And which you don’t seem to understand that the term macroeconomic refers to forces outside of the control of any given nation-state. Certainly I have seen no one blame the failure of Christianity for the loss of job’s resulting from NAFTA. Certainly one can’t blame a variety of majority-Muslim countries for a history of colonialism, proxy-wars, sanction’s, as well as a rigged commodities/trading regime that discriminates against almost all developing countries, of whatever stripe.

And these are things that affect a large swath of developing countries, including a number of majority Christian one’s. One’s GDP says little to nothing about the culture of a country, and even less about its religion. With little to nothing to say about other factors which have a far stronger causal link to poor political and economic performance, you zero right in on Islam as the clear source of all problems. If only things were only that simplistic.

See, you have this thing in front of your face called a “nose”…

See, you have this thing that you sit on, called an ass

And it appears to be spreading, as any thought of a golden age hear is now burdened by leaden debts.

Re: “(working where exactly, in many countries whose macroeconomics are disastrous), you have no proof to back up your assertion.”

Your circular illogic is breathtaking. Let’s see, you agree that the macroeconomics are disastrous. Well, all of those countries that practice macro economic disaster across the great arc of North Africa and Southwest Asia are Muslim. While their neighbors to the immediate north are prosperous. And the one prosperous Arab enclave (apart from the oil states who extract wealth, but don’t create it) was Lebanon when it had a significant Christian population.

See, you have this thing in front of your face called a “nose”…

‘by the measure which you judge, so to you will be judged.’

As to the charge that most Muslim countries are backwards and disagreeable, remember, immediately prior to the European socialists who decided to settle in Palestine, that Muslim country had been a quiet yet productive part of the world. Palestinians were always more capitalistic than the Israeli socialists. Now with the occupation, that capitalistic tradition has been replaced with total war socialism.

Israel and Palestine’s hope for becoming a Singapore was shattered when the socialist Irgun blew up the King David Hotel, but I guess you wouldn’t find that kind of analysis in The Jerusalem Post.

Racist because it implies that there is some intrinsic quality about Islamic culture that leads it to ruin. Outside of some rejoinders about random people protesting in the street while they should be working (working where exactly, in many countries whose macroeconomics are disastrous), you have no proof to back up your assertion.

Pointing this out isn’t “romanticizing”, which I never did, but arguing that given a certain set of external circumstances just about everyone will end up the same way. The rare exceptions prove the rule. Or some extremely good luck.

And typo, how is a calling a spade a spade (i.e., 2 above) “offensive garbage”? Christian Lebanese Arabs had been wildly successful. American game shows awarded trips to Beirut as prizes in the 60’s! What went wrong with that picture? Or better, who busted it up and why? Sean S calls an objective observation of Muslim Arab dysfunction “racist”. Racist in what way?

Palestinians? Arabs? Nothing against them. But romanticizing them because Israelis step on their necks is reactionary and stupid. It’s just that their way of life is nothing to write home about.

Likewise, it seems the argument by Bernstein involves Israel being “forced” to place crippling economic sanctions on the Palestinians.

You have to? As in, you’d rather not spout offensive garbage, but you really just don’t have a choice?

I have to agree with SteveM in that most Muslim societies are backward and disagreeable. The best of them are the monarchy’s such as Jordan and UAE states, where educated, relatively cosmopolitan elites manage things.

What pathology would that be? I’m looking through my copy of the DSM-IV here and I’m not seeing faith in Islam next to border-line personality disorder or schizophrenia. No, you’re just making up non-sense to give the imprimatur of fact to what is essentially racist hokum.

There’s alot of reasons why any political division in this world might be less than ideal, including a variety of internal and external dynamics working against a population. And establishing a democracy as it were with many of these competing things is exceptionally hard, and very, very fragile. People often don’t have the luxury of working in a vacuum.

As Daniel said, the idea that an occupied people are supposed to just magically whip something up is absurd, especially under the conditions that they face. It’s also impossible considering the geography, and the sources of water being cut in half by borders, that even a “two-state” solution would solve the crux of the matter; neither country would be anywhere near self-sufficient.

When Arabs took to the streets to condemn the Danish cartoons of Mohammad, the first thing I thought was, “Why aren’t those guys at work?” Lebanon, the one formerly bright spot in the Middle East was that way because of the Christian merchant and banking class. Once they were driven out, Muslim Lebanon became another Syria.

Palestinians should have political autonomy. Unfortunately, given the pathology of retrograde Islam, they probably won’t fare a whole lot better in the end.