medical community agrees that a certain practice X is unquestionably harmful for people and another practice Y is unquestionably beneficial for people. Does it follow that there should be laws that absolutely forbid X and absolutely enforce Y?

Should people not have a choice at all times (with full access to pros and cons)? I think that is an aspect to be looked at when discussing what is allowed and disallowed in a faith.

Re: Saad
(... 102 not out ...)
Thanks, but I think it is really due to the incredible discussions of the people themselves ... :)

Re: Nanda
Thanks. I hope that does not take a long time! Thinking about it, it is technologically feasible for people to completely do away with animal protein (I think). After all we need certain amino acids, which can be extracted from plants or produced in genetically engineered animals. So really, do we need to kill animals now?

(I understand the economic issue, which is critical, but theoretically, if people were to focus on this problem, then a cheap solution can be found...)

Re: Sean
You can contact me at wasiq@photon.hep.upenn.edu.

Life (and Death) etc. I will whole-heartedly join Asim: Welcome to Chowk!!! It was a pleasure reading your thoughts and comments to other articles at Chowk.

I guess life, truth, morality, dreams and immortality are all hopes, wishes for a ray of light. These are the hopes that allow one to survive in the darkness of death, lies, deceit, nightmares and utter lack of respect for life. All of these are wishful fantasies that keep one going by providing something to look forward to. These are the fires that power our engines, the batteries that keep the clock ticking!

best

Please spare the poor animals this Eid! Re: MAK

Dear MAK, no offense intended. Please read my blurb again, it is not a way to stigmatize a faith. I am asking a simple question which you should also be asking (perhaps you already do, I know many Islamic scholars have pondered this question). My question is:

Why does Islamic thought not manifest itself completely and coherently in Muslims?

Sure, people read the Quran, and feel the ``heat`` of Iman, but then why do the same people violate Islamic principles flagrantly? That is what I am asking.

Re: Rehan Rizvi

Your comments are very perceptive. How does one maintain the spirit and identity of a faith when dealing with an issue where a fundamental change (at the very least in the enactment of a ritualistic aspect of the faith) somewhere seems necessary?

It is a difficult issue to resolve, undoubtedly, and there are no quick answers to it. This requires thought. However, we have on the other hand identified some areas where the present way of fulfilling a particular ritual does not satisfy its intended purpose.

Re: Kafir

You have identified a very important issue. The issue of authority in such issues. Sure, we have the fundamental sources of Islamic thought, but getting from there to a resolution of practical issues requires life-long scholarship and intimate understanding of the sources. This process itself is hopelessly divided into different schools of thought, who have over time, stopped communicating and inter-relating to each other. In the absense of a singular intellectual pole in the ummah, whether an individual or a group of individuals, this problem is quite intractable. And yes, I can see why sects would branch off in an attempt to resolve this.

Re: momin

Thanks for your kind words. You have a very balanced way of dealing with such important issues, and thanks for sharing your views. I agree with you completely that Muslims were always meant to be completely open and honest about their faiths. They have been repeatedly asked to ponder and to use their minds, which is the faculty that sets them apart from other living beings. As Quran repeatedly says: The truth has been separated from falsehood, so why should we be afraid of using our divinely endowed faculties?

Of Vista Points and Immortality The story was beautifully written. Makes me think of the old age of people I care about. Also reminded me of a beautiful short-story by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, ``Bon Voyage, Mr. President``. Thanks.

Please spare the poor animals this Eid!

REVITALIZING ISLAMIC THOUGHT

We live in a century of discordant Islamic thought. The ideological and cultural threads that formed the warp and woof of the Islamic
Ummah are on the verge of being completely broken. Faith first receded from a collective level to
an individual level. Now it is on the retreat even on the individual level. What we are witnessing is more than mere decay of Islamic thought, we are witnessing its death. The cacophony of ideas that we hear from across the Muslim world are the last convulsions of an organism that has been diseased for a long time.

Let us ask ourselves the question, what exactly it is that is dying? What is dying is the Islamic thought itself, because it cannot manifest itself in us. Civilizations crystallize around ideals
that enable individuals to transcend themselves and identify themselves with a collective. Ideals empower individuals first, and then their societies to act as a coherent whole. The history of great civilizations is a history of individuals who have been unified by common ideals, purpose and action. When the foundations of ideals
are removed, all that is built on top is bound to
collapse. Societies are transformed into chaotic collections of people whose actions and purposes never resonate.

This is precisely what we see today amongst the Muslims, a deep-rooted psychological disjuncture. With their ideological and collective bonds
broken, they are following the same path that others have followed in history when their civilizations have collapsed. The response of
Muslims to this crisis is usually one of the following three.

First, there are the practicing Muslims, who follow Islam down to each and every ritual, but Islamic thought does not bind them into coherent
beings. Instead, their ideals and actions are contradictory. Their ideology never endows them with a moral conviction that encapsulates
each and every moment of their lives. They fill their moral vacuum by stressing on secondaries while forgetting the primaries. One will
therefore run into phenomena like the Taliban or Sipah-e-Sahaba, who will pursue outright barbarity to achieve their ends, in complete contradiction to what they profess in. If someone questions the
traditional interpretations of Islam, or criticizes some aspect of the faith, their reaction is usually extreme. This I believe is a
defensive reflex that stems from an insecurity about the potency of the faith.

Second, there are those who have completely given up in despair, and have silently or openly embraced alternative methods to forge an individual identity. They are usually secular, but stick to secularist ideals with as much blind faith and acceptance that they accuse the
practicing Muslims of. Bereft of their own heritage, and permanently disconnected from their newly adopted alien heritage, they are trapped
in a vicious cycle of first emulating others and then searching for their own roots. This by itself is not surprising, it is to be expected on the outset of any social transition. One would expect that within a proper secular social matrix, over long term, their identities would find a stable point.

Finally, there are those who are completely indifferent. Paralyzed by uncertainty and fear, they hedge their bets and do not decide one way
or another between acceptance or rejection of Islam. The most likely fate of this category is a life of indifference, that slowly rolls
over into a life of ambiguous acceptance as they grow old. For them, old age requires security of a faith, whose foundations have not been
sunk over the years.

What is common to all of three categories is that there is no unifying thread in life. A lack of coherence shows itself in each and every
sphere of their lives i.e. a person would pray five times a day and perform Hajj multiple times, yet accept bribery and forgery to be perfectly acceptable ways of sustaining his livelihood. Similarly, one meets liberal Muslims who will drink alcohol in abundance, yet abstain
completely from eating pork. This glaring contradiction in the life of a Muslim, is indicative of the advanced stage of decay in which we find the body of Islamic thought. On this critical juncture, therefore, we need to ask ourselves what are the reasons for this crisis and what ways are there to correct it?

What are the reasons for the crisis?

What really informs us of the crisis in Islamic thought is the fact that the Islamic world lags behind the West politically, economically
and ideologically. We have seen the West bloom in the past few hundred years, rising from virtual anonymity on the world stage to become the foremost power in the globe. Western colonialism in its heyday controlled most of the land mass of the planet. The Industrial and the Scientific
Revolution occurred in the West, and has endowed it with a definite technical, economic and political superiority over the rest of the
world. In contrast, the Muslims world is mostly poor with backward economies. The richest countries in the Muslim World are controlled by
claustrophobic monarchies or dictatorships. The average Muslim is uneducated and unskilled by modern standards. All this poverty, backwardness and incapacitance are the icons of Islam in the modern world.

Upon a cursory comparison of the icons of traditional Islam and the modern West, one can reach the conclusion that the reason for the
backwardness of Islamic World is Islamic thought itself. I think that is the primary reason why Islam does not manifest itself in the lives
of modern Muslims. Due to the failure of Islamic societies across the globe, Muslims are attracted towards the ideologies that are successful. The traditional minded tend to revert back to pristine
Islam. Others simply abandon it altogether.

However, this conclusion by itself is again
simplistic. Let us for a minute assume that Islamic scholars could agree on a core set of beliefs that would constitute Islamic thought. That would not necessarily imply that Islamic ideals would be implemented faithfully. For example, die-hard Marxists would not agree
with the Leninist interpretations of Communism. Ideals are open to interpretations, and many factors (personal, cultural, political etc.)
determine how people interpret the same thing.

All of this is further complicated by the fact that over the centuries, the number of different interpretations of Islamic ideals has grown. Islamic scholars find themselves debating over arcane issues which have lead to the separation of different sects and movements in Islam. In addition, over the centuries, one sees a
decline in the quality of scholarship of Islam. Whereas in the past, the best and the brightest students were attracted to Islamic scholarship, today, the worst of the lot end up in this crucial
position. Islamic scholarship is not considered an attractive career for a Muslim today. This drastic change of perception stems not only from a declining confidence in Islam as a guiding philosophy of life, but also from the decay and destruction of the traditional Islamic
centers of learning.

All of the above mentioned factors are fundamental to the decay of Islamic thought today. A young Muslim today sees a prevalent Islam which is clearly ineffectual in establishing a position for itself in the modern world. As a reaction if one decides to revert to the ``original`` Islam, one is confronted by a massive amount of ambiguous
and not entirely consistent set of traditional interpretations of Islam. To de-convolute the effects of fourteen centuries is virtually
impossible. In addition, one comes across many traditional interpretations of Islam that are not in accordance with what we see around us. Before I mention a few problems with the traditional
Islamic interpretations, let me define what criteria must be used to question Islamic thought..... (more later hopefully!)

One of my questions: What do you think is the reason for this crisis??