Edward Said's Orientalism

I will use this book to show how half images are leading to damaging one-sided stories when in reality, the full image is something completely different. Salaita, Steven. Anti-arab Racism in the Usa: Where It Comes from and What It Means for Politics Today. London: Pluto Press,

In his opening paragraphs, Braumoeller writes that “the characterization of America as an isolationist in the interwar period… is simply wrong.” Throughout his paper, he keeps with these kind of statements that, the idea he is arguing against is something that is entirely false. He also keeps his evidence straightforward and uncomplicated. His argument also catches something important which is that the misconception he is seeking to disprove stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of isolationism. He defines isolationism and then proves that America does not fit this definition in the interwar period. He suggests that people mistake various American policies of unilateralism or neutralism as isolationism.

Close this book at once! It is nothing but foma!” Vonnegut, later on, explains that fomas are “lies” or “harmless untruths,” begging the reader to wonder why such a warning would be included in a religion based on real life, many of which require the utmost belief in a religious text. Elaine Wiley, a graduate of DePauw University, writes “its [speaking of Bokononism] ludicrousness furthers Vonnegut’s satirical commentary on religion as an institution” (1), a point epitomized by the very forewarning of the story. This is the very embodiment of Vonnegut’s point conveyed through his parodical writing style: all of the world’s religious texts are ones that can only be believed if they are trusted vehemently by those that abide by the scriptures. Wiley explains that “[al]though Bokononism is in itself ridiculous, it serves the same purposes

The great disdain towards Woodrow Wilson, founder of idealist strand of American foreign policy, clearly put forward the ideology of Mr. Kissinger: “Moral prescriptions without concern for equilibrium... tend towards either crusades or an impotent policy tempting challenge”. Kissinger’s viewfinder, Realpolitik, advocated that we were unwisely swayed by the idealism in the past. The roots of the World War I, the conflict in the modern Middle East, the Arab Spring and America’s increasing ambivalent role on world stage, were offered a vision through his realpolitik lens. With his emphasis on balance of power, linkage and triangular diplomacy and strong regards for the works and ideologies of the likes of such as Richelieu and Teddy Roosevelt, clearly divulge his stand. The second is the balance of power as a system for managing relations between states.

Islam and ideologies parts talk about how people correlate Islam with feudalism, capitalism, idealism and communism. Moreover, the parts of Islam and applications talk about Islamic daily applications such as woman, civilizations, freedom of thought and etc. In this modern era when people measure and see everything from scientific perspective and rely much on ratio, religion is considered as an antique lifestyle. It is also applicable on Islam that considered as religion done with its duty to reform the Arabs. In fact and my opinion, this understanding is totally wrong.

He says that in small part thanks to new electronic media, ranging from film to television, standardization and stereotyping of the orient has intensified the 19th century’s orientalist understanding of “the mysterious Orient.” He gives the primary example of the Middle East and the Western perception of Arabs and Islam. Of three chief reasons he gives for the growth of this problem, at least two can be directly attributed to orientalism. The first is the history of anti-Arab and anti-Islamic prejudices prevalent in the West, the third is the absence of a cultural position to identify Arabs or Islam. By creating an other, through the dichotomy between occident and orient, identification has been made near impossible, and by furthering a imperialist ideology through academic discourse for centuries, prejudices have become

At the beginning of the twentieth century, the dominant style of moral philosophy was overthrown by European influences. G.E. Moore, a British philosopher, challenged the idea that goodness was a measurable quality. This critique of American naturalistic ethics was followed by A.J. Ayer, a member of the Vienna Circle, who argued that the philosophy of morals was a “pseudo-concept” that could not be argued for or against.

Orientalism and the study of the Middle East and North Africa The Middle East is a term called by the westerns . They called the area between the East and The West the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) . The Westerns tried over years to study the orient and to show how the people in the Middle Eastern countries a very primitive live and they do not have civilization. also they westerns tried to influence the Middle East and North Africa to spread their culture and achieve their imperialistic goals . Also they tried to show that Muslims who live in the Middle East are terrorists .

Said´s thesis on Orientalism (1978) and proposes that farang is an Occidentalising project conceived and conducted through Siam´s constantly changing historical and cultural experiences with and against the West. Edward Said is well known for his work on colonialism and orientalism in which he criticizes how knowledge about the Orient has been shaped. He directly challenged what Euro-American scholars traditionally referred to as "Orientalism", which is an entrenched structure of thought, a pattern of making certain generalizations about the part of the world known as the Orient. Orientalism is a way of coming to terms with the Orient that is based on the Orient´s special place in European-Western experience. It has helped to define Europe

Why is this being expressed, and what can be gained from a potential discussion? Mill would answer these questions with the theory of epistemology and obtaining further knowledge, but in many contemporary cases, unfortunately, opinions are expressed recklessly, with no real aim in progression or further knowledge. In the case of Charlie Hebdo and the drawing of the Holy Prophet Muhammed, the long prevailed attitude of Islamophobia was clearly expressed. Who could possibly benefit from drawing a holy figure with a bomb in his turban? What further knowledge and discussion can be obtained from this hate speech?