Friday, July 17, 2020

THE SADNESS FOR HAGIA SOPHIA


Now here's an interesting article;


And here's another;

The trouble with making Hagia Sophia a mosque again” [Ishaan Tharoor, stuff.co.nz, Jul 14 2020]

Turkey’s President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan (pictured right), actually thinks he can recapture the former glory of the Ottoman Empire by changing Hagia Sophia from a museum into a mosque.  Of course, it’s more about saving himself at the next election. Sadly, my cynicism doesn't alter the fact; we're powerless to stop Erdogan.
The first article explains how “Hagia Sophia was turned into a mosque after Istanbul's conquest by the Ottoman Empire.”  Well, “Istanbul” was not conquered by the Ottoman Turks; “Constantinople” was.  The Turks didn’t rename Constantinople until 1930, by Turkey’s then ruler, Attaturk.  But Attaturk, Turkey’s hero of Gallipoli, was a clever man.  He completely reformed Turkey, but I always felt that making Hagia Sophia a neutral building then was, in some small part, an attempt to placate the victorious Allies in the post-WWI years. I wonder if Attaturk felt the Allies might yet sweep “the sick man of Europe” right back into Anatolia?  Vengeful Greeks and Slavs might yet reclaim the Byzatine wonders of Constantinople for Christian Europe.  So it was indeed a clever international statement when Attaturk renounced the Hagia Sophia ”mosque” and proclaimed Hagia Sophia as a secular museum in 1934.

In the middle ages, Hagia Sophia Cathedral (pre-1453, left) was the jewel in the crown of the City of Constantinople.  Constantinople was the last remnant of Eastern Rome; Christian Byzantium.  After centuries of trying, the muslim Turks finally breached its walls on 29 May 1453 and swept through the city.  After two days of killing, raping and plundering, Hagia Sophia was almost immediately converted into a mosque.  The crosses were pulled down.  The mosaics were painted over.  The spectacular Byzantine frescoes were scarred and desecrated (example below, right), and the incongruous minarets added thereafter.

Erdogan claims, “It is Turkey's sovereign right to decide for which purpose Hagia Sofia will be used.''  Well, by that moral logic, Israel would have the “sovereign right” to level the Al Aqsa Mosque to restore the Jewish Temple of Solomon.  And that, my friends, is the path to war . . . 

Garo Paylan, an ethnic Armenian Christian, summed it up perfectly when he tweeted; “The decision to convert Hagia Sophia into a mosque will make life more difficult for Christians here and for Muslims in Europe;'' all of whom recognise the significance of Erdogan’s edict.

And even sadder? I don’t think most European Christians – ignorant of the history – will give a toss.


FURTHER BROWSING:

"Erdogan Should Not Erase Turkey’s Christian Past" [Richard V. Reeves, Mustafa Akyol, July 1 2020]






Wednesday, September 27, 2017

ALL CONTEMPT AND NO RESPONSIBILITY


Now here’s an interesting article;

Māori have 'gone back like a beaten wife to the abuser',defiant Marama Fox says [Maori TV, www.stuff.co.nz]

Oops, and here’s another;

Te Ururoa Flavell won't be part of a Māori Party revival [ELTON RIKIHANA SMALLMAN, stuff.co.nz]

Well, the Maori Party has been booted out of the New Zealand parliament, in last weekend’s general election.  And wait . . . the leaders are ripping into their own voters!

For my international readers, let me set some context before I go any further.  We had a general election on Saturday.  New Zealand’s proportional representation system (MMP) gives us two votes (two ticks on the ballot paper); one for your preferred MP (Electorate Vote), and the other for your preferred party (Party Vote).  To complicate things further, the country has two, parallel electoral roles; 

  • the general role, where the country is divided into 64 electorates for all New Zealand voters,
  • the Maori role, where the country is divided into 7 Maori electorates for Maori voters or voters of Maori descent.
Voters can vote in either role, but must choose which role they wish to vote in by registering in one or the other before the election.  Traditionally, the Maori Party has contested only the seven Maori seats in the Maori role.  However, anyone can vote for the Maori Party in the general role by giving it their “Party Vote.”  The Party Vote is crucial, because for any party to sit in parliament, that party must secure 5% of the vote or win at least one electorate seat.  While Maori could win seven electorate seats, they could have “topped up” those seats with a higher percentage party vote.  However, the Maori Party reached none of the two thresholds, and is thus now consigned to the political wilderness for the next three years.  So, how did that happen?

Well, Maori Party Co-Leader, Marama Fox, is bemoaning the fact that Maori voters have sided with the mainstream Labour Party again, as they did before the Maori Party was formed.  Labour NZ contested and won all seven seats in the Maori role, thereby sending the Maori Party back to obscurity.  A bitter Fox likened the Maori shift back to Labour, “like a beaten wife [gone back] to the abuser.”  Maori Party Co-Leader, Te Ururoa Flavell, was equally resentful;

“[Flavell] said Māori may have shot themselves in the foot by going with Labour.  If it does turn bad for Māori voters, Flavell said don't call him for a shoulder to cry on.  ‘I hope they don't wake up tomorrow and start shaking their heads, saying, I feel sorry for you, because I don't want to hear it.’”

Call me old fashioned, but it’s incredibly bad form for politicians to slam into their support base – even if what they say is the truth.  Astute political leaders shrug off such political shifts by praising democracy then using words like, “We’ll have to do better next election.”  Kicking Maori, the way Fox and Flavell have done, shows remarkable immaturity, naivety and a distinct lack of political shrewdness.

Frankly, I have no sympathy for Fox and Flavell (pictured above); the Maori Party sold its soul for a few crumbs.  It was invited into government by the ruling National Party - when National had no need to do so.  I think it's fair to say that, the National Party is the party representing the New Zealand establishment; the wealthy, the business leaders, the civil servants and the corporations.  So the invite by National was a brilliant piece of counter-thrust politics; a stroke of John Key genius.  Maori were lulled into thinking they would secure more progress for the Maori people by being in government than in opposition.  In reality, the right-wing National government silenced the most radical party in parliament by wooing them with trinkets and false promises.

Well my friends, when you bed with the devil, there’s always a price.  I think voter shift back to Labour had nothing to do with the Jacinda Ardern effect.  I think Maori voters punished the Maori Party for cuddling up to the right-wing hacks.  Maori voters clearly perceived no value from the relationship with the monetarists.  All those years of spreading their cheeks for the National Party, and what was to show for it?  Maori are still over-represented in prisons, in obesity, in unemployment, in poverty and in domestic abuse figures. No sign of any change there soon.

On Duncan Garner's AM Show this morning, a whining Fox tried to explain what had been acheived by cuddling up to the establishment.  She bleated that every Law passed while Maori were part of Government had Treaty of Waitangi clauses in it. Well, big deal!  If I was a disenfranchised Maori voter, living on the breadline, I wouldn't see the value either!  I'd also stick two fingers up at the party which was supposed to represent me. I think that, sadly, the Maori Party in recent years has represented the Maori establishment - who really benefit from lucrative Treaty settlements - rather than the average Maori in the street.  No wonder Maori went back to Labour!

Fox and Flavell’s lack-of-contrition and contempt for their own people is bad enough.  However, their unwillingness to take responsibility for the party’s demise is nothing short of repugnant.  They've taken no responsibility for siding with the neoliberals, taken no responsibility for failing Maori, and taken no responsibility for the real reason Maori voters see a better deal in Labour.  Did the Maori leaders really believe their unholy alliance with the monetarists would have no consequences?!

Why am I also bitter about the Maori Party’s demise?  I'm bitter, because there aren’t enough radical parties in New Zealand’s parliament.  Before the Maori Party went into bed with the devil, I thought they were a party with some good, radical ideals which this country needed.  This country needs radicalism.  We’re not going to turn back 40 years of monetarism with faint hearts and lovely speeches about “values.”  Only radical politics and taxing the rich will put an end to the dreadful consumerism and inequality that has been the hallmark of monetarist economics.  But clearly, New Zealand voters don’t want to hear that.  It might be bad form for a politician to slam into their electorate, but I have no such remit or compunction.  New Zealand voted for a born-to-rule sheepshagger and an extra $20 a week.

Crumbs from the rich man’s table [Luke 16:21].


 Further Reading;