Friday, January 15 2021 – 18:54
Psychological and historical obstacles to the recognition of the Amazigh New Year by Islamic extremists.
Some Moroccan Islamists continue to oppose the proposed “delimitation” of the Amazigh New Year, which has become the center of an ongoing cultural, historical and identity debate between various segments of society, while the position of the Islamic component is clearly evident each time. the question of the recognition of the Amazighs as an “inclusive” culture and basic element of identity in the tributaries. Moroccan culture.
Human rights and the Amazigh parliamentary activists are pushing for the adoption of the Amazigh New Year, which falls on January 13 of each year, as a national holiday, as the celebration of the Amazigh New Year represents a well-established tradition in the popular culture of North Africa. Meanwhile, Moroccan government officials claim the newspaper is ” in the hands of autocratic King Mohammed VI”.
A Social violence specialist believes that “extremism is the antithesis of tolerance, while the main feature of today’s world is pluralism and diversity.” He added: “There is no longer a single country or society in the world. All countries and societies are diverse, ethnically, linguistically and even ideologically. The difference between advanced and backward peoples has become their capacity to rationally manage this diversity and multiplicity.
The same university said in a statement that “when supporters of Islamic currents and their ideologues cry out that perpetuating the advent of the Amazigh New Year, for example, is a heresy and an illusion to be stood up against, they l exclusion and racism against an indigenous and original people, but also send dangerous messages that they reject A democracy that cannot be achieved without pluralism and diversity.
The extremism expert stressed that these “exclusivists” do not recognize an essential part of the constitution which states that Tamazight, with its language, culture, customs and traditions, is a basic formulation of Moroccan identity, and that it is not possible to speak of Morocco without him, adding: “Thus, the extremists of Islam have neglected the institution. The official religious establishment, including the institution of the Principality of the Faithful, is not a word, but an act and a behavior.
And after asserting that “these exclusionary groups are in common with the neo-fascist currents which have reappeared in the West and also call for the purification of national identity, even if this is done to the detriment of the preservation of the constitution , the dilution of the democratic system, and the establishment of a semi-dictatorial system based on discrimination between citizens on the basis of their origins. He said: “The objectives of these and those are an authoritarian policy under the pretext of preserving national or religious purity.”
The specialist in fundamentalist violence and extremism considered that “what they dream or aspire to in full consciousness will only be achieved by subduing the bearers of these contrary values, or by expelling them beyond the borders of the “emirate purity”, because the distance between what they say and the use of violence to achieve it is very thin.”
He also said: “Societies which regard diversity and pluralism as rich and treat them on this basis are mostly advanced and have a superior civilization. Social philosopher Avishai Marvelit said in his book Decent Societies that the criterion of decent societies is not their material progress, but their ability to respect the diversity and plurality that are the backbone of democracy.
The same researcher questioned the role of the state in protecting targeted citizens from other citizens who do not pay any value to the values on which Morocco’s culture and identity were founded. .
The spokesperson considered that “one of the mores of modern societies is that they renounce interference in the affairs of citizens and the use of violence to defend the interests of the State, which has the right to to its monopoly. He added: “But if the state is unable to make all citizens feel safe and secure, and the freedom to celebrate themselves as they are, then we can ask ourselves who has a problem. . The citizen or the state itself?
Al-Madhkouri notes that developed countries have laws and rules that preserve the rights of everyone, regardless of their different orientations and origins. Nevertheless, we will find in all societies, east and west, south and north, people, groups and even governments who do not like this plurality and diversity, and see it as a threat rather than enrichment for their societies he added: “The most important currents behind these ideas are those with fascist tendencies.”
The expert in social violence looks back on “what happened in the middle of the last century in terms of tragedies in the name of preserving the purity of belonging, ethnicity and beliefs. Any attempt to achieve religious, ideological or national “purity” leads to calamities that can only be seen when it is too late. “:” After Europe got rid of its religious obsession, laid the foundations of the modern state and recognized the diversity and plurality of its paths, it has lived through centuries of peace and prosperity that have accompanied; However, the disease of being drawn into “purity” was not completely eradicated and ended in two devastating wars which nearly destroyed the old continent.
According to the social violence specialist, extremism in attitudes towards diversity is considered one of the most serious threats to the peace and stability of nations. “We don’t need a lot of proof to be sure that the so-called Islamic societies today are the ones that suffer most from this scourge, not because Islam is no longer fit for coexistence. On the contrary, because there are still those who place their material and moral interests above all consideration, they therefore invest in the creation of armies of missionaries and defenders of their proposals, under the name of “ideological purity. And unity of the ranks.
He dates back to “67 the hideous defeat which put a tragic end to the Arab national dream, and displaced another dream in its place, which is the Islamic alternative which spawned different ideological and Islamic currents which fought against those who quarreled. ‘they considered traitors or who they called the enemy close; Then he set out to fight those he called the distant enemy, and finally he declared war on himself, and those he considered minorities, as agents of an enemy who did not has not yet been identified.
And the same researcher continues: “This is how the Muslims formed their cold war on ideological and ethnic bases. Of course, not everything can be attributed to Saudi Arabia’s role alone. What he did provoked reactions here and there and contributed to another diversity within Islamic movements and their relationship with their societies and the world … from a religious extremist group and politically defending existing regimes , to currents which do not believe all groups and regimes will resort to violence and other terrorist means to achieve “purity” which, according to her, includes all Islamic currents, including those which have adopted a relative democracy.