Abu Aardvark is someone I’ve read for quite a while – since he and I had a kind of inconclusive debate here some time ago.
Recently, he posted an interesting – worth powering through the academic jargon – post on the ‘war of ideas,’ which he explains as a “constructivist” strategy (for more on constructivism).
His post/article is a framing document and a program for further research – which I certainly think would be a good idea.
I’ll suggest that his concern that Al Quieda is dominating the ‘construction’ of meaning around the conflict is somewhat pessimistic; the actions of AQ that attract a small population also risk repelling a larger one (sort of like the “netroots” in Democratic party politics).
But fracturing the perceived unity of reaction by the Muslim world is Job #1 in my view, and anything that contributes to it is a Really Good Thing.
Our efforts at propoganda that I’ve heard about have been utterly miserable–done by people who had no idea about the nature of religion or what the religious war is about.
As “infidels” we have no standing in any debate between the neo-Karhajites and the rest of Islam, but it is within our capacity to try to influence the language of the debate. But at the moment pretty much our entire media program is, as far as a devout Muslim is concerned, satanic, in the sense of satan as deciever and seducer.
(A Christian wouldn’t necessarily disagree.)
What we want to be able to do is encourage ordinary Muslims, not completely under the sway of the Saudi imams, to critique Wahabbi doctrine. Though the Wahabbis are quick to condemn “heretics” as non-Muslims, this is strongly condemned in ordinary Islam, so we can’t hope for much “they aren’t true Muslims” action. But we can hope that people will notice that even if “sharia” is the “law of God,” the people who interpret it are not God themselves, and can and did make mistakes. We can encourage the idea that, even though they may not be permitted to say “you aren’t a true Muslim” themselves, they can recognize that not everyone who seems Muslim will be found to be so by God.
And if we can get them to accept the idea that “by their fruits you will know them” then we’re well along the way to having them accept the idea of a neutral state, which does not attempt to enforce every detail of religious law.
All we can do is try to provide the language, using our own news and education and entertainment outlet. All the movement has to come from within Islam.
The usual news outlets are worse than useless here. One big political problem with a new “VOA” is that it _has_ to be religion-friendly without being explicitly Christian (or Islamic), and I’m not sure how well that will go over in DC. And we can’t be explicit about efforts to define a language either.
See The Instructivist (see below) for ongoing commentary on how constructivist education theory has been distorted and used inappropriately in higher ed.
The fundamental flaw in constructivism, IMHO, is its aim to create a so-called “learning community” that seeks to emulate real-world collaboration toward acquisition of knowledge that has heretofore been directed by more classical, instructor-led lecture, quizzes, testing, etc.
On its face, constructivism ignores the fact that the post-academic collaboration that it seeks to emulate (where it exists in the real-world pursuit of knowledge _at all_) is _only_ made possible when preceded by the classical forms of education that impart rational thinking skills and a basic set of knowledge to the student during high school, college and periods of _individual_ advanced study.
In practise, constructivist curricula degenerate most often into a chaotic waste of students’ time (and their or their parents’ money) where the instructor is relegated to the position of “guide on the side” instead of a knowledgeable mentor whose command of the subject matter is imparted to the student. Any schoolwork involved in group projects is invariably shouldered by those few with a vested interest in gaining the knowledge of the course. Yet the group, as a whole, typically shares the grade procured by the efforts of the few. Sound vaguely familiar?
Note – the URL for The Instructivist weblog is being blocked by this site’s comment spam filter with the following message: “You said blog spot.com, which matched the banned text string blog spot.com, which has previously been used by a spammer.” You can reconstitute the URL from the following:
http://instructivist.blog spot.com/