I agree with the basic premise of the article that we should not demonize the other based on our own prejudice. But for the sake of our readers, we need to dig deeper. For example I read some of Yassine's writings, the leader of adl wa ihssane, which basically say that democracy is not islamic! at the same time I believe that the Islamists should be allowed to have an official party, simply because THEY ARE THE OPPOSITION, the rest of the main parties are not really an opposition. However, the current constitution bans political parties that are based on religion! I wish the article delved into these issues as I am not sure this is clear in my mind. Also, of prime importance are the economic projections of both the religious and secular parties. And let us not be dismissive of either as the example of Turkey has proved many wrong. In conclusion, I do agree with the author that the times of making the Islamist the bogeyman are gone.

Couple of weeks ago, I saw Mr. Benchemsi asking someone for directions, I waited until he was done asking, I went up to him and introduce myself and of course I surprised and perhaps scared the heck out him. Out of nowhere, I showed up introducing myself with salamualaykom, he looked at me flabbergasted and replied wa 3alaykom salam. After small talk, I re-realized that the man is down to earth and probably was happy to see a Moroccan dude somewhere where you don't expect to see one. Few years back, I sent him an email complaining about the online version of Telquel not published on Friday as it is indicated on the site, he replied and promised me that it won't happen again and that the reason is that they were struck by a nasty virus at telquel.

Any way, I forgot to ask him how is le prince rouge si hicham as they work in the same department at Stanford, one is a visiting scholar and the other one is a professor. It makes me feel good to see these guys among those Academic elite. Bref, let me go back to the Mr. Benchemsi's view about al adl wal ihsan. I happen to wholeheartedly agree with his views, Just like the US does not give a podium to communists, Morocco should not give a podium to al adl wal ihsan, the reason in my opinion is very very very simple. Morocco should not be ruled by Shari'a law and shari'a worked 1400 years ago to dismantle al jahiliya at the time when ahl quraish did not have any set of rules, the shariaa law came as a blessing to organize their every day life.

Morocco is poor country overtaken by M6's elites and most poor have no choice but to embrace an Islamic and salafist views if given a right to vote ( Remember Algeria? the Islamists were winning by a landslide). We have seen many examples that no country on earth that embraced shariaa is doing well (iran, taliban, saudi arabia where people cannot even breath). Why repeat others' mistake when we know that it has not work for them?

Many of you will say that it is not democratic to marginalize the islamists, I say the US who is more democratic than any other country did the same thing to communists.
You don't want to destroy Morocco in the name of Democracy and have al adl wal ihsan imposing burqas. Sorry!
No one expected the Mullahs in Iran could suffocate their own people. Look what they are doing now.
The others thing which is pretty dangerous is that the islamists think that they have a DIVINE right to rule as they wish to bring societies to god's will, the way they see god would want them to behave. That's pretty dangerous my friends.

Morcelli, you are wrong when you say Morocco should not have a sharia law. Show me one country in the world (muslim or kafir country) has directlly or indirectly not based its laws on sharia. If you join a club you have to abide by its rules, that I give you as an example, you don't have to be a Moroccan but if you are a Muslim, to say sharia does not matter is not being a muslim. Those who do not follow God's will, will know God's will, will prevail.

It is not that the sharia is bad, contrary, it is the bad people doing a bad job of running a country and ruining it. They will be taken care of by not human beings but the will of Allah. We have many recent examples where the leaders are history now.

More like a sect or cult. Political parties are formed around ideologies, with real-time and earth-bound ideas or solutions. Political parties are designed to evolve and adapt to the changing times. At least in theory. The holly books offer great SPIRITUAL guidance, and that's all. I cringe everytime I hear someone saying all the world woes would disappear if we only would consult the Koran or the Bible.

Mr Ibrahimi's rhetorical query to Mr Benchemsi : Would it be acceptable to the progressives "should the Islamists in Morocco prevail in an open and transparent election." WOW! Talk about a loaded question with a bullet in each chamber.
My answer? I would just flip-flop once again and say : Thank God M6 retained the title of Ameer-al-Momine en.
Let's see if the elites are willing to give up their 1956 Mouton-Rothschi ld!

I am not sure where you get your facts about your claims. So show us an example of a country directly or indirectly who adopted the the law of islam and did well for itself and it's people? you must think that shaira is superior and once established it would bring eveyone whether they like it or not to submit to the will of allah, and can you define what the will of allah is? If God the creator created man free to chose between right and wrong why would he force man to obey him? it doesn't make sense because if you have a son would you rather earn his respect and love or force him to respect you and love you? Man have a free will and will always have a free will no matter what any religion teaches.

when you think about al adl wal ihsan, think that this man with his Nike shoes can easily take your freedom and place you in a burqa in the name of allah

Hello everybody. Ahmed Benchemsi here.

Always glad when a public talk or an article of mine triggers debate. I usually don’t intervene in such discussions, but I have to make a little exception here, for the sake of factual accuracy.

Firstly, I thank Mr. Brahimi for his kind comments. I precisely remember the question he asked me in this Boston conference—a question he faithfully reported in the essay above. I have an utterly different memory of my answer, though.

What I recall saying is: I would evidently accept it if Islamists win elections, because that would be inconsistent on my part to claim democracy and not be ready to abide by its rules. And I added: of course, I would keep on fighting their ideology and exposing its core, inherent contradiction with what I believe the philosophical basis of democracy: freedom of thought (religion being one thought among others). And I concluded: another beauty of democracy is that majorities switch—so, as a democratic opponent of the Islamists, I would obviously have an agenda: defeat them at the ballot box when their term is over.

Thanks and keep up the great debate.

Chtaini said

Brother Brahimi:

Since you and I as we say as brothers “have buried la “hache” de guerre”, allow me to congratulate you on your last article. If I understand it right, it deals with 3 players in the Moroccan political scene as you were trying to tell us: The Islamists, the secular and the “unscrupulous state”. While the person you have “interviewed” Mr. Benchemsi responded to your question in what seemed to me to be the best way he knows how. You have found out some bias in his responses. You concluded your article by stating two of the players in this Moroccan political scene: the Islamists and the seculars have put their differences aside and are teaming up despite the “indiscriminate violence” from the third player the State. Mr. Benchemsi is then viewed by you as someone who is “putting himself in a compromising position where he is viewed by many as the typical home wrecker”. With all respect for your way of thinking and presenting issues and Mr. Benchemsi’s thinking, my question is if Mr. Benchemsi is viewed by many as you said as the “typical home wrecker”. How do you view yourself? Do you think that you are a neutral interviewer? By the way Mr. Benchemsi can defend himself. I am sure that many readers in Morocco and elsewhere would want to know what your position is on all these issues you presented in your excellent article? Which one of the 3 players do you support? I know that you do not support the third player: the Sate. This leaves the other two players the Islamists and the secular. Which one of these two do you support or do you support both of them if they solve their differences and confront jointly the third one : the State.

Mr. Brahimi – I did not read Mr. Benchemsi’s Time Magazine article, so I will refrain from commenting on that part and I will accept your interpretation of what was said.

You did mention that you were in favor of religious reforms and then later on you backtracked and said no tweaking was necessary!!! Which is it??? Tweaking and reforming mean pretty much the same thing… I agree with your first statement that we need to reform our Religion. We all know (but don’t admit) that the Quran contains a number of vague, inconsistent or conflicting verses… But that’s a topic for another day.

It would be a cold day in hell before the “Islamists” win any major support in Morocco – Their agenda is flawed and outdated! That’s my answer to your rhetorical question.

Observer – I think you are (Ould Adderb)… I grew up in the (Battemat) right next door to (Dar Shabbiba) :-)))

man en blanc – I have some 1956 vintage if you are interested!

@M.brahimi,
Yes, i did say marginalize al adl wal ihsan. How? You make them irrelevant to the masses? how do you do that? you embrace a real democracy not a sham constitution.

If the masses have a choice between a the maybe 70 virgins and real justice/democra cy, it is more likely than not, the masses will go for the tangible justice/democra cy not a promise that only men will benefit from.

Btw, when the dudes get the 70 virgins, what's in it for the dudette?

As for making the analogy between women voting and al adl wal ihsan's, that will not fly my friend, I already made analogy between communists and Radical islamists, why insert women here when you know that is like comparing "watermelons and peaches".

As for George Carlin, god bless his soul was one of my favorite along Richard Pryor, I watched many of his comedies but stopped bringing those dvd's as he used the F word more than I want my kids to see me enjoying his blunt in your face attitude.

As for Chtaini, You simply cannot deny the guy's love for his country and his king.
I challenge you or anyone here to find me ONE person in this planet who tries his best to make MAP look like a great new organization. There is only one chtaini and one chtaini only :-). I also think that Chtaini no matter how we disagree with his views, he does have a good heart and he loves all Moroccans including man en blanc and aziz al alami.













:D

Mr. Chtaini,
Good try brother... Try again.
I am beyond your tight, one dimensional definitions of what a free thinking being is or is not. So, any of assumptions about who I am strictly yours. Last time, I was asked that question I remember seeing four bare walls, a dim light, and two clean shaven white men. Never mind what I think. I am a virtual being. Please treat me that way.
Lastly, I was not interviewing Benchemsi; I attended a talk he was
giving in Boston and we had this friendly exchange.
Thank you

I noticed a sizable amount of undigested waste matter regurgitated or rather spewed, by some, over matters of religion.

Please take your time to be properly schooled in these matters -- there really is not any need or urgency to cry out the first thought that comes to mind, and in the process make an out of yourself.

Time + friction do wonders: Too much of Fox News and rubbing shoulders with Mr. Chitan and his bosom bodies (here) from DST Academy and affiliates will make a nice sculpture (in their image) of your mind.

Aziz: your “Ould Addarb” name calling has a wonderful sound, smell and taste to it – thank you.

Benchemsi: thank you for informing the record. With that I hope the separation between “fact and fiction or interpretation” is bit cleared.

Brahimi: I hope you now appreciate my cautionary note about fact vs. fiction or interpretation.

Watch out for the “social distance corollary or third-person theory.” There are not many exceptions to the rule – you stop questioning (thinking critically), you become one of them without even knowing it, as is clearly evidenced here.

I hope not all is lost in the translation.

Mr. Brahimi – I am certainly not an authority on this subject neither am I here to make a believer out of you...What I will do though is (at a later time and most likely under an alias name – out of fear of being e-stoned :-)), provide with enough material that not only shows the inconsistencies I mentioned – but I will take it a step further and show you how the Koran is a work of a number of men with their own agendas and not some divine revelation. You can then draw your own conclusion. But we all agree we are deviating a bit from the original thread of your article.

Mr. Chtaini – Lunch is on me… Let me know next time you are in this part of the world.

Observer is someone who is neutral about a subject matter and expresses himself without insult or accusation or partie pris especially when he gives the appearance of knowing the difference between facts and fiction and interpretation while applying critical thinking. It is not that there is a lost translation, what is lost is the inability to observe what you preach. You cynically and sarcastically make fun of a name you know nothing about. You accuse those who disagree with your view as DST Academy graduates. There is pride in protecting the country against those who want to cause it harm. As to the unjustifiable description of being influence by Fox News, I never watch Fox News because when Murdoch and his allies just started lobbying the Reagan Administration, they had an Office in the National Press Building where the MAP office was and I learned from my other colleagues in journalism in the Press building and as a member of the National Press Club then what Fox News was going to be about and it was not my cup of tea and is not my cup now and will never be. To do justice to the word observer and to borrow it a pseudonym, you should be neutral in your observations. Unfortunately you are not so what you say means nothing. I am saying all this with the utmost respect. I promised myself to be civil in my reactions even if others hit bellow the belt. It is hard for me, because I was not raised to take it lying down, but civil debate oblige

I like pieces of furniture. They have a depreciation lifetime that mirrors their utility. You can write them off when useless. You can always refer back to their Net Book Value to check where they stand in your books. A Politician is to a Cash Flow Statement what Cancer is to a Human Cell.

Why do I start with Balance Sheets and Cash Flow Statements? Follow the money trail and you will figure out that all this naive blabla about the virtues of democracy stops where interests lie, mainly the interests of those holding the treasury of a country. The Moroccan system currently works exactly exactly, let me repeat, exactly as it is intended to work: The intrinsic wealth of a nation is served up to a few nations with a local administration that requires at most 1% of the local population in a middle-manageme nt position; the downside of demography and law of big numbers is that over time more than 1% of the population will deem itself capable and worthy of that middle management function. They are called the educated upper middle class. In the meantime, 90% of the DNA roaming the land, blue collar?, is primarily looking for food and shelter. One would have to TRY hard to keep 50% of a country illiterate. Right?

Wall Street guys is not in Rabat. It is a 3-hr flight north from Rabat. The shareholders speak the language of Verlaine.
Executive Management, on paper, happens to be in Rabat.
The dividends are wired out to an IBAN account like clockwork.
The upper middle class is holding on to a miserable salary compared with the outflow of dividends.
The 90% are holding on to Goodwill, that line item that is an accounting detail, an intangible that can't survive on its own but through the petty generosity of the shareholders and Wall Street Analysts.

The system works exactly as designed, to serve a minority set of shareholders.
It feels good to beat up on executive management.

I would like to read about plans to turn the 90% into shareholders, shareholders that could be islamists, hedonists, atheists, or just your regular schizophrenic brother/cousin/ uncle who fasts one month a year to ready his liver for Johnny Walker the other 11.
I argue that an executive management change for the sake of change that works under the constraint of wiring out dividends to the same IBAN account is 'useless'.

Now, back to our furniture. Afwan ya kourssi!

Si Hamza,
I don't know what's in the Hong Kong water, but I think you got it. I too have a chair in my living room that my kids wouldn't dare sitting on. Kinda like Archie Bunker from "All in The Family TV show" that was in reruns in early 80s. I loved that show

Hamza,

I loved your comment and especially the chair analogy with one caveat:

Be they an awkward picture placed on the wall, or a new chair inconveniently placed in the middle of the room, IN TIME they all become pieces of furniture, integral part of the physical and mental environments we live in.

Once the habit takes root (i.e., new object elevated to the status of a piece of furniture) it becomes/forms another blind spot in our radar screen.

That is, they become almost unnoticeable – in this context, I think of this as a vulnerability in the make up of our minds (something to watch out for and guard against).

That is the risk we take whenever we allow parasites to become part of the norm.

Here is an experiment worth examining: take a ugly chair and place it in the middle of your living room. Allow this to continue for two to three weeks, and you'll see first hand how adaptive our brain is. In time, the chair will stop to "exist", courtesy of the brain's ability to dynamically filter out ...